text
stringlengths 4
2.78M
| meta
dict |
|---|---|
---
abstract: 'We show that the electron-phonon coupling, $\lambda _{\mathbf{q}\nu }$, in the transition-metal diborides $NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$ is dominated by the longitudinal acoustical ($LA)$ mode, in contrast to the optical $E_{2g}$ mode dominated coupling in $MgB_{2}.$ Our *ab initio* results, described in terms of phonon dispersion, linewidth, and $\lambda _{\mathbf{q}\nu }$ along $\Gamma -A$, also show that (i) $NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$ have a relatively weak electron-phonon coupling, (ii) the $E_{2g}$ linewidth is an order of magnitude larger in $MgB_{2}$ than in $NbB_{2}$ or $TaB_{2}$, (iii) the $E_{2g}$ frequency in $NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$ is considerably higher than in $MgB_{2}$, and (iv) the $LA$ frequency at $A$ for $TaB_{2}$ is almost half of that of $MgB_{2}$ or $NbB_{2}$.'
author:
- 'Prabhakar P. Singh'
title: 'Acoustical-Mode-Driven Electron-Phonon Coupling in Transition-Metal Diborides'
---
The discovery of superconductivity in $MgB_{2}$ [@akimitsu; @nagamatsu] has renewed interests [@young; @yamamoto; @akimitsu2; @Kaczorowski; @muzzy; @gasparov; @souptel; @bharathi; @note1] in finding superconductivity in similar materials such as simple metal diborides ($BeB_{2},\, BeB_{2.75}$ [@young]), transition-metal diborides ($NbB_{2}$ [@yamamoto; @akimitsu2], $TaB_{2}$ [@yamamoto; @Kaczorowski], $MoB_{2}$ [@muzzy], $ZrB_{2}$ [@gasparov]), borocarbides ($LiBC$ [@souptel; @bharathi]), and other alloys [@note1]. Surprisingly, many of the materials mentioned above have not shown any superconductivity, those who are found to superconduct do so at a relatively low $T_{c}<10\, K,$ and very likely, require hole doping and/or external pressure to show superconductivity. For example, the recent work of Yamamoto *et al*. [@yamamoto] **showing superconductivity in hole-doped $Nb_{x}B_{2}$ is a case in point. Thus, of all the diborides, $MgB_{2}$ seems to be in a class by itself with a $T_{c}=39\, K$while all the other diborides have $T_{c}<10\, K.$
Recent work on $MgB_{2}$ [@kortus; @an; @pps_prl; @kong; @bohnen; @yildirim; @choi1; @shukla; @pps_nbb2] have unambiguously shown a very strong and anisotropic electron-phonon coupling in this system. In particular, it is found that electron/hole states on the cylindrical sheets of the Fermi surface along $\Gamma -A$ couple very strongly to the in-plane $B-B$ bond stretching $E_{2g}$ phonon mode [@kong; @bohnen; @yildirim; @choi1; @shukla]. The $E_{2g}$ phonon mode coupling gives rise to partial electron-phonon coupling constant $\lambda _{\mathbf{q}\nu }$ of the order of $2-3$ [@shukla]. Such a large partial $\lambda _{\mathbf{q}\nu }$ along $\Gamma -A$ results in a relatively high superconducting transition temperature of $39\, K.$ Thus, the observed differences in the superconducting properties of $MgB_{2}$ *vis-a-vis* other diborides, specially the transition-metal diborides, can be better understood by comparing the electron-phonon coupling along $\Gamma -A$ in these systems. Taking the cue, we have studied from first principles (i) the phonon dispersion $\omega _{\mathbf{q}\nu }$, (ii) the phonon linewidth $\gamma _{\mathbf{q}\nu }$ [@allen1], and (iii) the partial electron-phonon coupling constant $\lambda _{\mathbf{q}\nu }$ along $\Gamma -A$ in $MgB_{2},\, NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$ in $P6/mmm$ crystal structure.
We have calculated the electronic structure of $MgB_{2},\, NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$ in $P6/mmm$ crystal structure. We used optimized lattice constants $a$ and $c$ for $MgB_{2}$ and $NbB_{2}$ [@pps_nbb2], and experimental lattice constants ($a=5.826\, a.u.,$ $c=6.130\, a.u.$) for $TaB_{2}$ which are close to our optimized values of $a=5.792\, a.u.$ and $c=6.143\, a.u.$. The lattice constants were optimized using the ABINIT program [@abinit] based on pseudopotentials and plane waves. For studying the electron-phonon interaction we used the full-potential linear response program of Savrasov [@savrasov1; @savrasov2] to calculate the dynamical matrices and the Hopfield parameter, which were then used to calculate the phonon dispersion $\omega _{\mathbf{q}\nu }$, the phonon linewidth $\gamma _{\mathbf{q}\nu }$, and the partial electron-phonon coupling constant $\lambda _{\mathbf{q}\nu }$ along $\Gamma -A$ in $MgB_{2},\, NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$.
Based on our calculations, described below, we find that (i) in contrast to a strong and $E_{2g}$-mode dominated electron-phonon coupling in $MgB_{2}$, the transition-metal diborides $NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$ have a relatively weak electron-phonon coupling which is dominated by the longitudinal acoustical $(LA)$ mode, (ii) the $E_{2g}$ phonon linewidth is an order of magnitude larger in $MgB_{2}$ than in $NbB_{2}$ or $TaB_{2}$, and (iii) the $E_{2g}$ phonon frequency in $NbB_{2}$ as well as $TaB_{2}$ is considerably higher than in $MgB_{2}$ while the $LA$ phonon frequency at $A$ for $TaB_{2}$ is almost half of that of $MgB_{2}$ or $NbB_{2}$.
Before describing our results in detail, we provide some of the computational details. As indicated above, the structural relaxation was carried out by the molecular dynamics program ABINIT [@abinit] with Broyden-Fletcher-Goldfarb-Shanno minimization technique using Troullier-Martins pseudopotential [@troullier] for $MgB_{2}$ and Hartwigsen-Goedecker-Hutter pseudopotentials [@hgh] for $NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$, 512 Monkhorst-Pack [@monkhorst] $\mathbf{k}$-points and Teter parameterization for exchange-correlation. The kinetic energy cutoff for the plane waves was $110\, Ry$ for $MgB_{2}$ and $140\, Ry$ for $NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}.$ The charge self-consistent full-potential LMTO [@savrasov1] calculations for electronic structure were carried out with the generalized gradient approximation for exchange-correlation of Perdew *et al* [@perdew] and 484 $\mathbf{k}$-points in the irreducible wedge of the Brillouin zone. In these calculations, we used $s,$ $p,$ $d$ and $f$ orbitals at the $Mg$ and $Ta$ sites, and $s,$ $p$ and $d$ orbitals at the $Nb$ and $B$ sites. The $2p$ state of $Mg$ as well as the $5s$ and $5p$ states of $Ta$ were treated as semi-core states. In all cases the potential and the wave function were expanded up to $l_{max}=6$. The muffin-tin radii for $Mg$, $B$, $Nb$ and $Ta$ were taken to be $2.4,$ $1.66,$ $2.3$ and $2.5$ atomic units, respectively.
The calculation of dynamical matrices and the Hopfield parameters along $\Gamma -A$ were carried out for $4$ equidistant $\mathbf{q}$-points for $MgB_{2}$ and $7$ equidistant $\mathbf{q}$-points for $NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}.$ For Brillouin zone integrations we used a $12\times 12\times 12$ grid while the Fermi surface was sampled more accurately with a $36\times 36\times 36$ grid of $\mathbf{k}$-points using the double grid technique as outlined in Ref. [@savrasov2]. We checked the convergence of the relevant quantities by carrying out Brillouin zone integrations using a $16\times 16\times 16$ grid of $\mathbf{k}$-points with Fermi surface sampling done over $48\times 48\times 48$ grid.
$\omega _{\Gamma (E_{2g})}$ $\omega _{A(E_{2g})}$ $\omega _{A(LA)}$
--------------------------- ----------------------------- ----------------------- -------------------
Present work 78 72 40
Kong *et al.* [@kong] 73 71 38
Bohnen *et al.* [@bohnen] 71 63 39
Shukla *et al.* [@shukla] 65 57 37
: The phonon frequencies (in $meV$) at $\Gamma $ and $A$ for the $E_{2g}$ and the $LA$ modes for $MgB_{2}$ calculated using the linear response method as described in the text as well as from previous work.
In Fig. 1 we show the phonon dispersion of $MgB_{2}$, $NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$ for $LA$ and optical $E_{2g}$ modes along $\Gamma -A$. For $MgB_{2}$, a comparison of our calculations of $E_{2g}$ and $LA$ phonon frequencies at $\Gamma $ and $A$ points with the previous calculations of Refs. [@kong; @bohnen; @shukla] is given in Table I. As expected, our results are closer to the work of Ref. [@kong]. The difference in the $E_{2g}$ phonon frequency at $\Gamma $, which has been found to be very sensitive to the structural input and Brillouin zone integration [@bohnen], arises due to the experimental lattice constants used in Refs. [@kong; @bohnen; @shukla]. The value calculated by Shukla *et al.* for $E_{2g}$ phonon frequency is somewhat lower. However, our calculated frequency for $LA$ phonon mode at $A$ is in good agreement with previous calculations. We expect $\omega _{\mathbf{q}\nu }$ for $NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$ to have similar accuracy.
In $NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$, the $E_{2g}$ phonon mode along $\Gamma -A$ has considerably stiffened in comparison with $MgB_{2}$. The $E_{2g}$ frequency in $MgB_{2}$ changes from $78$ to $72\, meV$, while for $NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$ it changes from $110$ to $107\, meV$ and $108$ to $105\, meV$ from $\Gamma $ to $A$, respectively. The $E_{2g}$ frequency at $\Gamma $ in $TaB_{2}$, as calculated by Rosner *et al.* [@rosner], is $98\, meV.$ The $LA$ phonon mode at $A$ for $TaB_{2}$ $(22\, meV)$ is almost half of that of $MgB_{2}$ $(40\, meV)$ and $NbB_{2}$ $(37\, meV)$. Here, we like to point out that in the present work the number of **$\mathbf{q}$** points chosen along $\Gamma -A$ is not sufficient to say anything about the anomaly in the acoustical mode.
The differences in the nature of electron-phonon interaction between $MgB_{2}$ and the transition-metal diborides $NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$ become quite apparent if one considers the electron-phonon contribution to the phonon lifetimes. In the case of $MgB_{2}$, as shown by Shukla *et al.* [@shukla], the anharmonic effects [@yildirim; @choi1] make negligible contribution to the the phonon linewidth . Thus, the anomalous broadening of the $E_{2g}$ phonon linewidth along $\Gamma -A$ underscores the strength of the electron-phonon coupling for this particular mode in $MgB_{2}$ [@shukla]. To see what happens in the transition-metal diborides, we show in Fig. 2 the phonon linewidths of $MgB_{2}$, $NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$ for $LA$ and $E_{2g}$ modes along $\Gamma -A$. For $MgB_{2}$, our calculated $\gamma _{\mathbf{q}\nu }$’s are in reasonable agreement with the results of Ref. [@shukla]. Note that the values shown in Fig. 2 correspond to twice the linewidth. From Fig. 2, it is clear that in $MgB_{2}$ the electron-phonon coupling along $\Gamma -A$ is dominated by the optical $E_{2g}$ phonon mode with a maximum $\gamma _{E_{2g}}$ of $44\, meV$, and that the $LA$ mode plays essentially no role. In contrast, in $NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$ (i) the linewidths are more than an order of magnitude smaller than in $MgB_{2}$, **for example the maximum $\gamma _{E_{2g}}$ is only about $4\, meV$ in $TaB_{2}$ and (ii) the contribution from the $E_{2g}$ mode decreases from $4$ to $2.8\, meV$, while that due to $LA$ mode increases from $0.02$ to $1.5\, meV$, as one moves from $\Gamma $ to $A$. The phonon linewidths of $MgB_{2}$ and the transition-metal diborides $NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$, as described above, clearly demonstrate the differences in the strength and the nature of electron-phonon interaction in these systems.
To see the strengths with which the $LA$ and the $E_{2g}$ phonon modes couple to the electrons, we show in Fig. 3 the partial as well as the total electron-phonon coupling constant $(\lambda _{\mathbf{q}})$ along $\Gamma -A$ for $MgB_{2},\, NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$. Certainly, the most striking feature of these systems, as evidenced in Fig. 3, is the overall strength of the electron-phonon coupling in $MgB_{2}$ $(\lambda _{\mathbf{q}}\sim 7.9)$ as compared to $NbB_{2}$ $(\lambda _{\mathbf{q}}\sim 1.5)$ and $TaB_{2}$ $(\lambda _{\mathbf{q}}\sim 2.5)$; nevertheless the additional feature of $E_{2g}-$dominated $\lambda _{\mathbf{q}}$ in $MgB_{2}$ giving way to $LA$-dominated $\lambda _{\mathbf{q}}$ in $NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$ is just as striking. Thus, the electron-phonon coupling in the transition-metal diborides $NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$ is essentially due to the $LA$ mode (the transverse acoustical mode makes some contribution), the contribution from the $E_{2g}$ mode being insignificant. For $TaB_{2}$, Rosner *et al.* [@rosner] also found $\lambda _{E_{2g}}=0.05$ at $\Gamma $, in agreement with the present work. However, their [@rosner] conclusion about the strength of the electron-phonon coupling in $TaB_{2}$ is erroneous because it doesn’t take into account the contributions from the acoustical modes properly. We also note that, in our opinion [@pps_nbb2; @pps_unp], the experimentally [@naiduk] deduced electron-phonon coupling in $NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$ are underestimated. These differences in the electron-phonon coupling between $MgB_{2}$ and the transition-metal diborides $NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$ may help explain why $MgB_{2}$ superconducts at $39\, K$ while $NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$ do not show any superconductivity down to $2\, K$.
Finally, in Fig. 4 we show the convergence of $\omega _{\mathbf{q}\nu }$, $\gamma _{\mathbf{q}\nu }$, and $\lambda _{\mathbf{q}\nu }$ at $A$ in the Brillouin zone for $NbB_{2}$ as a function of $\mathbf{k}$-points using the double-grid technique as outlined in Ref. [@savrasov2]. The use of double-grid technique allows one to construct two separate but commensurate $\mathbf{k}$-grids, one for the electronic charge self-consistency and the other for Fermi-surface sampling. We employed 4 sets of double grids (i) (8, 8, 8, 24), (ii) (12, 12, 12 ,24), (iii) (12, 12, 12, 36), and (iv) (16, 16, 16, 48), where the first three numbers define the electronic self-consistency grid and the last number sets up the Fermi-surface sampling grid which is commensurate with the first grid. We find that the results are converged for the (12,12,12,36) grid used in the present work.
In conclusion, we have studied from first principles (i) the phonon dispersion, (ii) the phonon linewidth, and (iii) the partial electron-phonon coupling constant along $\Gamma -A$ in $MgB_{2},\, NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$ in $P6/mmm$ crystal structure. We find that (i) in contrast to a strong and $E_{2g}$-mode dominated electron-phonon coupling in $MgB_{2}$, the transition-metal diborides $NbB_{2}$ and $TaB_{2}$ have a relatively weak electron-phonon coupling which is dominated by the $LA$ mode, (ii) the $E_{2g}$ phonon linewidth is an order of magnitude larger in $MgB_{2}$ than in $NbB_{2}$ or $TaB_{2}$, and (iii) the $E_{2g}$ phonon frequency in $NbB_{2}$ as well as $TaB_{2}$ is considerably higher than in $MgB_{2}$ while the $LA$ phonon frequency at $A$ for $TaB_{2}$ is almost half of that of $MgB_{2}$ or $NbB_{2}$.
[10]{} J. Akimitsu, Symp. on Transition Metal Oxides, Sendai, January 10, 2001; J. Nagamatsu *et al*., Nature **410**, 63 (2001). D. P. Young *et al*., cond-mat/0104063 v4. A. Yamamoto *et al*., cond-mat/0208331. J. Akimitsu, as cited in Ref. [@yamamoto]. D. Kaczorowski *et al*., cond-mat/0103571. L. E. Muzzy *et al*., cond-mat/0206006. V. A. Gasparov *et al*., JETP Lett. **73**, 532 (2001); cond-mat/0104323. D. Souptel *et al*., cond-mat/0208346 v2. A. Bharathi *et al*., cond-mat/0207448. See references in Prabhakar P. Singh and P. Jiji Thomas Joseph, J. Phys.: Condens Matter **14**, 12441 (2002). J. Kortus *et al*., Phys. Rev. Lett. **86**, 4656 (2001). J. M. An and W. E. Pickett, Phys. Rev. Lett. **86**, 4366 (2001). Prabhakar P. Singh, Phys. Rev. Lett. **87**, 87004 (2001). Y. Kong *et al*., Phys. Rev. B **64** 20501 (2001). K.-P. Bohnen *et al*., Phys. Rev. Lett. **86**, 5771 (2001). T. Yildirim *et al*., Phys. Rev. Lett. **87**, 37001 (2001). H. J. Choi *et al*., cond-mat/0111182; cond-mat/0111183. A. Shukla *et al*., cond-mat/0209064. Prabhakar P. Singh, cond-mat/0210091 (accepted for publication in Solid State Commun.). P. B. Allen, Phys. Rev. B **6**, 2577 (1972). http://www.abinit.org/. S. Y. Savrasov, Phys. Rev. B **54**, 16470 (1996). S. Y. Savrasov and D. Y. Savrasov, Phys. Rev. B **54**, 16487(1996). N. Troullier and J. L. Martins, Phys. Rev. B **43**, 1993 (1991). C. Hartwigsen *et al*., Phys. Rev. B **58**, 3641 (1998). H. J. Monkhorst and J. D. Pack, Phys. Rev. B **13**, 5188 (1976). J. P. Perdew and Y. Wang, Phys. Rev. B **45**, 13244 (1992); J. Perdew *et al*., Phys. Rev. Lett. **77**, 3865 (1996). H. Rosner *et al*., cond-mat/0106092. Prabhakar P. Singh, unpublished. Yu. G. Naiduk *et al*., Phys. Rev. B **66**, 140301(R) (2002).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The theory of exact and of approximate solutions for non-autonomous linear differential equations forms a wide field with strong ties to physics and applied problems. This paper is meant as a stepping stone for an exploration of this long-established theme, through the tinted glasses of a (Hopf and Rota–Baxter) algebraic point of view. By reviewing, reformulating and strengthening known results, we give evidence for the claim that the use of Hopf algebra allows for a refined analysis of differential equations. We revisit the renowned Campbell–Baker–Hausdorff–Dynkin formula by the modern approach involving Lie idempotents. Approximate solutions to differential equations involve, on the one hand, series of iterated integrals solving the corresponding integral equations; on the other hand, exponential solutions. Equating those solutions yields identities among products of iterated Riemann integrals. Now, the Riemann integral satisfies the integration-by-parts rule with the Leibniz rule for derivations as its partner; and skewderivations generalize derivations. Thus we seek an algebraic theory of integration, with the Rota–Baxter relation replacing the classical rule. The methods to deal with noncommutativity are especially highlighted. We find new identities, allowing for an extensive embedding of Dyson–Chen series of time- or path-ordered products (of generalized integration operators); of the corresponding Magnus expansion; and of their relations, into the unified algebraic setting of Rota–Baxter maps and their inverse skewderivations. This picture clarifies the approximate solutions to generalized integral equations corresponding to non-autonomous linear (skew)differential equations.'
author:
- |
José F. Cariñena\*, Kurusch Ebrahimi-Fard, \
Héctor Figueroa and José M. Gracia-Bondía§$\|$\
\*Departamento de Física Teórica, Universidad de Zaragoza,\
Zaragoza 50006, Spain\
Max-Planck-Institut für Mathematik, Vivatsgasse 7\
D-53111 Bonn, Germany\
Departamento de Matemáticas, Universidad de Costa Rica,\
San Pedro 2060, Costa Rica\
§Departamento de Física Teórica I, Universidad Complutense,\
Madrid 28040, Spain\
$\|$Departamento de Física, Universidad de Costa Rica,\
San Pedro 2060, Costa Rica
date: 'December 28, 2006 '
title: Hopf algebras in dynamical systems theory
---
*Mathematics Subject Classification 2000*: 16W25, 16W30, 37B55, 37C10
*2006 PACS*: 02.20.Qs, 02.30.Hq, 02.40.Gh, 45.30.+s
Keywords: Differential equations, Lie–Scheffers systems, Rota–Baxter operators, Hopf algebra, Spitzer’s identity, Magnus expansion
Aim, plan of the article and preliminaries
==========================================
This paper studies non-autonomous differential equations of the general type $$\begin{aligned}
\dot g(t)g^{-1}(t) &= \xi(t), \qquad g(t_0) = 1_G {\quad\mbox{or}\quad}
\label{eq:gato-encerrado}
\\
g^{-1}(t)\dot g(t) &= \eta(t), \qquad g(t_0) = 1_G,
\label{eq:menos-gatos}\end{aligned}$$ where the unknown $g:{\mathbb{R}}_t\to G$ is a curve on a (maybe infinite-dimensional) local Lie group $G$, with $1_G$ the neutral element; and $\xi(t),\eta(t)$ are given curves on the tangent Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}$ of $G$. Before proceeding note that, if $g(t)$ solves , then $g^{-1}(t)$ solves for $\eta(t)=-\xi(t)$.
Such equations are pervasive in mathematics, physics and engineering. To begin with, $G$ can have a faithful finite-dimensional representation. For instance, consider (affine) linear differential equations on ${\mathbb{R}}^n$, $$\dot x = A(t)x + b(t) {\quad\mbox{with}\quad} x(t_0) = x_0.
\label{eq:manes-de-afin}$$ They are exactly solved by $$x(t) = {\mathcal{G}}(t,t_0)x_0 + \int_{t_0}^t{\mathcal{G}}(t,t')b(t')\,dt';$$ where the *Green’s function* ${\mathcal{G}}(t,t_0)$ is the matrix satisfying $$\frac{d{\mathcal{G}}(t,t_0)}{dt}\,{\mathcal{G}}^{-1}(t,t_0) = A(t), \quad {\mathcal{G}}(t_0,t_0)=1_n$$ of the kind . More generally, dynamical systems admitting a superposition principle can be reduced to the form , with $G$ a finite dimensional Lie group. This assertion is part of the classical *Lie–Scheffers* theory [@NihilNovumSubSole], reviewed in Section 3 as part of and motivation for the whole enterprise. Even more generally, any non-autonomous dynamical system, given in local coordinates by $$\frac{dx^i}{dt} = Y^i(t;x(t)), \qquad x = (x^1,\ldots,x^n)
\label{eq:alpha-and-omega}$$ corresponds to a ‘time-dependent vector field’ $Y$ with $Y(t)$ belonging to ${\mathfrak{X}}(M)$, the Lie algebra of all vector fields on a manifold $M$. Then the solution of is given by the solution of an equation like ; this remark will be formalized in Section 4. The crucial difference is dimensionality of the (pseudo-)group. In practice, almost always we must content ourselves with approximate solutions —Lie–Scheffers systems are not solvable by quadratures in general— and actually those are our main concern.
We reformulate within the framework of Hopf algebra and Rota–Baxter operator theory —the latter has become popular recently in relation with the Connes–Kreimer paradigm for renormalization theory in perturbative quantum field theory. The convenience of such algebraic approach stems already from that, unless $G$ is a matrix group, $\dot g$ and $g^{-1}$ cannot be multiplied, and then equations and have no meaning, strictu sensu. Hopf algebras generalize both Lie groups and Lie algebras, so the problem does not present itself in a Hopf algebra formalism. Another advantage is that Hopf algebra and Rota–Baxter theory allow for efficient and meaningful comparisons among the different techniques for solving , proposed over the years. The main aim of this paper is to show these and other benefits of our algebraic viewpoint. They have been patent for a while to people working on control theory, but mostly ignored by the wider community of mathematicians and mathematical physicists.
We presume the readers acquainted with standard tools of differential analysis, like for instance in [@OldRedBook]: primarily the notion of tangent map and the exponential map $\exp:{\mathfrak{g}}\to G$. For the benefit of the readers, Lie group and Lie algebra actions are reviewed in Appendix A. The basics of Hopf algebra are a prerequisite. Unless otherwise specified, we consider Hopf algebras over the complex numbers. We briefly introduce our notations for them, which are like in [@Quaoar]; the pedagogical paper [@FresasSalvajes] is recommended as well. Given an associative algebra with unit $H\ni1_H=:u(1_{\mathbb{C}})$, then $H{\otimes}H$ is associative with bilinear multiplication given by $(a{\otimes}b)(c{\otimes}d)=ac{\otimes}bd$ on decomposable tensors, and unit $1_H{\otimes}1_H$. Write just 1 for the unit element of $H$ henceforth. One says $H$ is a bialgebra if algebra morphisms $\eta:H\to{\mathbb{C}}$ (augmentation) and ${\Delta}:H\to H{\otimes}H$ (coproduct) are defined, such that the maps $(\eta{\otimes}{{\mathrm{id}}}){\Delta}$ and $({{\mathrm{id}}}{\otimes}\eta){\Delta}$ from $H$ to $H$ coincide with the identity map ${{\mathrm{id}}}$ and $({\Delta}{\otimes}{{\mathrm{id}}}){\Delta}$ and $({{\mathrm{id}}}{\otimes}{\Delta}){\Delta}$ from $H$ to $H{\otimes}H{\otimes}H$ also coincide (we omit the sign $\circ$ for composition of linear maps). One says $H$ is a Hopf algebra if it furthermore possesses an antiautomorphism $S$, the *antipode*, such that $m(S{\otimes}{{\mathrm{id}}}){\Delta}=m(S{\otimes}{{\mathrm{id}}}){\Delta}=u\eta$; where $m:H{\otimes}H\to H$ denotes the algebra map. Familiarity with enveloping algebras and the Poincaré–Birkhoff–Witt and Cartier–Milnor–Moore theorems in particular will be helpful. Both results can be summarized in the statement that a connected cocommutative Hopf algebra is the enveloping algebra of a Lie algebra, as an algebra, and cofree, as a coalgebra. At any rate, we discuss a strong version of the Poincaré–Birkhoff–Witt theorem in Section 4, and the Cartier–Milnor–Moore theorem at the end of Section 5. The necessary notions of Rota–Baxter operator theory will be introduced and explained in due course.
Whereas the Hopf algebraic description springs up naturally from the intrinsic geometrical approach, we have found it expedient to smooth this transition with the help of Lie–Rinehart algebras: these constitute the “noncommutative geometry” version of Lie algebroid technology.
The plan of the work is as follows. In this section we explain our main aims and fix some notations of frequent use. Next we recommend a look at Appendix A, indispensable for everything that follows; most readers will just need to scan it for the notations. In Section 2 we address for the first time Lie–Scheffers systems; they are intimately linked to equations and .
After this, two paths are possible: either reading Appendices C and D for motivation, or not. Most of the stuff in them could be regarded as preceding Sections 3 and following; but it gets in the way of our algebraic business, and this is why it has been confined to the end. Section 3 plunges the reader at once into an application of Hopf algebra to differential geometry. This is due to Rinehart and Huebschmann, and deserves to be better known, as it clarifies several questions; one should compare the treatment of differential operators given here with that of [@Mackenzie Chapter 3]. Readers less familiar with Hopf algebra might wish to read this in parallel with Section 4.
Sections 4 to 6 are largely expository. In Section 4 we leisurely *construct* the Hopf algebra structure governing our approach to equations and from the geometric notions. Section 5 recalls some structure results for Hopf algebras.
After that, our master plan is to transplant the usual paradigmatic strategies for dealing with and to the Hopf algebraic soil, which on the one hand will prove to be their native one, and on the other naturally leads to far-reaching generalizations. At the outset, in Section 6 we consider the Campbell–Baker–Hausdorff–Dynkin (CBHD) development, which we proceed to derive in Hopf algebraic terms. In turn, that development is the natural father of the Magnus expansion method [@Magnus]. We eventually derive the Magnus series with the help of Rota–Baxter theory. For the purpose, the Riemann integral is treated in this paper as a particular Rota–Baxter operator of weight zero.
We first show in Section 7 that skewderivations and Rota–Baxter operators (of the same weight) are natural inverses. The ordinary Spitzer formula is revisited in Section 8, together with a nonlinear CBHD recursion due to one of us. The latter is instrumental in obtaining the *noncommutative Spitzer formula*. Also, inspired by the work of Lam, we give a noncommutative generalization of the Bohnenblust–Spitzer formula. In the next two sections, the Magnus expansion is arrived at as a limiting case of that formula. All along, we try to distinguish carefully which statements are valid for general Rota–Baxter operators, which for Rota–Baxter operators of vanishing weight, and which just for the Riemann integral. The main alternative integration method, the Dyson–Chen ‘expansional’ [@Dyson; @Chen; @Araki], flows from the Magnus series, and vice versa, by our Hopf algebraic means in Section 11. In turn, it reveals itself useful to understand the quirks of the Magnus expansion, and to solve the weight-zero CBHD recursion. Section 12 explores by means of pre-Lie algebras with Rota–Baxter maps the solution of that nonlinear recursion in the general case. Section 13 is the conclusion, whereupon perspectives for research are discussed.
As said, Appendix A reviews the basics of Lie group and Lie algebra actions on manifolds. As also hinted at, Appendices B and C run a parallel, complementary strand to the main body of the paper. They contain more advanced material on the topic of dynamical systems with symmetry; their treatment here naturally calls for the Darboux derivative of Lie algebroid theory. The main point is to show how one is led to the arena of Lie algebra and *geometrical integration*, for the solution of differential equations we are concerned with. This provides a rationale for our choice of the Magnus series, and its generalizations, as the primary approximation method in the body of the paper —see the discussion at the beginning of Section 10.
Appendix D gives the Hopf algebraic vision of a theorem of Lie and Engel.
Several notational conventions are fixed next. Let $M$ be a (second countable, smooth, without boundary) manifold of finite dimension $n$. The space ${\mathcal{F}}(M)$ of (real or) complex smooth functions on $M$ is endowed with the standard commutative and associative algebra structure. Let $\tau_M:TM\to M$ denote the tangent bundle to $M$. Vector fields on $M$ can be defined either as sections for $\tau_M$, that is, maps $X:M\to TM$ such that $\tau_M\circ X={{\mathrm{id}}}_M$, or as derivations of ${\mathcal{F}}(M)$. When we wish to distinguish between those roles, we denote by ${\mathcal{L}}_X$ the differential operator corresponding to the vector field $X$. Because the commutator of two derivations is again a derivation, the space ${\mathfrak{X}}(M)$ of vector fields has a Lie algebra structure; we choose to define the bracket there as the opposite of the usual one: in local coordinates, $$[X, Y]^i = Y^j \,{\partial}_j X^i - X^j \,{\partial}_j Y^i;$$ so ${\mathfrak{X}}(M)\equiv{\mathfrak{diff}}(M)$, the Lie algebra of the infinite-dimensional Lie group $\operatorname{Diff}(M)$ [@Omori]. Also ${\mathfrak{X}}(M)$ becomes a faithful ${\mathcal{F}}(M)$-module when one defines $hX(x)=h(x)X(x)$ for $h\in{\mathcal{F}}(M)$. Together, ${\mathcal{F}}(M)$ and ${\mathfrak{X}}(M)$ constitute a Lie–Rinehart algebra in the sense of [@Bigotes1].
Given a smooth map $f:N\to M$, the pull-back $f^*:{\mathcal{F}}(M)\to{\mathcal{F}}(N)$ is defined as $f^*h=h\circ f$. A vector field $X\in{\mathfrak{X}}(N)$ is said to be $f$-related with the vector field $Y\in{\mathfrak{X}}(M)$ if $Tf\circ X=Y\circ f$; we then say that the vector field $X$ is $f$-projectable onto the vector field $Y$, and write $X\sim_f Y$. We have $X\sim_f Y$ iff the maps ${\mathcal{L}}_X\circ f^*$ and $f^*\circ{\mathcal{L}}_Y$ from ${\mathcal{F}}(M)$ to ${\mathcal{F}}(N)$ coincide. If $X_1,X_2\in{\mathfrak{X}}(N)$ are $f$-related with $Y_1,Y_2$ respectively, then $X_1+X_2$ and $[X_1,X_2]$ are also $f$-related, respectively with $Y_1+Y_2$ and $[Y_1,Y_2]$. A given $X\in{\mathfrak{X}}(N)$ will not be $f$-projectable in general. However, if $f$ is a diffeomorphism, then every vector field $X\in{\mathfrak{X}}(N)$ is projectable onto a unique vector field on $M$, to wit, $Y=Tf\circ X\circ f^{-1}$, and we say $X$ is the pull-back of $Y$. A vector field $X\in{\mathfrak{X}}(M)$ is *invariant* under a diffeomorphism $f$ of $M$ iff $X\sim_f X$. On ${\mathbb{R}}_t$ (or on an open interval $I\subset{\mathbb{R}}_t$) there is a canonical vector field $d/dt$. A curve $\gamma:{\mathbb{R}}_t\to M$ is said to be an integral curve for a vector field $X\in{\mathfrak{X}}(M)$ if $d/dt$ and $X$ are $\gamma$-related: $\dot\gamma:=T\gamma\circ d/dt=X\circ \gamma$. Well-known theorems assert that the integral curves of a vector field define a local ${\mathbb{R}}_t$-action or flow [@Carniceria].
By a *vector field along* $f$ we understand a map $Y:N\to
TM$ such that $\tau_M\circ Y=f$: $$\xymatrix{&TM\ar[d]^{\tau_M} \\ N\ar[r]_f\ar[ur]^Y &M}$$ It is clear that the concept is just a particular case of a more general one: section along the map $f$ over a general bundle $\pi:E\to
M$. Vector fields along $f$ can also be regarded as $f$-derivations, in an obvious sense. The right hand side of the non-autonomous dynamical system is just the vector field along the map $\pi_2:{\mathbb{R}}_t{\times}M\to M$ expressed in local coordinates by $$Y = Y^i(t;x(t))\,{\partial}_i\circ\pi_2.$$ Also, clearly any curve $\gamma:{\mathbb{R}}_t\to M$ defines a vector field $\dot\gamma$ along $\gamma$. We envisage here the concept of integral curves of vector fields $Y$ along maps $f$. These are curves $\gamma:{\mathbb{R}}_t\to N$ such that the image under $Tf\circ T\gamma$ of the vector field $d/dt$ coincides with the vector field along $f\circ\gamma$ given by $Y\circ\gamma$ —depending on $f$, there might be vector fields along it without integral curves. Under this definition $t\mapsto(t,{\gamma}(t))$ is always the integral curve of $(t,{\gamma}(t))\mapsto\dot\gamma(t)$ along $\pi_2:{\mathbb{R}}_t{\times}M\to M$.
The Lie–Scheffers theorem
=========================
The system of differential equations admits a *superposition principle* —or possesses a set of fundamental solutions— if a superposition function $\Psi:{\mathbb{R}}^{n(m+1)}\to{\mathbb{R}}^n$ exists, written $$x = \Psi(x_{(1)},\ldots,x_{(m)};k_1,\ldots,k_n),$$ such that the general solution of can be expressed (at least for small $t$) as the functional $$x(t) = \Psi(x_{(1)}(t),\dots,x_{(m)}(t);k_1,\dots,k_n),
\label{eq:manes-de-LS}$$ where ${\{\,x_{(a)}:a=1,\dots,m\,\}}$ is a set of particular solutions and $k_1,\dots,k_n$ denote $n$ arbitrary parameters. The latter must be *essential* in the sense that they can be solved from the solution functional: $$k = \Xi\bigl(x_{(1)}(t),\dots,x_{(m)}(t);x(t)\bigr), {\quad\mbox{with}\quad} k
:= (k_1,\dots,k_n).
\label{eq:desmanes-de-LS}$$
The Lie–Scheffers theorem [@NihilNovumSubSole] asserts:
For to admit a superposition principle it is necessary and sufficient that the time-dependent vector field $Y$ be of the form $$Y(t;x) = Z_1(t)X_1(x) + \cdots + Z_r(t)X_r(x),
\label{eq:cascabel-al-gato}$$ where, as indicated in the notation, the $r$ scalar functions $Z_a$ depend only of $t$ and the $r$ vector fields $X_a$ depend only on the variables $x$; and these fields close to a real Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}$. That is, the $X_a$ are linearly independent and there exist suitable structure constants $f_{ab}^c$ such that $$[X_a, X_b] = \sum_{c=1}^r f_{ab}^c\,X_c.$$ Moreover, the dimension $r$ of ${\mathfrak{g}}$ is not greater than $nm$. Systems fulfilling the conditions of the theorem are called here Lie–Scheffers systems associated to ${\mathfrak{g}}$.
Modern reviews of this subject include [@macrote; @TresMosqueteros; @Ciguenya; @PBPepinArturo; @TresMosqueterosbis]. We ponder a few pertinent examples of Lie–Scheffers systems next.
Linear systems are Lie–Scheffers systems. If $n+1$ particular solutions $x_{(1)},\ldots,x_{(n+1)}$ of are known, such that $x_{(2)}(t)-x_{(1)}(t),\ldots,x_{(n+1)}(t)- x_{(1)}(t)$ are independent, and $H(t)$ is the regular matrix with these vectors as columns, then the vector of parameters is given by $$k = H^{-1}(t)\bigl(x(t) - x_{(1)}(t)\bigr).$$ This follows from the fact that the transformation $$x'(t) = H^{-1}\bigl(x(t) - x_{(1)}(t)\bigr)$$ reduces the system to $dx'/dt=0$.
A famous example for $n=1$ is provided by the Riccati equation: $$\dot x = a_0(t) + a_1(t)x + a_2(t)x^2.
\label{eq:manes-de-Riccati}$$ One can understand by Hopf algebraic methods why, up to diffeomorphisms, Riccati’s is the only nonlinear Lie–Scheffers differential equation on the real line; this was indicated in [@Bruna] and it is spelled in Appendix D. Also is the simplest Lie–Scheffers system not solvable by quadratures; and other Lie–Scheffers equations on the line are reductions of it, in an appropriate sense —see Appendix B. The superposition principle for the Riccati equation is given by $$k = \frac{(x - x_{(2)})(x_{(1)} - x_{(3)})}{(x - x_{(1)})(x_{(2)} -
x_{(3)})}.$$
The one-dimensional example $$\dot x = b(t)\chi(x)
\label{eq:tugurito}$$ is instructive. We assume $\chi$ does not change sign in the interval of interest. Let $$\phi(x) := \int^x\frac{dx'}{\chi(x')}.$$ Then $$x(t) = \phi^{-1}\Bigl(k' + \int b(t)\,dt\Bigr)$$ is the general solution. We have therefore a superposition rule of the form $$x(t) = \phi^{-1}\bigl(\phi(x_{(1)}(t)) + k\bigr),$$ with $m=n=r=1$: only one particular solution is required. Notice that the local diffeomorphism $\phi$ projects the vector field corresponding to the right hand side in to the vector field $b(t){\partial}_x$: in the language of Lie, the flow associated to this problem is locally similar to a translation.
Now we can tackle at last the question of giving intrinsic geometrical meaning to . It turns out to correspond to a Lie–Scheffers system on a Lie group. For an arbitrary curve $t\mapsto
g(t)$ on the $r$-dimensional Lie group $G$, we have the vector field along the curve given by $\dot g(\cdot)$ as discussed at the end of Section 1. Then we *define* the left hand side of as $$\dot g(t)\,g^{-1}(t) := T_{g(t)}R_{g^{-1}(t)}\dot g(t).
\label{eq:madre-del-cordero}$$ By construction, for each value of the parameter $t$, this vector lies in $T_1G\equiv{\mathfrak{g}}$, the tangent Lie algebra of $G$. We obtain in this way a curve on ${\mathfrak{g}}$. Note that, if $g(t)=\exp(t\eta)$, then simply $\dot g(t)\,g^{-1}(t)=\eta$. Now, if ${\gamma}^a$ is a basis for ${\mathfrak{g}}$, then $$\dot g(t)\,g^{-1}(t) = \sum_{a=1}^r Z_a(t){\gamma}^a =: \xi(t) \in {\mathfrak{g}},
\label{eq:eqingr}$$ for some functions $Z_a(t)$. We realize that $g(t)$ is an integral curve of the right invariant vector field along ${\mathbb{R}}_t{\times}G\to G$: $$\xi_G(t,g) := \sum_{a=1}^r Z_a(t){\gamma}^a_G(g) = \sum_{a=1}^r
Z_a(t)X^R_{{\gamma}^a}(g), {\quad\mbox{with}\quad} {\gamma}_G^a(1_G) = {\gamma}^a.$$ Here ${\gamma}^a_G$ is the fundamental vector field or infinitesimal generator of the left group translations generated by ${\gamma}^a$, which is a *right* invariant vector field —see Appendix A for the notations. In the language of , the differential system is $$\dot g(t) = \sum_{a=1}^r Z_a(t)\,{\gamma}^a_G(g(t)).
\label{eq:fund}$$ The theorem says that for every choice of the functions $Z_a(t)$ we have a (right invariant) Lie–Scheffers system on the Lie group $G$, and any such system is of this form. The reader should be aware, nevertheless, that for a system of the type there might be more than one superposition rule [@TresMosqueterosbis]. The reason one needs only one particular solution is precisely the right invariance of the last equation: if $g(t)$ is the solution such that $g(t_0)=1$, then consider $\bar g(t):=g(t)\,g_0$ for each $g_0\in G$. We have $$\begin{aligned}
&&\dot{\bar g}(t) = T_{g(t)}R_{g_0}(\dot g(t)) =
T_{g(t)}R_{g_0}\left[T_1R_{g(t)}\left(\sum_{a=1}^r
Z_a(t){\gamma}^a\right)\right]
\cr
&&= T_1R_{g(t)g_0}\left(\sum_{a=1}^r Z_a(t){\gamma}^a\right) = \sum_{a=1}^r
Z_a(t){\gamma}^a_G(\bar g(t)).\end{aligned}$$ Equation $X^R(g) = T_1R_gX^R(1_G)$ has been used. Therefore $\bar
g(t)$ is the solution of the same equation with $\bar
g(t_0)=g_0$: the solution curves of the system are obtained from just one of them by right-translations. In other words, the superposition functional can be symbolically expressed by $\Psi(g_{(1)},k)=g_{(1)}k$, with $k\in G$; for which always $m=1$.
Lie–Scheffers systems live on manifolds which are not groups in general; however, they are always associated with the action of a finite-dimensional Lie group on the manifold on which $Y(t;x)$ is defined; and this symmetry of the differential equation can be powerfully exploited through the action of the group of curves on the group manifold on a set of systems of the same type. This variant of Lie’s reduction method is of wide applicability; it is explained in Appendix B.
Let us finally note than in control theory, say on $M\equiv{\mathbb{R}}^n$, business is often with equations of a form not unrelated to : $$\dot x(t) = X_1(x(t)) + \sum_{a=2}^r Z_a(t)\,X_a(x(t));$$ the functions $Z_2,\ldots,Z_r$ being the controls. In the most important cases the $X_1,\ldots,X_r$ vector fields close to a finite-dimensional Lie algebra, or $X_2,\ldots,X_r$ close to a finite-dimensional Lie algebra.
Differential operators on Lie–Rinehart algebras
===============================================
Let $R$ be a commutative, unital ring and ${\mathcal{A}}$ a commutative algebra over $R$ be given. A derivation ${\delta}$ of ${\mathcal{A}}$ is a $R$-linear map from ${\mathcal{A}}$ to itself, such that ${\delta}(ab)={\delta}a\,b+a\,{\delta}b$. Since ${\mathcal{A}}$ is commutative, the linear space $\operatorname{Der}({\mathcal{A}})$ of such maps becomes an ${\mathcal{A}}$-module when we define $(a{\delta})b=a\,{\delta}b$. Moreover, with the usual bracket given by the commutator $\operatorname{Der}({\mathcal{A}})$ is a Lie algebra. In this paper $R={\mathbb{C}}$ nearly always.
A left (right) *action* of a Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}$ on ${\mathcal{A}}$ is a Lie algebra homomorphism (antihomomorphism) ${\alpha}:{\mathfrak{g}}\to\operatorname{Der}({\mathcal{A}})$.
Assume that we are given a commutative algebra ${\mathcal{A}}$ and a Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}$ which is also a faithful ${\mathcal{A}}$-module. The pair $({\mathcal{A}},{\mathfrak{g}})$ is a *Lie–Rinehart algebra* if there exists an ${\mathcal{A}}$-module morphism ${\alpha}:{\mathfrak{g}}\to\operatorname{Der}({\mathcal{A}})$, called the *anchor*, satisfying the compatibility condition $$a[X, Y] = [X, a\,Y] - {\alpha}(X)a\,Y,
\label{eq:compatibility}$$ for $a\in{\mathcal{A}}, X,Y\in {\mathfrak{g}}$. If we write $m_a$ for the multiplication operator $m_a(X)=a\,X$ and $\operatorname{ad}_X$, as usual, for the adjoint operator $\operatorname{ad}_X(Y)=[X, Y]$, the compatibility condition is rewritten as $$[\operatorname{ad}_X, m_a] = m_{{\alpha}(X)a}.$$ Often, in the definition of Lie–Rinehart algebra, the apparently stronger condition that the anchor be also a left action of ${\mathfrak{g}}$ on ${\mathcal{A}}$ is required. But, as it turns out, these two definitions are equivalent.
The concept essentially coincides with Kastler and Stora’s Lie–Cartan pairs [@GoodPair]. As already indicated $\bigl({\mathcal{F}}(M),{\mathfrak{X}}(M),{{\mathrm{id}}}\bigr)$ is a Lie–Rinehart algebra. A more general example of Lie–Rinehart algebra may be $\bigl({\mathcal{F}}(M),
{\Gamma}(M,E),{\alpha}\bigr)$, where ${\Gamma}(M,E)$ is the ${\mathcal{F}}(M)$-module of sections of a vector bundle $E$ over $M$, on which a Lie bracket and an anchor ${\alpha}$ (hence a vector bundle map $E\to TM$, denoted in the same way) are supposed given. If the fibres have dimension bigger than one, then a linear map satisfying is not only automatically a Lie algebra morphism, but also a ${\mathcal{F}}(M)$-module morphism. These geometrical examples are called Lie algebroids. A Lie algebroid is called *transitive* when it is onto fibrewise; totally intransitive when ${\alpha}=0$. For examples of this, consider a principal bundle $P(M,G,\pi)$ over $M$; if $VP$ is the vertical bundle over $P$, we have the exact sequences of vector bundles $$0 \to VP \hookrightarrow TP \to TM \to 0 {\quad\mbox{and}\quad}
0 \to VP/G \hookrightarrow TP/G \to TM \to 0;$$ the second being essentially the Atiyah sequence; and then $(C^\infty(M),{\Gamma}(M,TP/G),T\pi/G)$ is a transitive Lie algebroid; while $\bigl(C^\infty(M),{\Gamma}(M,VP/G)\bigr)$ is totally intransitive.
Whenever we have a Lie–Rinehart algebra, we can algebraically define a differential calculus. For instance a $n$-form is a skewsymmetric $n$-linear map from ${\mathfrak{g}}$ to ${\mathcal{A}}$. If we define $d$ on 1-forms by $$d{\beta}(X,Y) = {\alpha}(X){\beta}(Y) - {\alpha}(Y){\beta}(X) - {\beta}\bigl([X, Y]\bigr),$$ then certainly $d$ can be extended so $d^2=0$. Also, let $V$ be an ${\mathcal{A}}$-module. A $V$-connection in the sense of [@GoodPair; @Bigotes2] is a linear assignment to each element $X\in {\mathfrak{g}}$ of a linear map $\rho(X):V\to V$ such that, for $v\in V$, $$\bigl(a\rho(X)\bigr)v = a\bigl(\rho(X)\bigr)v; \qquad \rho(X)(av)
= a\,\rho(X)v + {\alpha}(X)a\,v.$$ If $V$ is moreover a ${\mathfrak{g}}$-module, the connection is flat (as the curvature defined in the obvious way vanishes).
A morphism $({\mathcal{A}},{\mathfrak{g}})\to({\mathcal{A}}',{\mathfrak{g}}')$ of Lie–Rinehart algebras is a pair $(\phi,\psi)$ of an algebra morphism $\phi:{\mathcal{A}}\to{\mathcal{A}}'$ and an ${\mathcal{A}}$-module morphism $\psi:{\mathfrak{g}}\to {\mathfrak{g}}'$, where the action of ${\mathcal{A}}$ on ${\mathfrak{g}}'$ is given by $aX':=\phi(a)X'$, intertwining the anchors: $$\phi\bigl({\alpha}(X)\,a\bigr) = {\alpha}'\bigl(\psi(X)\bigl)\,\phi(a).$$ An important example by Grabowski is as follows [@JanuszBifronte]. A linear operator $D:{\mathfrak{g}}\to{\mathfrak{g}}$ is called a *quasi-derivation* for ${\mathcal{A}}$, and we write $D\in\operatorname{Qder}_{\mathcal{A}}({\mathfrak{g}})$, if for each $a\in{\mathcal{A}}$ there exists $\widehat D(a)\in{\mathcal{A}}$ —necessarily unique— such that $[D,m_a]=m_{\widehat D(a)}$, where the bracket is the usual commutator. It is easily seen that $\widehat D\in\operatorname{Der}({\mathcal{A}})$. Then $({{\mathrm{id}}}_{\mathcal{A}},\operatorname{ad}):({\mathcal{A}},{\mathfrak{g}})\to\bigl({\mathcal{A}},\operatorname{Qder}_{\mathcal{A}}({\mathfrak{g}})\bigr)$, where $\operatorname{ad}:X\mapsto\operatorname{ad}_X$, is a morphism of Lie–Rinehart algebras.
Our first example of Hopf algebra comes now across: the (universal) enveloping algebra ${\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{g}})$ of the Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}$. The enveloping algebra is Hopf because there is the diagonal algebra homomorphism $${\Delta}: {\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{g}}) \to {\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{g}}{\oplus}{\mathfrak{g}}) \simeq {\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{g}}) {\otimes}{\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{g}}) {\quad\mbox{by}\quad} X
\mapsto X {\oplus}X \mapsto X {\otimes}1 + 1 {\otimes}X, \; {\Delta}1 = 1 {\otimes}1,$$ for every $X\in {\mathfrak{g}}$.
When ${\mathfrak{g}}={\mathfrak{X}}(M)$, the enveloping algebra should not be confused with the algebra (with the usual composition product) of differential operators ${\mathbb{D}}(M)$. It is true that the first-order elements of both are the vector fields, thus coincide. However, we are going to show that if first order differential operators are to be considered primitive elements, then ${\mathbb{D}}(M)$ cannot be given a natural Hopf algebra structure; we thank P. Aschieri for making us aware of the following argument, since published [@Corfu]. Consider the linear map ${\mathcal{L}}:{\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{X}}(M))\to{\mathbb{D}}(M)$ obtained by extending the Lie derivative. This map is not onto because zeroth order differential operators are functions, whereas the zeroth order elements of ${\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{X}}(M))$ are just scalars. Actually, ${\mathbb{D}}(M)$ is a ${\mathcal{F}}(M)$-module, while ${\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{X}}(M))$ is not. For this very reason ${\mathbb{D}}(M)$ cannot be a Hopf algebra. Consider two commuting linearly independent vector fields $X,Y$ nonvanishing on a common domain (e.g. locally let $X$ be the partial derivative ${\partial}_i$ and $Y$ a different one ${\partial}_j$), and the vector fields $aX,aY$, where $a$ is an arbitrary function, nonvanishing on the same domain. The composition $a{\mathcal{L}}_X{\mathcal{L}}_Y = a{\mathcal{L}}_Y{\mathcal{L}}_X$ is an element in ${\mathbb{D}}(M)$. Suppose *arguendo* that there exist on ${\mathbb{D}}(M)$ a coproduct ${\delta}$ compatible with composition of operators, and such that vector fields are primitives. We would have $$\begin{aligned}
{\delta}(a{\mathcal{L}}_X{\mathcal{L}}_Y) &= a{\mathcal{L}}_X{\mathcal{L}}_Y {\otimes}1 + a{\mathcal{L}}_X {\otimes}{\mathcal{L}}_Y + {\mathcal{L}}_Y {\otimes}a{\mathcal{L}}_X + 1
{\otimes}a{\mathcal{L}}_X{\mathcal{L}}_Y {\quad\mbox{and}\quad}
\\
{\delta}(a{\mathcal{L}}_Y{\mathcal{L}}_X) &= a{\mathcal{L}}_Y{\mathcal{L}}_X {\otimes}1 + a{\mathcal{L}}_Y {\otimes}{\mathcal{L}}_X + {\mathcal{L}}_X {\otimes}a{\mathcal{L}}_Y +
1 {\otimes}a{\mathcal{L}}_Y{\mathcal{L}}_X.\end{aligned}$$ Now, the right hand sides are not equal. As a corollary we have that the map ${\mathcal{L}}$ is not injective: the fact that in ${\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{X}}(M))$ one has a good coproduct implies that $aX{\cdot}Y$ is there different >from $aY{\cdot}X$, with ${\cdot}$ the product in the enveloping algebra. Thus the kernel of ${\mathcal{L}}$ contains $aX{\cdot}Y-aY{\cdot}X$. Notice that the argument fails if $M$ is one-dimensional. Notice as well that ${\delta}$ makes ${\mathbb{D}}(M)$ into a good coalgebra over ${\mathcal{F}}(M)$. However, the product is then not ${\mathcal{F}}(M)$-linear.
In spite of the above, Hopf algebra renders us a first great service in helping to manufacture ${\mathbb{D}}(M)$ out of ${\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{X}}(M))$. This involves a purely algebraic construction [@Bigotes1; @Harbinger] suggested by the previous discussion and better presented in the context of Lie–Rinehart algebras.
Assume for simplicity that ${\mathcal{A}}$ is unital. The *universal object* of $({\mathcal{A}},{\mathfrak{g}})$ is by definition a triple $({\mathcal{U}}({\mathcal{A}},{\mathfrak{g}}),\imath_{\mathcal{A}},
\imath_{\mathfrak{g}})$, where ${\mathcal{U}}({\mathcal{A}},{\mathfrak{g}})$ is an associative algebra, therefore a Lie algebra with the usual commutator, together with morphisms $\imath_{\mathcal{A}}:{\mathcal{A}}\to{\mathcal{U}}({\mathcal{A}},{\mathfrak{g}})$ and $\imath_{\mathfrak{g}}:{\mathfrak{g}}\to{\mathcal{U}}({\mathcal{A}},{\mathfrak{g}})$, respectively of algebras and Lie algebras, such that $$\imath_A(a)\imath_{\mathfrak{g}}(X) = \imath_{\mathfrak{g}}(aX); \qquad
[\imath_{\mathfrak{g}}(X),\imath_A(a)] = \imath_A({\alpha}(X)a);$$ and $({\mathcal{U}}({\mathcal{A}},{\mathfrak{g}}),\imath_{\mathcal{A}},\imath_{\mathfrak{g}})$ is universal among these triples; that is, for a similar triple $(B,\phi_{\mathcal{A}},\phi_{\mathfrak{g}})$, there is a unique algebra morphism $\Phi_B:{\mathcal{U}}({\mathcal{A}},{\mathfrak{g}})\to B$ such that $\Phi_B\imath_{\mathcal{A}}=\phi_{\mathcal{A}}$ and $\Phi_B\imath_{\mathfrak{g}}=\phi_{\mathfrak{g}}$.
To construct ${\mathcal{U}}({\mathcal{A}},{\mathfrak{g}})$ we employ ${\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{g}})$ in the following way. The condition that the anchor maps into derivations means precisely that ${\mathcal{A}}$ is a Hopf ${\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{g}})$-module [@Quaoar]. One may keep using the same notation ${\alpha}$ for the new action, as for the generators; ${\alpha}(1)=1$. Consider now the smash product or crossed product algebra ${\mathcal{A}}\rtimes{\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{g}})$. This is the vector space ${\mathcal{A}}{\otimes}{\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{g}})$ with the product defined on simple tensors by $$(a {\otimes}u)(b {\otimes}v) := a{\alpha}(u_{(1)})b {\otimes}u_{(2)}v,$$ where we use the standard Sweedler notation ${\Delta}u=u_{(1)}{\otimes}u_{(2)}$. There are obvious morphisms $\imath'_{\mathcal{A}}:{\mathcal{A}}\to{\mathcal{A}}\rtimes
{\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{g}})$ and $\imath'_{\mathfrak{g}}:{\mathfrak{g}}\to{\mathcal{A}}\rtimes{\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{g}})$. Now, let $J$ be the right ideal generated in ${\mathcal{A}}\rtimes U({\mathfrak{g}})$ by the elements $ab{\otimes}X -
a{\otimes}bX$. One has $$\begin{aligned}
(c {\otimes}X)(ab {\otimes}Y - a {\otimes}bY) &= cab {\otimes}XY + c{\alpha}(X)(ab) {\otimes}Y - ca
{\otimes}XbY - c{\alpha}(X)a {\otimes}bY
\\
&= cab {\otimes}XY + c{\alpha}(X)a\,b {\otimes}Y + ca{\alpha}(X)b {\otimes}Y
\\
&\quad -ca {\otimes}bXY - ca {\otimes}{\alpha}(X)b\,Y - c{\alpha}(X)a {\otimes}bY
\\
&= cab{\otimes}XY - ca {\otimes}bXY + c{\alpha}(X)a\,b {\otimes}Y - c{\alpha}(X)a {\otimes}bY
\\
&\quad + ca{\alpha}(X)b {\otimes}Y - ca {\otimes}{\alpha}(X)b\,Y,\end{aligned}$$ where in the last equality we just reordered terms; hence $J$ is two-sided. By construction it is clear that the quotient ${\mathcal{U}}({\mathcal{A}},{\mathfrak{g}}):={\mathcal{A}}\rtimes U({\mathfrak{g}})/J$ together with the obvious quotient morphisms $\imath_{\mathcal{A}}$ and $\imath_{\mathfrak{g}}$ possesses the universal property. Note that $\imath_{\mathcal{A}}$ is injective. A morphism $(\phi,\psi):({\mathcal{A}},{\mathfrak{g}})\to({\mathcal{A}}',{\mathfrak{g}}')$ induces a morphism of algebras ${\mathcal{U}}(\phi,\psi):{\mathcal{U}}({\mathcal{A}},{\mathfrak{g}})\to{\mathcal{U}}({\mathcal{A}}',{\mathfrak{g}}')$, and vice versa; this is an equivalence of categories.
One obtains by this construction the ordinary algebra of differential operators ${\mathbb{D}}(M)={\mathcal{U}}({\mathcal{F}}(M),{\mathfrak{X}}(M))$. It is also clear that ${\mathcal{U}}({\mathbb{C}},{\mathfrak{g}})={\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{g}})$ with trivial action of ${\mathfrak{g}}$. Just like the enveloping algebra, the universal algebra ${\mathcal{U}}({\mathcal{A}},{\mathfrak{g}})$ is filtered, with an associated graded object $\operatorname{gr}\,{\mathcal{U}}({\mathcal{A}},{\mathfrak{g}})$, which is a commutative graded ${\mathcal{A}}$-algebra. There is also a Poincaré–Birkhoff–Witt theorem for ${\mathcal{U}}({\mathcal{A}},{\mathfrak{g}})$ when ${\mathfrak{g}}$ is projective over ${\mathcal{A}}$ —which is the case in the geometrical examples. It claims that if $S_{\mathcal{A}}[{\mathfrak{g}}]$ is the symmetric ${\mathcal{A}}$-algebra on ${\mathfrak{g}}$, then the natural surjection $$S_{\mathcal{A}}[{\mathfrak{g}}] \to \operatorname{gr}\,{\mathcal{U}}({\mathcal{A}},{\mathfrak{g}}),
\label{eq:Casimir-future}$$ is an isomorphism of ${\mathcal{A}}$-algebras, rather like the $S[{\mathfrak{g}}]\simeq\operatorname{gr}\,
{\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{g}})$ effected, say, through the ‘symmetrization’ map $\sigma:S[{\mathfrak{g}}]
\to{\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{g}})$. In that case $\imath_{\mathfrak{g}}$ is of course injective.
Coming by Hopf algebra
======================
We begin here a journey from the geometrical to the Hopf world. Let us start by some well-known observations [@KawskiS]. A smooth manifold $M$ is determined by the linear space ${\mathcal{F}}(M)$, in the sense that points of $M$ are in one-to-one correspondence with a particular class of linear functionals on ${\mathcal{F}}(M)$, to wit, multiplicative ones. One writes $\<x,h>:=h(x)$ to express this correspondence. As a consequence $M{\hookrightarrow}{\mathcal{F}}'(M)$, where ${\mathcal{F}}'(M)$ is the space of compactly supported distributions on $M$. We denote by ${\mathbb{C}}M$ the subspace of ${\mathcal{F}}'(M)$ generated by the points of $M$. It will sometimes be convenient to write $Th=\<T,h>$ for the value of the distribution $T\in{\mathcal{F}}'(M)$ at $h\in{\mathcal{F}}(M)$; accordingly we abbreviate to $xh=h(x)$. Many other geometrical objects can be expressed as functionals in this way; for instance, if $v_x\in T_xM$, then $\<v_x,h>\equiv v_xh$ is the derivative of $h$ in the direction of the tangent vector $v_x$ at $x$. Therefore $TM{\hookrightarrow}{\mathcal{F}}'(M)$, too. If $X$ is a smooth vector field and $Xh:=X(h)$, then $xX$ is defined naturally by $$(xX)h = x(Xh).$$ That is, $xX=X(x)$; and we may omit the parentheses in $xXh$. An advantage of thinking in this way is that operations in principle not meaningful on $M$ make sense in ${\mathcal{F}}'(M)$. For instance, given a curve ${\gamma}:{\mathbb{R}}_t\to M$ with ${\gamma}(0)=x_0$, the definition $$\dot{\gamma}(0) = \lim_{{\varepsilon}\downarrow0}\frac{{\gamma}({\varepsilon}) - x_0}{{\varepsilon}},$$ which looks unacceptable on $M$, in ${\mathcal{F}}'(M)$ just means that for all $h\in{\mathcal{F}}(M)$: $$\dot{\gamma}(0)h := \bigl<\lim_{{\varepsilon}\downarrow0}\frac{{\gamma}({\varepsilon}) -
x_0}{{\varepsilon}}, h\bigr> := \lim_{{\varepsilon}\downarrow0}\frac{h({\gamma}({\varepsilon})) -
h(x_0)}{{\varepsilon}}.$$ Let now $f:N\to M$ be smooth. If $S\in{\mathcal{F}}'(N)$, a corresponding element $S_f$ is defined in ${\mathcal{F}}'(M)$ by $$S_f h := S(f^*h).$$ Clearly, $x_f=xf=f(x)$, and so $S\to S_f$ extends $f$ to a map from ${\mathcal{F}}'(N)$ to ${\mathcal{F}}'(M)$. Somewhat rashly, one denotes the extension by the same letter; with this notation, if $v_x$ is a tangent vector at $x\in N$, the tangent vector $T_xf(v_x)$ at $f(x)\in M$ would become $v_x f$.
We may freely use the notation $e^{tX}$ for the flow generated by a vector field $X$: if ${\gamma}_X(t,x_0)$ is the integral curve of $X$ going through $x_0$ at $t=0$ and $xe^{tX}:={\gamma}_X(t,x)$, then the identity $\fd{}{t}\bigl({\gamma}_X(t,x)\bigr)= X\bigl({\gamma}_X(t,x)\bigr)$ acquires the linear look $\fd{}{t}\bigl(xe^{tX}\bigr) = xe^{tX}X$. We have indeed linearized the dynamical system associated to $X$. In more detail: if $xe^{tX}h:=h\bigl({\gamma}_X(t,x)\bigr)$, then $$\begin{aligned}
&\fd{}{t}\bigl(xe^{tX}\bigr)h = \sum_{i=1}^n\fd{x^i}{t}\; \frac{{\partial}h}{{\partial}x^i}\bigl({\gamma}_X(t,x)\bigr) =\sum_{i=1}^n X^i
\bigl({\gamma}_X(t,x)\bigr) \frac{{\partial}h}{{\partial}x^i}\bigl({\gamma}_X(t,x)\bigr)
\\
&=Xh\bigl({\gamma}_X(t,x)\bigr) =: xe^{tX}Xh.\end{aligned}$$ Linearization works as well for non-autonomous dynamical systems. Recall under the form: $$\dot x = Y(t;x(t)); \qquad x(t_0) = x_0.
\label{eq:gatos}$$ For $t$ given, the vector $Y(t;x(t))$ lives in the fibre over $x(t)$. Denote $$L(t,t_0)h(x) = h(x(t)), {\quad\mbox{for $h\in{\mathcal{F}}(M)$; then}\quad}
\frac{dL(t,t_0)}{dt} = L(t,t_0)Y(t);$$ with $Y$ interpreted as the corresponding time-dependent vector field. This, as announced in Section 1, is in the guise of . The Cauchy problem $$\dot x = xL(t,t_0); \qquad x(t_0) = x_0$$ has that of as unique solution [@RusosNoDescontrolados]. The difference with the finite-dimensional case is of course substantial; at the analytical level this is discussed at the end of Section 11.
Linearization is precisely what Hopf algebra is about. Things become really interesting when there is a symmetry group $G$ of the manifold $M$. As pointed out in [@HazewinkelRecom], linearization is then a particularly good idea; for instance, often the action $\Phi$ is indecomposable (think of the case $M=G$ and lateral action) and so contains little information; whereas the linear actions of $G$ on ${\mathcal{F}}(M)$ and ${\mathcal{F}}'(M)$ are generally decomposable (for instance when $G=M={\mathbb{S}}^1$). This is the point of harmonic analysis. For a fully algebraic description of these phenomena, we try to regard ${\mathcal{F}}'(G)$ and ${\mathcal{F}}(G)$, eventually restricting appropriately the functors ${\mathcal{F}}',{\mathcal{F}}$, as Hopf algebras.
There is no trouble in recognizing an algebra structure for the *whole* of ${\mathcal{F}}'(G)$: this is given just by *convolution*, which is a map ${\mathcal{F}}'(G){\otimes}{\mathcal{F}}'(G){\hookrightarrow}{\mathcal{F}}'(G{\times}G)\to{\mathcal{F}}'(G)$. If $S_1,S_2\in {\mathcal{F}}'(G)$, then $S_1*S_2$ is defined as the image $\mu(S_1,S_2)$, of the extended group multiplication $\mu:G{\times}G\to G$. This is an associative operation [@DieudonneIII]. We have in particular $g_1*g_2=g_1g_2$, for $g_1,g_2\in G$. The unit element in ${\mathcal{F}}'(G)$ is $1_G$. An augmentation on ${\mathcal{F}}'(G)$ is given by evaluation on the function $1\in{\mathcal{F}}(G)$: $$\eta(S) = S1.$$ In particular $\eta(g)=1$ for all $g\in G$. Clearly $\eta(S_1*S_2)=
\eta(S_1)\eta(S_2)$. A candidate antipode is the extension of the inversion diffeomorphism $\imath:g\mapsto g^{-1}$; certainly it is an algebra antiautomorphism: $$\imath(S_1*S_2) = \imath(S_2)*\imath(S_1).$$ In the sequel, the integral notation for convolution $$(S_1*S_2)h' = \int dS_1(g')\,dS_2(g)\,h'(g'g),$$ will be handy. A locally summable function $h$ defines a distribution by $h'\mapsto\int h(g)h'(g)\,dg$, with $dg$ a (left) invariant measure on $G$. For instance $1\in{\mathcal{F}}'(G)$ if $G$ is compact. Now $S*h$ is defined by: $$\int dS(g')\,h(g)h'(g'g)\,dg = \int dS(g')\,h({g'}^{-1}g)h'(g)\,dg;$$ so we identify it with the function $$g \mapsto \int dS(g')\,h({g'}^{-1}g) = \int dS(gg')\,h(g).
\label{eq:the-end-of-the-beginning}$$ Similarly, for $h*S$: $$\int dS(g)\,h(g')h'(g'g)\,dg' = \int dS(g)\,h(g'g^{-1})h'(g')\,
{\delta}(g^{-1})\,dg';$$ where ${\delta}$ is the modular function, so we identify $h*S$ with $g'\mapsto\int dS(g)\,h(g'g^{-1})\,{\delta}(g^{-1})$. In particular, $$h_1*h_2(g) = \int_G h_1(g')h_2({g'}^{-1}g)\,dg' = \int_G
h_1(gg')h_2({g'}^{-1})\,dg' = \int h_1(g{g'}^{-1})h_2(g')\,
{\delta}^{-1}(g')\,dg'.$$
To give ${\mathcal{F}}'(G)$ a coalgebra structure, one might try the following strategy. The diagonal homomorphism $d{:\,}G\to G{\times}G$, given by $g\mapsto(g,g)$, extends to $d{:\,}{\mathcal{F}}'(G)\to{\mathcal{F}}'(G{\times}G)$, by the repeatedly used procedure. However, ${\mathcal{F}}'(G{\times}G)$ is vastly bigger than ${\mathcal{F}}'(G){\otimes}{\mathcal{F}}'(G)$. So we look for convolution subalgebras $O(G)$ of ${\mathcal{F}}'(G)$ for which $O(G{\times}G)\simeq O(G){\otimes}O(G)$. For a start, ${\mathbb{C}}G$ will do; and naturally the elements of $G$, when regarded as elements of ${\mathcal{F}}'(G)$, are *grouplike* in the sense of Hopf algebra theory: for $h_1,h_2\in{\mathcal{F}}(G)$: $$\<{\Delta}g, h_1 {\otimes}h_2> = \<g, \mu(h_1 \circ d {\otimes}h_2 \circ d)>
=\<g{\otimes}g, h_1{\otimes}h_2>.$$ The Hopf algebra ${\mathbb{C}}G$ is too small for our purposes. Nonetheless, recall that the tangent algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}$ of $G$ also sits inside ${\mathcal{F}}'(G)$. The discussion around in Appendix A allows us to regard the elements of ${\mathfrak{g}}$ as right invariant differential operators on $G$. So let us focus on the subalgebra ${\mathbb{D}}^R(G)\subsetneq{\mathbb{D}}(G)$ of right invariant differential operators on ${\mathcal{F}}(G)$. There is great advantage in regarding any $D\in{\mathbb{D}}(G)$ as extended to distributions by $(DS)h=D(Sh)$. Now, ${\mathbb{D}}^R(G)$ can be realized as the algebra of distributions on $G$ with support at $1_G$. In effect, look first at the fundamental vector fields $\xi_G\equiv X^R_\xi$. From , we see that in general $$\xi_G(S*h) = \xi_G(S)*h; {\quad\mbox{as $1_G*h=h$, we conclude}\quad}
\xi_G(h) = \xi_G(1_G)*h.$$ For any element $D$ of ${\mathbb{D}}^R(G)$ analogously $D(h)=D(1_G)*h$. Note that $D(1_G)$ is a distribution concentrated at $1_G$. Moreover, $$DD'h = D(1_G)*D'(1_G)*h,$$ so the map $D\mapsto D(1_G)$ is a homomorphism. It is in fact an isomorphism, as any distribution vanishing outside a point is a finite sum of derivatives of a Dirac function; thus conversely $D$ can be written as a polynomial in the right invariant vector fields.
Therefore we have a new subalgebra of ${\mathcal{F}}'(G)$. Let us just write $\xi$ for $\xi_G(1_G)$. Furthermore, by the Leibniz rule we are able to define the shuffle coproduct: $${\Delta}\xi = \xi {\otimes}1 + 1 {\otimes}\xi.
\label{eq:Aquitaine}$$ This extends to ${\mathbb{D}}^R(G)(1_G)$ as an algebra homomorphism. Naturally says that the elements of ${\mathfrak{g}}$, when regarded as elements of ${\mathcal{F}}'(G)$, are primitive in the sense of Hopf algebra theory. A little more work shows that in fact ${\mathbb{D}}^R(G)\simeq{\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{X}}^R(G))\equiv{\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{g}})$, the algebra of right invariant differential operators *coincides* with the enveloping algebra of the Lie algebra of fundamental vector fields for the left action of $G$ on itself. Also we remark here that the equivalence of the Lie algebra structures considered on $T_1G$ in Appendix A can be seen from $$\xi*\eta - \eta*\xi = [\xi, \eta];$$ see [@DieudonneIV].
Our $O(G)$ will be the convolution algebra generated by ${\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{g}})\equiv{\mathbb{D}}^R(G)(1_G)$ and ${\mathbb{C}}G$; this is a Hopf crossed product [@Quaoar], as $g*\xi*g^{-1} = \operatorname{Ad}_g\xi$, and similarly for more general elements of ${\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{g}})$; it can be also regarded as a completion of the latter. Note ${\Delta}\circ i=(i{\otimes}i){\Delta}$ as well; we invite the reader to check the rest of the expected Hopf algebra properties. By the way, extending $\operatorname{Ad}$ to $S({\mathfrak{g}})$ as well, it is found that the symmetrization map mentioned after intertwines both actions of $G$. The centre $Z({\mathfrak{g}})$ of left *and* right (Casimir) invariant differential operators is clearly a commutative algebra, isomorphic to the algebra of the $G$-invariant elements in $S({\mathfrak{g}})$ —this states a strong form of the Gelfand–Harish–Chandra theorem.
One begins to feel the power of the Hopf algebra approach: equations and make sense in $O(G)$ without further ado; we are allowed to write for them $$\dot g(t) * g^{-1}(t) = \xi(t), \quad g(t_0) = 1_G {\quad\mbox{or}\quad}
\dot g(t) = \xi(t) * g(t), \quad g(t_0) = 1_G;
\label{eq:auto-gato}$$ similarly for : $$g^{-1}(t) * \dot g(t) = \eta(t), \quad g(t_0) = 1_G {\quad\mbox{or}\quad}
\dot g(t) = g(t) * \eta(t), \quad g(t_0) = 1_G;$$ The rigorous but roundabout arguments at the end of Section 3 are simplified thereby. Moreover the possibility of considering interpolated equations, of the form $$g^{-a}(t) * \dot g(t) * g^{-b}(t) = \kappa(t), {\quad\mbox{with $a + b =
1$,}\quad}$$ opens distinctly [@Eunomia]. This is uninvestigated.
Before leaving ${\mathcal{F}}'(G)$, let us note that we refrained from pondering distributions with point supports other than the elements of $G$. This would have allowed us in particular to consider $TG{\hookrightarrow}{\mathcal{F}}'(G)$; and then $g*v_{g'}=gv_{g'},\,v_{g'}*g=v_{g'}g$ —see in Appendix A. However, one should not believe $v_g*v_{g'}=v_gv_{g'}$; that is, $O(TG)$ does not embed into ${\mathcal{F}}'(G)$.
It is well known that the subalgebra ${\mathcal{R}}(G)$ of ‘representative functions’ in ${\mathcal{F}}(G)$, with its ordinary commutative multiplication, is also a Hopf algebra. The space ${\mathcal{R}}(G)$ is made of those functions whose translates $x\mapsto h(xt)$, for all $t\in G$, generate a finite-dimensional subalgebra of ${\mathcal{F}}(G)$. Then also ${\mathcal{R}}(G)$ is endowed with a coproduct in which $${\Delta}h\in{\mathcal{R}}(G) {\otimes}{\mathcal{R}}(G) {\quad\mbox{is given by}\quad} {\Delta}h(x,y) :=
\bigl(h_{(1)} {\otimes}h_{(2)}\bigr)(x,y) := h(xy);
\label{eq:dies-illa}$$ which is not cocommutative, unless $G$ is abelian. One has: $$\eta(h) = h(1); \qquad Sh(g) = h(g^{-1}).$$ Both previous constructions of $O(G)$ and ${\mathcal{R}}(G)$ are mutually dual. Questions of duality are delicate in Hopf algebra theory; fortunately we need not deal with them in particular detail. The main point there is the following. Given any Hopf algebra $H$ and an algebra $A$, one can define [@Quaoar] the *algebraic convolution* of two ${\mathbb{C}}$-linear maps $f,h \in \operatorname{Hom}(H,A)$ as the map $f*h \in \operatorname{Hom}(H,A)$ given by the composition $$H \xrightarrow{{\Delta}} H {\otimes}H \xrightarrow{f{\otimes}h} A {\otimes}A
\xrightarrow{m_A} A.$$ Here $m_A$ denotes the product map from $A{\otimes}A$ to $A$. Because of coassociativity of ${\Delta}$, the triple $\bigl(\operatorname{Hom}(H,A),*,
u_A\eta_H=:\eta_A\bigr)$ is an associative algebra with unit. Now, for $A={\mathbb{C}}$, the Hopf algebraic definition of convolution on $O(G)$ as a dual of ${\mathcal{R}}(G)$ *coincides* with the analytical one.
Algebra morphisms respect convolution, in the following way $$\ell(f * h) = \ell f * \ell h; {\quad\mbox{similarly}\quad} (f * h)\ell = f\ell
* h\ell,$$ if $\ell$ is a coalgebra morphism. Clearly the antipode $S$ is the inverse of the identity map ${{\mathrm{id}}}$ for the convolution product of endomorphisms of $H$ [@Quaoar]. If $f\in\operatorname{Hom}(H,A)$ is an algebra morphism, using the convolution product of $\operatorname{End}(H)$ one finds that its composition $fS$ with the antipode is a convolution inverse for $f$: $$f * fS = f({{\mathrm{id}}}*S) = fu_H\eta_H = \eta_A = f(S * {{\mathrm{id}}}) = fS * f.$$ Denote by $\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathrm{alg}}(H,A)$ the convolution monoid —with unit element the map $\eta_A$— of multiplicative morphisms of $H$ on the algebra $A$. In general $fS$ does not belong to $\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathrm{alg}}(H,A)$; but it does when the algebra $A$ is commutative. Moreover, if $A$ is commutative, the convolution product of two multiplicative maps is again multiplicative, so $\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathrm{alg}}(H,A)$ becomes a group, that we may call $G_H(A)$. In particular, this happens for the set $G_H({\mathbb{C}})$ of scalar characters, and for $G_H(H)$ if $H$ is commutative. Thus we have a (representable by definition) functor $G_H$ going from commutative Hopf algebras to groups. We may call $G_H$ an ‘affine group scheme’. If we suppose $H$ to be graded, connected (meaning that the scalars are the only elements in degree zero) and of finite type, then $G_H({\mathbb{C}})$ is a projective limit of triangular matrix groups. An important example is studied in Appendix D.
In general there will be only an embedding —that can be made continuous— of $G$ into the group $G_{{\mathcal{R}}(G)}({\mathbb{R}})$ of characters of ${\mathcal{R}}(G)$; under favourable circumstances (for instance, for $G$ compact, thanks to the Peter–Weyl theorem) both groups coincide. Also if $A$ is commutative then $\operatorname{Hom}(H,A)$ is an $A$-algebra. Then a Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}_H(A)$ can be obtained as well by considering the elements $L$ (‘infinitesimal characters’) of $\operatorname{Hom}(H,A)$ satisfying the Leibniz rule $$L(cd) = \eta_A(c)Ld + \eta_A(d)Lc,$$ for all $c,d\in H$. The bracket $[L_1,L_2]:=L_1*L_2-L_2*L_1$ of two infinitesimal characters is an infinitesimal character, and so we have a functor ${\mathfrak{g}}_H$ from commutative algebras to Lie algebras. Needless to say, under favourable circumstances ${\mathfrak{g}}_{{\mathcal{R}}(G)}({\mathbb{R}})$ is just ${\mathfrak{g}}$.
To summarize, the situation is here quite different of that examined in Section 2, whereby we showed ${\mathbb{D}}(G)\nsim{\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{X}}(G))$, whereas ${\mathbb{D}}^R(G)\sim{\mathcal{U}}({\mathfrak{X}}^R(G))$. Notice that ${\mathbb{D}}^R(G)$ can be expressed directly in Hopf theoretic terms, as follows: a derivation of the commutative algebra ${\mathcal{R}}(G)$ belongs to ${\mathbb{D}}^R(G)$ iff it is of the form $L*{{\mathrm{id}}}$, with $L$ an infinitesimal character of ${\mathcal{R}}(G)$. Here the convolution of an endomorphism of ${\mathcal{R}}(G)$ and an element of $O(G)$ is clearly well defined; and indeed $$L * {{\mathrm{id}}}(h_1h_2) = D(h_1)h_2 + h_1D(h_2),$$ after a short calculation. Right invariance of $L*{{\mathrm{id}}}$ is clear. Reciprocally $\eta D$ is an infinitesimal character. All this is in [@TheSecondComing].
The books [@DieudonneIV; @Warner; @Taylor] and the review article [@Cartier2006] are good references for most of this section.
Some structure results for Hopf algebras
========================================
Familiarity with the tensor ${\mathcal{T}}(V)$ and cotensor (or shuffle) ${\mathcal{T}}^*(V)$ Hopf algebras is very convenient; we survey them here. Consider a countable basis $B={\{\,v_1,\dots,v_p,\dots\,\}}$ of the vector space $V$, and think of it as an alphabet, a word of this alphabet being a finite sequence of $v$’s. We let ${\mathcal{T}}^*(V)$ be the vector space generated by the set of words and $1$ (corresponding to the empty word). The length of a word $w=v_{i_1}\cdots v_{i_n}$ is denoted by $|w|=n$; naturally $|1|=0$. Introduce a noncocommutative (deconcatenation) coproduct on ${\mathcal{T}}^*(V)$ by the formulae ${\Delta}1=1{\otimes}1$ and $${\Delta}w = \sum_{p=0}^{n} v_{i_1}\cdots v_{i_p} {\otimes}v_{i_{p+1}}\cdots
v_{i_n},$$ with the agreement that when all the terms are on the one side of the tensor sign there is a $1$ on the other side. Notice that $$({\Delta}{\otimes}{{\mathrm{id}}}){\Delta}(v_{i_1}\cdots v_{i_n}) = \sum_{0\le p\le q\le n}
v_{i_1} \cdots v_{i_p} {\otimes}v_{i_{p+1}} \cdots v_{i_q} {\otimes}v_{i_{q+1}}
\cdots v_{i_n} = ({{\mathrm{id}}}{\otimes}{\Delta}){\Delta}(v_{i_1} \cdots v_{i_n}),$$ understanding that when $p=q$ the middle term of the summand is $1$. Hence $\bigl({\mathcal{T}}^*(V),{\Delta},\eta\bigr)$, where $\eta{:\,}{\mathcal{T}}^*(V)\to{\mathbb{R}}$ is defined by $\eta(1)=1$ and $\eta(w)=0$ if $|w|>0$, is indeed a coalgebra; by the way, any commutative ${\mathbb{Q}}$-algebra at the place of the real numbers would do here. The dual vector space consists of all infinite series of the form $\sum {\lambda}_I v'_I$, where $I={\{\,i_1,\dots,i_n\,\}}$ and $v'_I$ denotes the dual of $v_I:=
v_{i_1}\cdots v_{i_n}$. It becomes an algebra with product $$\<v'_J v'_K, v_I> := \<v'_J{\otimes}v'_K, {\Delta}v_I>.$$ Since the right hand side vanishes unless $J\cup K=I$ as ordered sets, and in that case equals $1$, this product is simply concatenation: $$v'_J v'_K = v'_{j_1}\cdots v'_{j_m} v'_{k_1}\cdots v'_{k_l}.$$ In other words, this dual is the algebra ${\mathbb{R}}[[B']]$ of noncommutative formal power series in the variables $v_i$, which is the (Krull topology) completion of the algebra ${\mathbb{R}}[B']$ of noncommutative polynomials in the same variables —that is the tensor algebra ${\mathcal{T}}(V)$, as tensor product is given by concatenation.
It is clear that ${\mathcal{T}}(V)$ is a free associative algebra on $B'$ [@Reutenauer]. Moreover, if ${\mathcal{L}}(B')$ is the free Lie algebra on $B'$, from the universal properties of ${\mathcal{L}}(B')$ and of ${\mathcal{U}}\bigl({\mathcal{L}}(B')\bigr)$ it follows that also ${\mathcal{U}}\bigl({\mathcal{L}}(B')\bigr)$ is a free associative algebra on $B'$; therefore ${\mathcal{T}}(V)=
{\mathcal{U}}\bigl({\mathcal{L}}(B')\bigr)$. In particular, we have a Hopf algebra structure on ${\mathcal{T}}(V)$, which is inherited by its completion. Their cocommutative coproduct is given on monomials by the formula $${\Delta}(v'_{i_1}\cdots v'_{i_n}) = \sum_{p=0}^n\sum_{{\sigma}\in S_{n,p}}
v'_{{\sigma}(i_1)}\cdots v'_{{\sigma}(i_p)} {\otimes}v'_{{\sigma}(i_{p+1})}\cdots
v'_{{\sigma}(i_n)}.$$ Here we deal with $(p,n-p)$-shuffles, that is, permutations ${\sigma}$ of $[n]={\{\,1,\dots,n\,\}}$ such that ${\sigma}(1)<\cdots<{\sigma}(p)$ and ${\sigma}(p+1)<\cdots<{\sigma}(n)$; we write ${\sigma}\in S_{n,p}$. From this coproduct we obtain a product $\pitchfork$ on ${\mathcal{T}}^*(V)$ by dualization: $$\<v'_I, v_J \pitchfork v_K> := \<{\Delta}v'_I, v_J {\otimes}v_K>.
\label{eq:shuffleProduct}$$ Explicitly, the commutative *shuffle* product $\pitchfork$ is given by $$v_{i_1}\cdots v_{i_p} \pitchfork v_{i_{p+1}}\cdots v_{i_n} =
\sum_{{\sigma}\in S_{n,p}} v_{i_{{\sigma}(1)}} \cdots v_{i_{{\sigma}(n)}}.$$ For instance $v_iv_j\pitchfork v_k=v_iv_jv_k+v_iv_kv_j+v_kv_iv_j$ and $$v_i v_j \pitchfork v_k v_l = v_iv_jv_kv_l + v_iv_kv_jv_l +
v_iv_kv_lv_j + v_kv_iv_jv_l + v_kv_iv_lv_j + v_kv_lv_iv_j.$$ It is also easy to check the following formula, which can be employed as a recursive definition of the shuffle product: $$v_{i_1}\cdots v_{i_p} \pitchfork v_{i_{p+1}}\cdots v_{i_n} =
(v_{i_1}\cdots v_{i_p} \pitchfork v_{i_{p+1}}\cdots
v_{i_{n-1}})v_{i_n} + (v_{i_{p+1}}\cdots v_{i_n} \pitchfork
v_{i_1}\cdots v_{i_{p-1}})v_{i_p}.$$ The coproduct on ${\mathcal{T}}^*(V)$ and $\pitchfork$ are compatible since they are respectively obtained by dualization of the product and coproduct of the Hopf algebra ${\mathbb{R}}[[B']]$. The resulting commutative, connected, graded Hopf algebra $\operatorname{Sh}(V)\equiv{\mathcal{T}}^*(V)$ is called the shuffle Hopf algebra over $V$. The construction does not depend on the choice of the basis $B$, since all the algebras involved only depend on the cardinality of $B$. The antipode on ${\mathcal{T}}(V)$ is given by $$S(v'_1\cdots v'_n)= (-1)^n v'_n\cdots v'_1;$$ by duality the same formula holds on $\operatorname{Sh}(V)$.
Every polynomial $P\in {\mathbb{R}}[B']$ can be written in the form $P=\sum_n
P_n$ where $P_n$ is the sum of all monomials of $P$ of degree $n$. It is called a *Lie element* if $P_0=0$ and each $P_n$ belongs to the free Lie algebra generated by the $v'_i$. The following is a classical theorem by Friedrichs.
A polynomial $P$ is a Lie element if, and only if, it is primitive.
The ‘only if’ part follows easily by induction from the obviously true assertion for $n=1$. To prove the converse we invoke in context the Dynkin operator $D$, for whose study we recommend [@Eunomia; @WignerGood; @FredericReut]. An abstract definition of $D$ is $D=S*Y$, where $Y$ is the derivation given by the grading; equivalently ${{\mathrm{id}}}*D = Y$. If $P_n$ is primitive, then so are $$nP_n = YP_n = \pi({{\mathrm{id}}}\otimes D)(1 \otimes P_n + P_n \otimes 1) =
D(P_n);$$ and vice versa. But $D(P_n)$ is a Lie element, as it corresponds to the left-to-right bracketing: $$D(x_{i_1}\ldots x_{i_n}) = [\dots[[x_{i_1}, x_{i_2}], x_{i_3}], \dots,
x_{i_n}] {\quad\mbox{(the Dynkin--Specht--Wever theorem).}\quad}$$ To prove the last equality, note that it is true for $|w|=1$. Assume that it holds for all words of degree less than $n$, and let $w=xx_{i_n}=x_{i_1} \cdots x_{i_n}$. Then $${\Delta}w = {\Delta}x {\Delta}x_{i_n} = (x_{(1)} {\otimes}x_{(2)})(x_{i_n} {\otimes}1 + 1{\otimes}x_{i_n}) = x_{(1)}x_{i_n} {\otimes}x_{(2)} + x_{(1)} {\otimes}x_{(2)}x_{i_n}.$$ Since $Sx_{i_n} = -x_{i_n}$ and $\eta(x)=0$, $$\begin{aligned}
(S*Y)w &= S(x_{(1)}x_{i_n})Yx_{(2)} + Sx_{(1)}Y(x_{(2)}x_{i_n})
\\
&= S(x_{i_n})Sx_{(1)}Yx_{(2)} + Sx_{(1)}Yx_{(2)}x_{i_n} +
Sx_{(1)}x_{(2)}Yx_{i_n}
\\
&= -x_{i_n}Sx_{(1)}Yx_{(2)} + Sx_{(1)}Yx_{(2)}x_{i_n}
\\
&= [Dx, x_{i_n}] = [\dots[[x_{i_1}, x_{i_2}], x_{i_3}], \dots,
x_{i_n}],\end{aligned}$$ upon using the induction hypothesis in the last equality. (The definition $D=Y*S$ would work the same, yielding right-to-left bracketing.)
When $V$ is finite dimensional, the previous argument of Friedrichs’ theorem goes through for formal power series, because the homogeneous components are polynomials, and there is only a finite number of words of a given length. In the infinite-dimensional case Lie series are defined as those such that their projections to any finite-dimensional subspace $\tilde V$ are Lie series over $\tilde V$, so the theorem also holds for series in the infinite-dimensional context [@Reutenauer Section 3.1].
Given a power series $Z$, let us denote by $(Z,w)$ the coefficient of the word $w$ in $Z$. The topology in ${\mathbb{R}}[[B']]$ alluded above is the weakest topology such that for each $w$ the mapping $Z\mapsto (Z,w)$ is continuous, when ${\mathbb{R}}$ is equipped with the discrete topology. In particular, the neighbourhoods of 0 are indexed by finite sets of words, and correspond to those series whose coefficients vanish on all the words of the given finite set. Thus, given a sequence of series $(Z_n)$ such that for each neighbourhood of 0, all but a finite number of $Z_n$’s are in this neighbourhood, their sum $\sum_n Z_n$ is defined as the power series $Z$ satisfying $$(Z,w) = \sum_n (Z_n,w).$$ This sum makes sense since only finitely many terms are different >from zero for each $w$. Notice that $Z$ can be written as $Z=\sum_w (Z,w)w$, where the sum runs over the set of words. (Henceforth we shall no longer be fussy on ‘topological’ matters.)
When $Z$ is a series such that $(Z,1)=0$, then the expression $\sum_n
{\lambda}_n Z^n$ has a meaning for any choice of the numbers ${\lambda}_n$. In particular, we may define exponentials and logarithms as usual: $$\exp(Z) = \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{Z^n}{n!} {\quad\mbox{and}\quad} \log(1+Z) =
\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{(-1)^{n-1}}{n} Z^n,$$ As expected $$\log\bigl(\exp(Z)\bigr) = Z, {\quad\mbox{and}\quad} \exp\bigl(\log(1 + Z)\bigr)
= 1 + Z.$$ and routine calculations establish that $\exp$ is a bijection from the set of primitive elements in the completion of ${\mathcal{T}}(V)$ into the set of grouplike elements, and vice versa for $\log$.
Equation entails $${\Delta}Z = \sum_{w,x} (Z,w\pitchfork x) w{\otimes}x.$$ Since for grouplike elements ${\Delta}Z = \sum_{w,x}(Z,w)(Z,x)w{\otimes}x$, it follows that $$(Z,w\pitchfork x) = (Z,w)(Z,x),
\label{eq:Ree}$$ for them. This of course means that the grouplike elements of ${\mathbb{R}}[[B']]$ are precisely those $Z$ for which the map $w\mapsto(Z,w)$ is an algebra homomorphism for the shuffle product. This characterization is originally due to Ree [@Ree].
We collect next some elements of structure theory of commutative or cocommutative Hopf algebras —mostly due to Patras [@Frederic1; @Frederic2]— beginning by a ‘double series’ argument similar to the one in [@Reutenauer] for the shuffle-deconcatenation Hopf algebra.
Consider, for $H=\bigoplus_m^\infty H^{(m)}$ a graded connected *commutative* Hopf algebra with augmentation ideal $H_+$ and graded dual $H'$, a suitable completion $H{\mathrel{\overline\otimes}}H'$ of the tensor product $H{\otimes}H'$. This is a unital algebra, with product $m{\otimes}{\Delta}^t$ and unit $1{\otimes}1$. Now by Leray’s theorem —an easy dual version of the Cartier–Milnor–Moore theorem— our $H$ is a symmetric algebra over a supplement $V$ of $H_+^2$ in $H_+$ [@Quaoar; @Frederic2]. Let $A$ index a basis for $V$, let ${\tilde A}$ (the monoid freely generated by $A$) index the words $X_u$, and let $Z_u$ denote an element of the dual basis in $H'$; then the product on $H {\mathrel{\overline\otimes}}H'$ is given by the double series product: $$\biggl(\,\sum_{u,v\in{\tilde A}}{\alpha}_{uv}X_u{\otimes}Z_v\biggr)
\biggl(\,\sum_{w,t\in{\tilde A}}{\beta}_{wt}X_w{\otimes}Z_t\biggr)
:= \sum_{u,v,w,t\in{\tilde A}} {\alpha}_{uv} {\beta}_{wt} \,X_u X_w{\otimes}Z_v Z_t.$$ The linear embedding $\operatorname{End}H \to H {\mathrel{\overline\otimes}}H'$ given by $$f \mapsto \sum_{u\in{\tilde A}}f(X_u){\otimes}Z_u,$$ is really a convolution algebra embedding $$(\operatorname{End}H,*) \to (H {\mathrel{\overline\otimes}}H',m{\otimes}{\Delta}^t).$$ Indeed, $$\begin{aligned}
\biggl(\,\sum_{u\in{\tilde A}} f(X_u) {\otimes}Z_u\biggr)
&\biggl(\,\sum_{v\in{\tilde A}} g(X_v) {\otimes}Z_v\biggr)
= \sum_{u,v\in{\tilde A}} f(X_u) g(X_v) {\otimes}Z_u Z_v
\notag \\
&= \sum_{t\in{\tilde A}} \biggl(\,\sum_{u,v\in{\tilde A}}
f(X_u) g(X_v) \,\<Z_uZ_v,X_t> \biggr) {\otimes}Z_t
\notag \\
&= \sum_{t\in{\tilde A}} \biggl(\,\sum_{u,v\in{\tilde A}}
f(X_u) g(X_v) \,\<Z_u{\otimes}Z_v,{\Delta}X_t> \biggr) {\otimes}Z_t
\notag \\
&= \sum_{t\in{\tilde A}} f*g(X_t) {\otimes}Z_t.
\label{eq:conv-series}\end{aligned}$$ Notice that the identities $u\eta$ for convolution and ${{\mathrm{id}}}$ for composition in $\operatorname{End}H$ correspond respectively to $$u\eta \mapsto 1{\otimes}1 {\quad\mbox{and}\quad}
{{\mathrm{id}}}\mapsto \sum_{u\in {\tilde A}}X_u{\otimes}Z_u.$$ Denote $$\pi_1(X_w) := \sum_{k\ge1} \frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k} \sum_{u_1, \dots,
u_k\ne1} \<Z_{u_1} \cdots Z_{u_k},X_w>\, X_{u_1} \cdots X_{u_k} =:
\log^*{{\mathrm{id}}}\,X_w.$$ Using the same idea as in , we get $$\begin{aligned}
\log\biggl(\,\sum_{u\in{\tilde A}} X_u{\otimes}Z_u \biggr)
&:= \sum_{k\ge1} \frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}
\biggl(\,\sum_{u\ne1} X_u {\otimes}Z_u \biggr)^k
{\nonumber}\\
&= \sum_{k\ge1}\frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}
\sum_{u_1,\dots,u_k\ne1}
X_{u_1} \cdots X_{u_k} {\otimes}Z_{u_1} \cdots Z_{u_k}
{\nonumber}\\
&= \sum_{w\in{\tilde A}}\sum_{k\ge1}\frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}
\sum_{u_1,\dots,u_k\ne1}
\<Z_{u_1} \cdots Z_{u_k},X_w>\, X_{u_1} \cdots X_{u_k} {\otimes}Z_w
{\nonumber}\\
&= \sum_{w\in{\tilde A}} \pi_1(X_w) {\otimes}Z_w.
\label{eq:basic-truth}\end{aligned}$$ We moreover consider the endomorphisms $\pi_n:=\pi_1^{*n}/n!$ so that, by : $$\sum_{w\in\tilde A}\pi_n(X_w){\otimes}Z_w =
\frac{1}{n!}\biggl(\,\sum_{v\in\tilde A}\pi_1(X_v){\otimes}Z_v\biggr)^n.$$ We may put $\pi_0 := u\eta$. Thus, if $a\in H$ is of order $n$, $\pi_m(a) = 0$ for $m > n$. Furthermore, for $n > 0$, $${{\mathrm{id}}}^{*l}a = \exp^*(\log^*({{\mathrm{id}}}^{*l}))\,a =
\sum_{m=1}^n\frac{(\log^*({{\mathrm{id}}}^{*l}))^m}{m!}a =
\sum_{m=1}^nl^m\frac{(\log^*{{\mathrm{id}}})^m}{m!}a = \sum_{m=1}^nl^m\pi_m(a).
\label{eq:greater-good}$$ In particular ${{\mathrm{id}}}=\sum_{m\ge0}\pi_m$. The graded maps ${{\mathrm{id}}}^{*n}$ are called the *Adams operations* or characteristic endomorphisms of $H$; they play an important role in the (Hochschild, cyclic) cohomology of commutative algebras [@GS1; @NoOffenseIntended; @GS2]. The $\pi_n$ are often called *Eulerian idempotents*. We have for them:
\[pr:Trick\] For any integers $n$ and $k$, $${{\mathrm{id}}}^{*n}\,{{\mathrm{id}}}^{*k} = {{\mathrm{id}}}^{*nk} = {{\mathrm{id}}}^{*k}\,{{\mathrm{id}}}^{*n}.
\label{eq:burden of proof}$$ and $$\pi_m\pi_k = {\delta}_{mk}\,\pi_k.
\label{eq:make-believe}$$
The first assertion is certainly true for $k=1$ and all integers $n$, and if it is true for some $k$ and all integers $n$, then taking into account that ${{\mathrm{id}}}$ is an algebra homomorphism, the induction hypothesis gives $${{\mathrm{id}}}^{*n}\,{{\mathrm{id}}}^{*k+1}={{\mathrm{id}}}^{*n}({{\mathrm{id}}}^{*k}*{{\mathrm{id}}})
={{\mathrm{id}}}^{*nk}*{{\mathrm{id}}}^{*n}={{\mathrm{id}}}^{*n(k+1)}.$$ Substituting the final expression of in , with very little work one obtains . So indeed the $\pi_k$ form a family of orthogonal projectors.
Thus the space $H=\bigoplus_m^\infty H^{(m)}$ always has the direct sum decomposition $$H=\bigoplus_{n\ge0} H_n := \bigoplus_{n\ge0}\pi_n(H).
\label{eq:decomposition}$$
Moreover, from , $${{\mathrm{id}}}^{*l} H_n = l^n H_n,$$ so the $H_n$ are the common eigenspaces of the operators ${{\mathrm{id}}}^{*l}$ with eigenvalues $l^n$. Thus, the decomposition turns $H$ into a graded algebra. Indeed, if $a\in H_r$ and $b\in H_s$, then $${{\mathrm{id}}}^{*l}(ab) = {{\mathrm{id}}}^{*l}a\,{{\mathrm{id}}}^{*l}b = l^{r+s}(ab),$$ and therefore $m$ sends $H_r{\otimes}H_s$ into $H_{r+s}$. We shall denote by $\pi_n^{(m)}$ the restriction of $\pi_n$ to $H^{(m)}$, the set of elements of degree $m$, with respect to the original grading.
If $H$ is cocommutative instead of commutative, the previous arguments go through. One then has $$\log\biggl(\,\sum_{u\in{\tilde A}}X_u {\otimes}Z_u\biggr) =
\sum_{w\in{\tilde A}}X_w {\otimes}\pi_1(Z_w).$$ Furthermore, in this case the Eulerian idempotents of $H$ are the transpose of the Eulerian idempotents of the graded commutative Hopf algebra $H'$. In particular, for $H$ cocommutative, $\pi_1(H)=P(H)$, the Lie algebra of primitive elements in $H$. This is easily sharpened into the following version [@Frederic2] of the Cartier–Milnor–Moore theorem: the inclusion $\pi_1(H)\hookrightarrow H$ extends to an isomorphism of ${\mathcal{U}}\bigl(\pi_1(H)\bigr)$ with $H$.
The CBHD *development* and Hopf algebra
=======================================
There are three paradigmatic methods (and sundry hybrid forms) to deal with first order non-autonomous differential equations: the iteration formula or Dyson–Chen expansional, the Magnus expansion and the product integral. For reasons expounded later, at the beginning of Section 10, in this paper we look first for the Magnus expansion [@Magnus]. In the influential paper [@inflationbuster] dealing with the latter method (although Magnus’ seminal contribution is not mentioned) the famous Campbell–Baker–Hausdorff–Dynkin (CBHD) formula in Lie algebra theory is shown to be a special case of general formulas for the solution of . This is scarcely surprising, as that solution involves some kind of exponential with non-commuting exponents; also the quest for ‘continuous analogues’ of the CBHD formula was a motivation for Chen’s work. Conversely, a heuristic argument for obtaining Magnus’ expansion from the CBHD formula has been known for some time [@macrote; @MexicoLindo]; and a routine, if rigorous and Hopf flavoured as well, derivation of Magnus’ method from CBHD is available in [@MexicoOtraVez]. Hence the interest, as a prelude to our own derivation of the Magnus expansion from the CBHD development (that will employ the concept of nonlinear CBHD *recursion* and Rota–Baxter theory techniques) of rendering the proof of the CBHD expansion in Hopf algebraic terms. This was recognized as the deeper and more natural approach to the subject some fifteen years ago, but remains to date woefully ignored. Standard treatments of the CBHD development can be found in good Lie group theory books like [@H-ChProphet].
In the sequel we follow [@RiauRiau] and [@LodayEM]. It will be soon clear to the reader, according to the previous discussion, that the CBHD formulae are universal; thus we can as well return to the case where $H$ is the Hopf tensor algebra ${\mathcal{T}}(V)$ and where $V$ possesses a basis $B={\{\,X_1,\ldots,X_n\,\}}$. The CBHD series $\sum_{m\ge1} \Phi_m(X_1,\dots,X_n)$ is defined by $$\sum_{m\ge1}\Phi_m(X_1,\ldots,X_n)
= \log\bigl(e^{X_1}\cdots e^{X_n}\bigr),$$ where $\Phi_m(X_1,\ldots,X_n)$ are homogeneous polynomials of degree $m$.
Now, if $a$ is a grouplike element in a Hopf algebra $H$, and $f,h\in\operatorname{Hom}(H,A)$, where $A$ is a unital algebra, then $$f*h(a) = f(a)h(a).$$ In particular $$\log\bigl(e^{X_1}e^{X_2}\cdots e^{X_n}\bigr) =
\log^*{{\mathrm{id}}}\bigl(e^{X_1}e^{X_2}\cdots e^{X_n}\bigr) =:
\pi_1\bigl(e^{X_1}e^{X_2}\cdots e^{X_n}\bigr).
\label{eq:tabla-de-salvacion}$$ Take first $n=2$. Then $\Phi_m(X,Y)=\pi_1^{(m)}\bigl(e^Xe^Y\bigr)$. The Cauchy product gives $$e^Xe^Y= \sum_{m\ge0}\left(\sum_{i=0}^m
\frac{X^i}{i!}\,\frac{Y^{n-i}}{(n-i)!}\right),$$ hence $$\Phi_m(X,Y)=\sum_{i+j=m}\frac{1}{i!j!}\;\pi_1^{(m)}(X^iY^j).$$ A similar argument entails the following proposition.
\[pr:Dirty\] $$\Phi_m(X_1,\ldots,X_n) = \sum\frac{1}{i_1!\cdots i_n!}\,
\pi_1^{(m)}(X_1^{i_1}X_2^{i_2}\cdots X_n^{i_n}),
\label{eq:at-sea}$$ where the sum runs over all vectors $(i_1,\dots,i_n)$, with nonnegative coordinates, such that $i_1+\cdots+i_n=m$.
Denote by ${\varphi}_n(X_1,\ldots,X_n)$ the ‘multilinear’ part of $\Phi_n(X_1,\ldots,X_n)$ —that is, the homogeneous polynomial of degree $n$ that consist of those monomials of $\Phi_n(X_1,\ldots,X_n)$ that include all the $X_i$’s. This amounts to take $X_i^2=0$ in $\Phi_n(X_1,\ldots,X_n)$, for all $i$. So by $${\varphi}_n(X_1,\ldots,X_n) = \pi_1^{(n)}(X_1\cdots X_n),$$ since in that case $$\begin{aligned}
e^{X_1}\cdots e^{X_n} &= (1 + X_1) \cdots (1 + X_n)
\nonumber \\
&= \sum_iX_i + \sum_{i<j} X_iX_j + \sum_{i<j<k}X_iX_jX_k + \cdots +
X_1\cdots X_n.
\label{eq:useful}\end{aligned}$$
Now, if $X_{\sigma}:=(X_1,\dots,X_n)\cdot{\sigma}:=
(X_{{\sigma}(1)},\dots,X_{{\sigma}(n)})$ denotes the standard right action of the symmetric group $S_n$ on $V^{{\otimes}n}$, then the monomials that include all the $X_i$’s are of the form $X_{\sigma}$, therefore $$\pi_1^{(n)}(X_1\cdots X_n) = \sum_{{\sigma}\in S_n} c_{\sigma}X_{\sigma},$$ for some coefficients $c_{\sigma}$, that we shall determine in a moment.
\[pr:NotQuick\] $$\pi_1^{(n)}(X_1\cdots X_n) = \sum_{{\sigma}\in S_n}
\frac{(-1)^{d({\sigma})}}{n}{\binom{n-1}{d({\sigma})}}^{-1}X_{\sigma}.
\label{eq:la-madre-del-cordero}$$ where $d(\sigma)$ is the number of [descents]{} of $\sigma$, that is, the number of ‘errors’ in ordering consecutive terms in ${\sigma}(1),\dots,{\sigma}(n)$.
Assume that ${\sigma}$ has $d$ descents, say in $n_0,n_0+n_1,n_0+n_1+\cdots
+n_{j-1}$, set $n_j=n-n_0-\cdots-n_{j-1}$ and let $Z=\sum_i X_i +
\sum_{i<j} X_iX_j+\cdots+X_1\cdots X_n$. By , $e^{X_1}\cdots e^{X_n}=Z+Y$, where $Y$ is a collection of terms that contains at least one factor of the form $X^2_i$, therefore they will not contribute to the coefficient of $X_{\sigma}$, and we neglect them. Now, since $\log(1+Z)=\sum\frac{(-1)^j}{j}Z^j$ we have to compute the contribution $c(j)$ from each power $Z^j$.
Suppose that the monomial $X_{{\sigma}(1)}\cdots X_{{\sigma}(n_0)}$ is built >from $j_1$ monomials of $Z$, and in general that each monomial $X_{{\sigma}(n_0+\cdots+n_{i-1}+1)}\cdots X_{{\sigma}(n_0+\cdots+n_i)}$ is the product of $j_i$ monomials of $Z$. Notice that there are ${n_i-1\choose j_i-1}$ manners to construct each monomial, in such a way, because $X_{{\sigma}(n_0+\cdots+n_{i-1}+1)}$ is always in the first monomial, and once the first $j_i-1$ monomials are chosen, the last monomial is fixed since ${\sigma}$ is increasing in each segment. Thus $$c(j)=\sum_{(j_0,\dots,j_d)}{n_0-1\choose j_0-1}
{n_1-1\choose j_1-1}\cdots{n_d-1\choose j_d-1}\;,$$ where the sum extends over all vectors $(j_0,\dots,j_d)$ satisfying $j_0+\cdots+j_d=j$. Since ${n_k-1\choose j_k-1}$ is the coefficient of $x^{j_k-1}$ in the binomial expansion of $(1+x)^{n_k-1}$, and $\sum_{i=0}^d(j_i-1)=j-d-1$, $c(j)$ is the coefficient of $x^{j-d-1}$ in $$\prod_{i=0}^d(1+x)^{n_k-1}=(1+x)^{\sum_{i=0}^d(n_i-1)}
=(1+x)^{n-d-1},$$ we therefore conclude that $$c(j)={n-d-1\choose j-d-1}\;.$$ Now, we have $j\le n$ since $X_{\sigma}$ has $n$ letters. Also $j\ge d+1$ as $X_{\sigma}$ is broken in $d+1$ parts. Therefore $$c_{\sigma}=\sum_{j=d+1}^n\frac{(-1)^{j-1}}{j}{n-d-1\choose j-d-1}
=(-1)^d\sum_{i=0}^m\frac{(-1)^i}{i+d+1}{m\choose i},$$ where $m=n-d-1$. Now, from the binomial identity $$\int_0^1\!(1-x)^mx^d\,dx
=\sum_{i=0}^m(-1)^i{m\choose i}\int_0^1\!x^{i+d}\,dx
=\sum_{i=0}^m\frac{(-1)^i}{i+d+1}{m\choose i}.$$ Finally, a simple induction, using integration by parts, gives $$\int_0^1\!(1-x)^mx^{d}\,dx=\frac{d!\,m!}{(m+d+1)!}
=\frac{1}{m+d+1}{d+m\choose d}^{-1}
=\frac{1}{n}{n-1\choose d}^{-1}.$$ Our task is over. But the number of descents will reappear soon enough.
This construction performed here is arguably more elegant and simpler than the standard treatments of the CBHD development by purely Lie algebraic methods. We came in by the backdoor, using the bigger free associative algebra, knowing that $\log\bigl(e^{X_1}\cdots
e^{X_n}\bigr)$ —and each of its homogeneous parts— is primitive, i.e., a Lie element; and that we have the Dynkin operator to rewrite it in terms of commutators.
Let us exemplify with the case $n=2$. Obviously we have $$\Phi_1(X,Y) = X + Y; \qquad \Phi_2(X,Y) = \frac{1}{2}[X,Y].$$ Now, $$\pi_1^{(3)}(X_1X_2X_3)=\frac{1}{3}X_{(123)}
-\frac{1}{6}\left(X_{(132)}+X_{(213)}+X_{(231)}+X_{(312)}\right)
+\frac{1}{3}X_{(321)}.$$ Therefore $$\begin{aligned}
\Phi_3(X,Y) &=\frac{1}{2}(\pi_1^{(3)}(X^2Y)+\pi_1^{(3)}(XY^2)) \\
&=\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{1}{6}X^2Y-\frac{1}{3}XYX+\frac{1}{6}YX^2
+\frac{1}{6}XY^2-\frac{1}{3}YXY+\frac{1}{6}Y^2X\right) \\
&=\frac{1}{12}\left([[X,Y],Y]-[[X,Y],X]\right).\end{aligned}$$ Both cubic Lie elements appear in $\Phi_3$. Similarly $$\begin{aligned}
\pi_1^{(4)}(X_1X_2X_3X_4)&=\frac{1}{4}X_{(1234)}
-\frac{1}{12}\biggl(X_{(1243)}+X_{(1324)}+X_{(1342)}
+X_{(1423)}+X_{(2134)} \\
&\quad+X_{(2314)}+X_{(2341)}+X_{(2413)}+X_{(3124)}+X_{(3412)}
+X_{(4123)}\biggr) \\
&\quad+\frac{1}{12}\biggl(X_{(1432)}+X_{(2143)}+X_{(2431)}+X_{(3142)}
+X_{(3214)}+X_{(3241)} \\
&\quad+X_{(3421)}+X_{(4132)}+X_{(4213)}+X_{(4231)}+X_{(4312)}\biggr)
-\frac{1}{4}X_{(4321)}\end{aligned}$$ We concentrate on $X^2Y^2$, as it is clear that most terms coming from $X^3Y$ or $XY^3$ will vanish; and in fact the corresponding contributions *in toto* come to naught. We obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\Phi_4(X,Y) &= -\frac{1}{192}\bigl(4XYXY + 2XY^2X +2YX^2Y - 3YXYX
- 2XY^2X - 3YX^2Y\bigr) \\
&=-\frac{1}{24}[[[X,Y],X],Y].\end{aligned}$$ The identity of Jacobi has been used, under the form $$[[[X,Y],X],Y] = [[[X,Y],Y],X].$$ It is remarkable that the other quartic Lie elements, $[[[X,Y],X],X]$ and $[[[X,Y],Y],Y]$, do not appear in the fourth degree term.
Rota–Baxter maps and the algebraization of integration
======================================================
This paper draws inspiration partly from [@TheSecondComing], where Connes and Marcolli have introduced logarithmic derivatives in the context of Hopf algebras. Our intent and methods are different; but it is expedient to dwell here a bit on their considerations. Given $H$ and $A$ commutative as in the last part of Section 4, and a derivation ${\delta}$ on $A$, for a multiplicative map $\phi \in G_H(A)$ Connes and Marcolli define two maps in $\operatorname{Hom}(H,A)$ by ${\delta}(\phi):={\delta}\circ \phi$, and then $$D_{\delta}(\phi) := \phi^{-1} * {\delta}(\phi)$$ This yields an $A$-valued infinitesimal character. Indeed, using Sweedler’s notation and multiplicativity of $\phi\in G_H(A)$, one has $$\begin{aligned}
D_{\delta}(\phi)[cd] &=& \phi^{-1} * {\delta}(\phi)[cd] = m_A(\phi^{-1} {\otimes}{\delta}(\phi))\Delta(cd) =
\phi^{-1}(c_{(1)}d_{(1)}){\delta}(\phi(c_{(2)}d_{(2)}))
\\
&=&
\phi^{-1}(c_{(1)})\phi^{-1}(d_{(1)})\bigl({\delta}(\phi(c_{(2)}))\phi(d_{(2)})
+ \phi(c_{(2)}){\delta}(\phi(d_{(2)}))\bigr)
\\
&=&\phi^{-1}(c_{(1)}){\delta}(\phi(c_{(2)}))\phi^{-1}(d_{(1)})\phi(d_{(2)}) +
\phi^{-1}(c_{(1)})\phi(c_{(2)})\phi^{-1}(d_{(1)}){\delta}(\phi(d_{(2)}))
\\
&=& D_{\delta}(\phi)[c] \eta_A(d) + \eta_A(c) D_{\delta}(\phi)[d].\end{aligned}$$ Therefore $D_{\delta}(\phi)$ belongs to ${\mathfrak{g}}_H(A)$.
The Dynkin operator appearing in Section 5 —one of the fundamental Lie idempotents in the theory of free Lie algebras [@Reutenauer; @FredericReut]— is a close cousin of the logarithmic derivative $D_{\delta}(g)$. Consider $G_H(H)$, for $H$ connected and graded. The grading operator $Y$ is a derivation of $H$ $$Y(hh') = Y(h)h'+ hY(h') =: |h|hh' + hh'|h'|.$$ The map $Y$ extends naturally to a derivation on $\operatorname{End}(H)$. With $f,g
\in\operatorname{End}(H)$ and $h\in H$ we find where we used that $\Delta (Y(h))=|h|\Delta (h)=\bigl(|h^{(1)}|+
|h^{(2)}|\bigr)\,h^{(1)}{\otimes}h^{(2)}$. Now, as before, convolution of the antipode $S$ with the derivation $Y$ of $H$ defines a Dynkin operator, to be interpreted as an $H$-valued infinitesimal character [@Eunomia].
Suppose we have a smooth map $t \mapsto L(t)$ from ${\mathbb{R}}_t$ to ${\mathfrak{g}}_H(A)$. We could say that one of the main aims of this paper is to solve for $g(t)$ the initial value scheme $$D_{d/dt}\bigl(g(t)\bigr) = L(t); \qquad g(0) = \eta_A,
\label{eq:donya-toda}$$ at least for (real and) complex points. Now, both the classical notions of derivation and integration have interesting generalizations. It would then be a pity to limit ourselves to the classical framework; and so we now jump onto a somewhat more adventurous path.
For integration, one lacks a good algebraic theory similar to the one developed in [@Kolchin], say. Next we elaborate on a somewhat unconventional presentation of the integration-by-parts rule using the algebraic notion of the weight-$\theta$ Rota–Baxter relation corresponding to the generalization of the Leibniz rule in terms of weight-$\theta$ *skewderivations*. One should strive for nothing less ambitious than developing Rota’s program, beautifully outlined in [@Rota98] in the context of Chen’s work [@Chen], of establishing an algebraic theory of integration in terms of generalizations of the integration-by-parts rule.
Let us recall first the integration-by-parts rule for the Riemann integral map. Let $A:=C({\mathbb{R}})$ be the ring of real continuous functions. The indefinite Riemann integral can be seen as a linear map on $A$ $$I: A \to A, \qquad I(f)(x) := \int_0^x f(t)\,dt.
\label{eq:Riemann}$$ Then, integration-by-parts for the Riemann integral can be written as follows. Let $$F(x) := I(f)(x) = \int_0^x f(t)\,dt, \qquad G(x) := I(g)(x) = \int_0^x
g(t)\,dt;$$ then $$\int_0^x F(t)\frac{d}{dt}\bigl(G(t)\bigr)\,dt = F(x)G(x) -
\int_0^x \frac{d}{dt}\bigl(F(t)\bigr)G(t)\,dt.$$ More compactly, this well-known identity is written $$I(f)(x)I(g)(x) = I\bigl( I(f) g \bigr)(x) + I\bigl( fI(g)
\bigr)(x), \label{eq:integ-by-parts}$$ dually to the Leibniz rule.
Now, we introduce so-called skewderivations of weight $\theta\in{\mathbb{R}}$ on an algebra $A$ [@JosephA]. A skewderivation is a linear map ${\delta}:A
\to A$ fulfilling the condition $${\delta}(ab) = a{\delta}(b) + {\delta}(a)b - \theta{\delta}(a){\delta}(b).
\label{eq:crash}$$ We call skewdifferential algebra a double $(A,{\delta};\theta)$ consisting of an algebra $A$ and a skewderivation ${\delta}$ of weight $\theta$. A skewderivation of weight $\theta=0$ is just an ordinary derivation. An induction argument shows that if $A$ is commutative we have $${\delta}(a^n) = \sum_{i=1}^{n}{n \choose i}(-\theta)^{i-1}a^{n-i} {\delta}(a)^{i}.$$ Also $${\delta}^{n}(ab) = \sum_{i=0}^{n}{n\choose
i}\sum_{j=0}^{n-i}{n-i\choose
j}(-\theta)^{i}{\delta}^{n-j}(a){\delta}^{i+j}(b).$$ Both formulae generalize well-known identities for an ordinary derivation. We mention examples. First, on a suitable function algebra $A$ the simple finite difference operation ${\delta}: A\to A$ of step ${\lambda}$, $${\delta}(f)(x) := \frac{f(x - {\lambda})-f(x)}{{\lambda}},
\label{skewDiffexample1}$$ satisfies identity with $\theta=-\lambda$. See [@Zudilin] for an interesting application of the ${\lambda}=1$ case in the context of multiple zeta values. A closely related, though at first sight different, example is provided by the $q$-difference operator $${\delta}_qf(x) := \frac{f(qx)-f(x)}{(q-1)x}
\label{qDiff}$$ which satisfies the $q$-analog of the Leibniz rule, $${\delta}_q(fg)(x) = {\delta}_q f(x) g(x) + f(qx){\delta}_q g(x) = {\delta}_q f(x)g(qx) +
f(x){\delta}_q g(x).$$ This corresponds to relation for $\theta=(1-q)$, modulo the identity $${\delta}_q(fg)(x) = {\delta}_q f(x)g(x) + f(x){\delta}_q g(x) + x(q-1){\delta}_q f(x)
{\delta}_q g(x);$$ defining now $\bar{\delta}_q=x{\delta}_q$, it is a simple matter to check that $\bar{\delta}_q$ is a skewderivation of weight $1-q$.
We may ask for an *integration operator* corresponding to the skewderivation in . On a suitable class of functions, we define the summation operator $$Z(f)(x) := \sum_{n\geq 1} \theta f(x + \theta n).
\label{eq:le-clou}$$ For ${\delta}$ being the finite difference map of step $\theta$, As ${\delta}$ is linear we find as well ${\delta}Z(f)=f$. Observe, moreover, that $$\begin{aligned}
&\biggl(\sum_{n\geq 1} \theta f(x + \theta
n)\biggr)\biggl(\sum_{m\geq 1} \theta g(x + \theta m)\biggr) =
\sum_{n\geq 1, m\geq 1}\theta^2 f(x+\theta n)g(x+\theta m)
\nonumber \\
&= \biggl( \sum_{n > m \geq 1} + \sum_{m > n \geq 1} + \sum_{m = n
\geq 1}\biggr) \theta^2 f(x+\theta n) g(x+\theta m)
\nonumber \\
&= \sum_{m \geq 1} \biggl( \sum_{k \geq 1} \theta^2 f\bigl(x +
\theta(k+m)\bigr)\biggr) g(x +\theta m) + \sum_{n\geq 1}
\biggl(\sum_{k\geq 1} \theta^2 g\bigl(x + \theta
(k+n)\bigr)\biggr) f(x +\theta n)
\nonumber \\
&+ \sum_{n\geq 1} \theta^2 f(x+\theta n)g(x + \theta n) =
Z\bigl(Z(f)g\bigr)(x) + Z\bigl(fZ(g)\bigr)(x) + \theta Z(fg)(x).
\label{eq:parto-de-los-montes}\end{aligned}$$
Related to the $q$-difference operator there is the *Jackson integral* This can be written in a more algebraic way, using the operator $P_q[f] := \sum_{n>0}E_q^{n}[f]$, with the algebra endomorphism ($q$-dilatation) $E_q[f](x):=f(qx)$, for $f\in A$. The map $P_q$ is a Rota–Baxter operator of weight $-1$ and hence, ${{\mathrm{id}}}+P_q=:\hat{P}_q$ is of weight $+1$, see [@Rota2]. Jackson’s integral is given in terms of the above operators $P_q$ and the multiplication operator $M[f](x):= xf(x),\,f \in A$, by $J[f](x) = (1-q) \hat{P}_q M[f](x)$. The modified Jackson integral $\bar{J}$, defined by $\bar{J}[f](x) =
(1-q)\hat{P}_q[f](x)$, satisfies the relation $$\begin{aligned}
\bar{J}[f]\,\bar{J}[g] + (1-q)\bar{J}[f\,g] = \bar{J}\big[ f\,
\bar{J}[g] \big] + \bar{J}\big[ \bar{J} [f] \, g\big].\end{aligned}$$ For motivational reasons we remark that the map $\hat{P}_q$ is of importance in the construction of $q$-analogs of multiple-zeta-values. The examples motivate the generalization of the dual relation between the integration-by-parts rule and the Leibniz rule for the classical calculus.
A *Rota–Baxter map* $R$ of weight $\theta\in{\mathbb{R}}$ on a not necessarily associative algebra $A$, commutative or not, is a linear map $R:A\to A$ fulfilling the condition $$R(a)R(b) = R(R(a)b) + R(aR(b)) - \theta R(ab), \qquad a,b \in A.
\label{eq:brokeback}$$ The reader will easily verify that $\tilde{R}:=\theta\,{{\mathrm{id}}}-R$ is a Rota–Baxter map of the same weight, as well. We call a pair $(A,R)$, where $A$ is an algebra and $R$ a Rota–Baxter map of weight $\theta$, a *Rota–Baxter algebra* of weight $\theta$. The indication ‘not necessarily associative’ is indispensable in this paper, as we soon meet Rota–Baxter algebras that are neither Lie nor associative.
We state a few simple observations, which will be of use later. The so-called *double Rota–Baxter* product $$x *_R y := xR(y) + R(x)y - \theta xy, \qquad x,y \in A,
\label{def:doubleRBprod}$$ endows the vector space underlying $A$ with another Rota–Baxter algebra structure, denoted by $(A_R,R)$. In fact, $R$ satisfies the Rota–Baxter relation for the new product. One readily shows, moreover: $$R(x *_R y) = R(x)R(y) {\quad\mbox{and}\quad} \tilde{R}(x *_R y) = -
\tilde{R}(x)\tilde{R}(y),\qquad x,y \in A.
\label{eq:doubleRBhom}$$ This construction may be continued, giving a hierarchy of Rota–Baxter algebras.
Let $(A,R)$ be an associative Rota–Baxter algebra of weight $\theta \in {\mathbb{R}}$. The Rota–Baxter relation extends to the Lie algebra $A$ with the commutator $[x,y]:=xy-yx$, $$[R(x), R(y)] + \theta R\bigl([x, y]\bigr) = R\bigl([R(x), y] + [x,
R(y)]\bigr)$$ making $(A,[.,.],R)$ into a Rota–Baxter Lie algebra. \[prop:LieRB\]
This is a mere algebra exercise. A more exotic result coming next will prove to be important in the context of Magnus’ expansion and beyond.
Let $(A,R)$ be an associative Rota–Baxter algebra of weight $\theta \in {\mathbb{R}}$. The binary composition $$a \cdot_R b := [a,R(b)] + \theta ba
\label{eq:preLie}$$ defines a right pre-Lie (or Vinberg) product such that $A$ becomes a Rota–Baxter right pre-Lie algebra. \[prop:preLieRB\]
Recall that for a pre-Lie algebra $(A,\cdot)$ the (right) pre-Lie property is weaker than associativity $$a \cdot (b \cdot c) - (a \cdot b) \cdot c = a \cdot( c \cdot b) - (a
\cdot c) \cdot b ,\quad \forall a,b,c \in A,$$ As the Jacobiator is the total skewsymmetrization of the associator, the pre-Lie relation is enough to guarantee that the commutator $[a,
b]:=a\cdot b-b\cdot a$ satisfies the Jacobi identity. For the sake of brevity we verify only the weight-zero case and leave the rest to the reader. $$\begin{aligned}
a \cdot_R (b \cdot_R c) &- (a \cdot_R b) \cdot_R c
=\big[a, R([b, R(c)])\big] - \big[[a,R(b)], R(c)\big] =
\\
&=\big[a, R([b, R(c)])\big] + \big[[R(c), a], R(b)\big] + \big[a,
[R(c), R(b)]\big]
\\
&=\big[a ,R([c, R(b)])\big] - \big[[a, R(c)], R(b)\big] =: a \cdot_R (c
\cdot_R b) - (a \cdot_R c) \cdot_R b;
\\
{\quad\mbox{and}\quad} R(a) \cdot_R R(b) &= [R(a), R(R(b))] = R\bigl([R(a),
R(b)]\bigr) + R\bigl([a, R(R(b))]\bigr)
\\
&= R\bigl( R(a) \cdot_R b\bigr) + R\bigl(a \cdot_R R(b)\bigr).\end{aligned}$$ Here we used Proposition \[prop:LieRB\] as well as the Jacobi identity.
The Lie algebra bracket corresponding to the double Rota–Baxter product (\[def:doubleRBprod\]) is the double Rota–Baxter Lie bracket $[a,b]_R:= a *_R b - b *_R a = a \cdot_R b - b \cdot_R a$, known since the work of Semenov-Tian-Shansky [@STS83]. We should mention that these little calculations become more transparent using the link between associative Rota–Baxter algebras and Loday’s dendriform algebras [@Loday01; @KEF].
As a corollary to the last propositions we add the following identity which will also be useful later $$\begin{aligned}
R(a \cdot_R b) &= R([a,R(b)]) + \theta ba) = R([b,R(a)]) + [R(a),R(b)]
+ \theta R(ab)
\nonumber \\
&=R(b \cdot_R a) + [R(a),R(b)],
\label{pre-Lie-wow}\end{aligned}$$ which is another way of saying that $$R([a,b]_R) = R(a *_R b - b *_R a) =[R(a),R(b)] =R(a \cdot_R b - b
\cdot_R a).$$
The triple $(A,{\delta},R;\theta)$ will denote an algebra $A$ endowed with a skewderivation ${\delta}$ and a corresponding Rota–Baxter map $R$, both of weight $\theta$, such that $R{\delta}a=a$ for any $a\in A$ such that ${\delta}a\ne0$, as well as ${\delta}Ra=a$ for any $a\in A,Ra\in0$. We check consistency of the conditions and imposed on $R,{\delta}$. Respectively $$\begin{aligned}
\theta{\delta}R(ab) &= R(a)b + aR(b) - {\delta}(R(a)R(b)) = R(a)b + aR(b) -
R(a)b - aR(b) + \theta ab = \theta ab;
\\
R{\delta}(ab) & = R(a{\delta}(b)) + R({\delta}(a)b) - \theta R({\delta}(a){\delta}(b)) =
R(a{\delta}(b)) + R({\delta}(a)b)
\\
&- R(a{\delta}(b)) - R({\delta}(a)b) + ab = ab.\end{aligned}$$ The moral of the story is that Rota–Baxter maps are *generalized integrals*, skewderivations and Rota–Baxter operators being natural (partial) inverses. As an example we certainly have $(C({\mathbb{R}}),d/dt,\int;0)$, with ${\delta}=$ the derivative (with only the scalars in its kernel). Another example is given by the aforementioned triple $(A,{\delta},Z;-\theta)$ of the finite difference map ${\delta}$ of step $\theta$ and the summation $Z$ in .
Rota–Baxter algebras have attracted attention in different contexts, such as perturbative renormalization in quantum field theory (see references further below) as well as generalized shuffle relations in combinatorics [@EbLe]. A few words on the history of the Rota–Baxter relation are probably in order here. In the 1950’s and early 1960’s, several interesting results were obtained in the fluctuation theory of probability. One of the better known is Spitzer’s classical identity [@Spitzer] for sums of independent random variables. In an important 1960 paper [@Baxter], the American mathematician G. Baxter developed a combinatorial point of view on Spitzer’s result, and deduced it from the above operator identity , in the context where the algebra $A$ is associative, unital and commutative. Then G.-C. Rota started a careful in depth elaboration of Baxter’s article in his 1969 papers [@Rota1; @Rota2], where he solved the crucial “word problem”, and in [@RotaSmith], where he established several important results. During the 1960’s and 1970’s, further algebraic, combinatorial and analytic aspects of Baxter’s identity were studied by several people, see [@Kingman; @CartierBaxter; @fields] for more references. Recently, the Rota–Baxter relation became popular again as a key element of the Connes–Kreimer [@DirkChen; @ConnesKrRHI; @EbKr] algebraic approach to renormalization.
At an early stage the mathematician F. V. Atkinson made an important contribution, characterizing such algebras by a simple decomposition theorem.
[[(Atkinson [@Atkinson])]{}]{} Let $A$ be an algebra. A linear operator $R:A\to A$ satisfies the Rota–Baxter relation if and only if the following two statements are true. First, $A_+:=R(A)$ and $A_-:=
(\theta\,{{\mathrm{id}}}-R)(A)$ are subalgebras in $A$. Second, for $X,Y,Z\in A$, $R(X)R(Y)=R(Z)$ implies $(\theta\,{{\mathrm{id}}}-R)(X)(\theta\,{{\mathrm{id}}}-R)(Y) =
-(\theta\,{{\mathrm{id}}}-R)(Z)$. \[Atkinson1\]
This result degenerates in the case $\theta=0$, whereby $R=-\tilde{R}$. A trivial observation is that every algebra is a Rota–Baxter algebra (of weight 1); in fact, the identity map and the zero map are a natural Rota–Baxter pair. The case of an idempotent Rota–Baxter map implies $\theta=1$ and, more importantly, $A_{-}\cap A_{+}=\{0\}$, corresponding to a direct decomposition of $A$ into the image of $R$ and $\tilde{R}$.
Atkinson made another observation, formulating the following theorem, which describes a multiplicative decomposition for associative unital Rota–Baxter algebras.
\[Atkinson2\] Let $A$ be an associative complete filtered unital Rota–Baxter algebra with Rota–Baxter map $R$. Assume $X$ and $Y$ in $A$ to solve the equations $$X = 1_{A} + R(a\, X) {\quad\mbox{and}\quad} Y = 1_{A} + \tilde{R}(Y\, a),
\label{atkinsonEqs}$$ for $a\in A^1$. Then we have the following factorization $$Y (1_{A} - \theta a) X = 1_{A}, {\quad\mbox{so that }\quad} 1_A - \theta a
= Y^{-1}X^{-1}. \label{eq:Atkinsonfact1}$$ For an idempotent Rota–Baxter map this factorization is unique.
First recall that a complete filtered algebra $A$ has a decreasing filtration ${\{\,A^n\,\}}$ of sub-algebras $$A=A^0 \supset A^1 \supset \dots \supset A^n \supset \dots$$ such that $A^mA^n\subseteq A^{m+n}$ and $A\cong{\varprojlim}A/A^n$, that is, $A$ is complete with respect to the topology determined by the ${\{\,A^n\,\}}$. Also, note that $$R(a)\tilde{R}(b) = \tilde{R}(R(a)b) + R(a\tilde{R}(b)),$$ and similarly exchanging $R$ and $\tilde{R}$. Then the product $YX$ is given by Hence we obtain the factorization . Uniqueness for idempotent Rota–Baxter maps is easy to show [@EGMbch06].
In summary, finite difference as well as $q$-difference equations play a role in important applications; thus it is useful to consider generalizations of the classical apparatus for solving differential equations. In the next section, by exploiting and complementing the CBHD development of the previous one, we make preparations to extend the work by Magnus on exponential solutions for non-autonomous differential equations to general Rota–Baxter maps, beyond the Riemann integral.
The Spitzer identities and the CBHD *recursion*
===============================================
In the last section we mentioned Spitzer’s classical identity as a motivation for Baxter’s work. Now we spell out what that is. Spitzer’s identity can be seen as a natural generalization of the solution of the simple initial value problem on the commutative algebra $A$ of continuous functions over ${\mathbb{R}}$, $$\frac{df(t)}{dt} = a(t)f(t), \quad f(0) = 1, \quad a \in A.
\label{eq:IVP}$$ This has, of course, a unique solution $f(t)=\exp\left(\int_0^t
a(u) \,du\right)$. Transforming the differential equation into an integral equation by application of the Riemann integral $I: A \to
A$ to , $$f(t) = 1 + I(af)(t),
\label{eq:integralIVP1}$$ we arrive naturally at the not-quite-trivial identity $$\exp\left(\int_0^t a(u)\,du\right) = \exp\bigl(I(a)(t)\bigr) = 1 +
\sum_{n=1}^\infty \underbrace{I\Bigl(a I\bigl(a\cdots I(a)\cdots
\bigr)\Bigr)}_{n\mbox{\rm -times}}(t).
\label{eq:exp-sol}$$ Taking into account the weight-zero Rota–Baxter rule for $I$, the last identity follows simply from $$\bigl(I(a)(t)\bigr)^n = n!\underbrace{I\Bigl(a I\bigl(a\cdots
I(a)\cdots \bigr)\Bigr)}_{n\mbox{\rm -times}}(t).
\label{eq:BSzero}$$
Let now $(A,R)$ to be a *commutative* Rota–Baxter algebra of weight $\theta\neq0$. We formulate Spitzer’s finding in the ring of power series $A[[t]]$, which is a complete filtered algebra with the decreasing filtration given by the powers of $t,\,A^{n}:=t^nA[[t]],\, n\geq 0$. Notice that the power series algebra $A[[t]]$ with the operator $\mathcal{R}:A[[t]]\to A[[t]]$ acting on a series via $R$ through the coefficients, $\mathcal{R}\left(\sum_{n\ge 0}a_nt^n\right):=\sum_{n\ge
0}R(a_n)t^n$, is Rota–Baxter as well. Then we have
[(Spitzer’s identity)]{} Let $(A,R)$ be a unital commutative Rota–Baxter algebra of weight $\theta\ne0$. Then for $a\in A$, $$\exp\left(\!-R\biggl(\frac{\log(1 - a\theta
t)}{\theta}\biggr)\!\!\right) =
\sum_{n=0}^\infty(t)^n\underbrace{R\Bigl(\!a R\bigl(a\cdots
R(a)\cdots \bigr)\!\Bigr)}_{n\mbox{\rm -times}}
\label{eq:clSpitzer}$$ in the ring of power series $A[[t]]$. \[clSpitzer\]
Analytic as well as algebraic proofs of this identity can be found in the literature, see for instance [@RotaSmith; @EbKr]; and anyway it is a corollary of our work further below. Observe that $-\theta^{-1} \log(1 - a\theta t)\xrightarrow{\theta\downarrow
0}at$. Thus indeed generalizes .
Moreover, identity generalizes to the *Bohnenblust–Spitzer formula* [@RotaSmith] of weight $\theta$. This is as follows. Let $(A,R)$ be a commutative Rota–Baxter algebra of weight $\theta$ and fix $s_1,\dots,s_n\in A,
\,n>0$. Let $S_n$ be the set of permutations of $\{1,\dots, n\}$. Then $$\sum_{\sigma\in S_n}R\Bigl(s_{\sigma(1)}R\bigl(s_{\sigma(2)}\cdots
R(s_{\sigma(n)})\cdots\bigr)\Bigr) =
\sum_{\mathcal{T}\in\Pi_n}\theta^{n-|\mathcal{T}|}\prod_{T\in
\mathcal{T}}(|T|-1)!\,R\Bigl(\prod_{j\in T}s_j\Bigr),
\label{eq:BohnenblustSp}$$ Here $\mathcal{T}$ runs through all unordered set partitions of $\{1,\dots,n\}$; by $|\mathcal{T}|$ we denote the number of blocks in $\mathcal{T}$; by $|T|$ the size of the particular block $T$. The Rota–Baxter relation itself appears as a particular case for $n=2$. The weight $\theta=0$ case reduces the sum over $\mathcal{T}$ to $|\mathcal{T}|=n$: $$\sum_{\sigma\in S_n}R\Bigl(s_{\sigma(1)}R\bigl(s_{\sigma(2)}\cdots
R(s_{\sigma(n)})\cdots\bigr)\Bigr) = \prod_{j=1}^{n}
R\bigl(s_j\bigr).$$ Also, for $n>0$ and $s_1=\dots=s_n=x$ we find in : $$R\Bigl(x R\bigl(x\cdots R(x)\cdots \bigr)\Bigr) =
\frac{1}{n!}\sum_{\mathcal{T}\in\Pi_n}\theta^{n - |\mathcal{T}|}
\prod_{T \in \mathcal{T}}(|T|-1)!\, R\bigl( x^{|T|}\bigr).
\label{eq:BohnenblustSp2}$$ Relation follows from Spitzer’s identity by expanding the logarithm and the exponential on the left hand side, and comparing order by order the infinite set of identities in $A[[t]]$.
Spitzer’s classical identity constitutes therefore an interesting generalization of the initial value problem , respectively the integral equation , to more general integration-like operators $R$, satisfying the identity . Again we refer the reader to [@RotaSmith; @fields] for examples of such applications in the context of renormalization in perturbative quantum field theory, $q$-analogs of classical identities, classical integrable systems and multiple zeta values. Also, Atkinson’s factorization Theorem \[Atkinson2\] is obvious from Spitzer’s identity. The right hand side of identity is a solution to $X=1_A+tR(a\, X)$ in $A[[t]]$ corresponding to the factorization of the element $1_A - \theta a t$. (One ought to be careful here, since Spitzer’s identity as well as are only valid for commutative Rota–Baxter algebras of weight $\theta$, whereas Atkinson’s factorization result applies to general associative unital Rota–Baxter algebras.)
Let us adopt an even more general point of view. For functions with image in a noncommutative algebra, say $n{\times}n$ matrices with entries in ${\mathbb{R}}$, relation is not valid anymore as a solution to ; nor is identity valid. From our present perspective, however, it does seem quite natural to approach the problem of finding a solution to the initial value problem, as well as relations and , on a noncommutative function algebra $A$ by looking for a generalization of Spitzer’s identity to noncommutative unital associative Rota–Baxter algebras of weight $\theta$. This latter problem was finally solved in [@E-G-K1; @E-G-K2] —see also [@EGMbch06], where the reader may find more detail and earlier references. We will review briefly those results, prior to extend our findings by indicating a noncommutative generalization of the Bohnenblust–Spitzer formula.
We then take the first steps towards the *noncommutative Spitzer* identity. Let $A$ be a complete filtered associative algebra. Bring in from Section 6 the Campbell–Baker–Hausdorff–Dynkin (CBHD) formula for the product of exponentials of two non-commuting objects $x,y$ $$\exp(x)\exp(y) = \exp\bigl(x + y + \operatorname{CBHD}(x,y)\bigr),
{\quad\mbox{where}\quad} \sum_{m\ge 2}\Phi_m(x,y) =: \operatorname{CBHD}(x,y).$$ Now let $P:A\to A$ be *any* linear map preserving the filtration and $\tilde{P}=\theta\,{{\mathrm{id}}}-P$, with $\theta$ an arbitrary nonzero complex parameter. For $a\in A^1$, define the nonlinear map $$\chi^{\theta,\tilde{P}}(a) =
\lim_{n\to\infty}\chi^{\theta,\tilde{P}}_{(n)}(a)$$ where $\chi^{\theta,\tilde{P}}_{(n)}(a)$ is given by the so-called CBHD *recursion*, and where the limit is taken with respect to the topology given by the filtration. Then the map $\chi^{\theta,\tilde{P}}:A^1\to A^1$ satisfies $$\chi^{\theta,\tilde{P}}(a) = a - \frac{1}{\theta}\,
\CBHD\bigl(\tilde{P}(\chi^{\theta,\tilde{P}}(a)),
P(\chi^{\theta,\tilde{P}}(a))\bigr). \label{eq:BCHrecursion1}$$ We call $\chi^{\theta,\tilde{P}}$ the CBHD recursion of weight $\theta$, or just the $\theta$-CBHD recursion. In the following we do not index the map $\chi^\theta(a):= \chi^{\theta,\tilde{P}}$ by the operator $\tilde{P}$ involved in its definition, when it is obvious from context. One readily observes that $\chi^\theta$ reduces to the identity for commutative algebras.
The following theorem states a general decomposition on the algebra $A$ implied by the CBHD recursion. It applies to associative as well as Lie algebras.
Let $A$ be a complete filtered associative (or Lie) algebra with a linear, filtration preserving map $P:A\to A$ and $\tilde{P}:=
\theta\,{{\mathrm{id}}}-P$. For any $a\in A^1$, we have $$\exp({\theta}a) = \exp\bigl(\tilde{P}(\chi^{\theta}(a))\bigr)
\exp\bigl(P(\chi^{\theta}(a))\bigr). \label{eq:bch}$$ Under the further hypothesis that the map $P$ is idempotent (and $\theta=1$), we find that for any $x\in 1_A+A^1$ there are unique $x_{-}\in \exp\bigl(\tilde{P}(A^{1})\bigr)$ and $x_{+}\in
\exp\bigl(P(A^{1})\bigr)$ such that $x=x_-\,x_+$. \[thm:bch\]
For proofs we refer the reader to [@EGMbch06]. Using this factorization one simplifies considerably.
\[simpleCHI\] Let $A$ be a complete filtered algebra and $P:A \to A$ a linear map preserving the filtration, with $\tilde{P}$ as above. The map $\chi^\theta$ in solves the following recursion $$\chi^{\theta}(u) := u + \frac{1}{\theta}\operatorname{CBHD}\bigl(\theta u,-
P(\chi^{\theta}(u))\bigr), \quad u \in A^1.
\label{eq:BCHrecursion2}$$
The convolution algebra $(\operatorname{Hom}(H,A),*)$, for $H$ a connected graded commutative Hopf algebra, will also be complete filtered. We may immediately apply the above factorization theorem, giving rise to a factorization of the group $G_H(A)$ of $A$-valued characters, upon choosing any filtration-preserving linear map on $\operatorname{Hom}(H,A)$. In fact, we find for $\theta=1$ in the definition of $\chi$ the following result.
\[prop:factHopf\] Let $A$ be a commutative algebra and $H$ a connected graded commutative Hopf algebra. Let $P$ be any filtration preserving linear map on $\operatorname{Hom}(H,A)$. Then we have for all $\phi \in G_H(A)$ and $Z:=\log(\phi) \in g_H(A)$ the characters $\phi^{-1}_{-}:=
\exp\bigl(\tilde{P}(\chi(Z))\bigr)$ and $\phi_{+}:=
\exp\bigl(P(\chi(Z))\bigr)$ such that $$\phi = \phi^{-1}_{-} * \phi_{+}.
\label{eq:fact}$$ If $P$ is idempotent this decomposition is unique.
A natural question is whether one can find closed expressions for the map $\chi^\theta$. The answer is certainly affirmative in some non-trivial particular cases [@EGMbch06].
In the setting of the last proposition we find for the particular choice of $P=\pi_-: H \to H$ being the projection to the odd degree elements in $H$ (hence $\theta=1$) $$\chi(Z) = Z + \CBHD\Big(Z,-\pi_{-}(Z) - {\tfrac{1}{2}}\CBHD\big(Z,Z -
\pi_{-}(Z) \big)\Big), \quad Z \in g_H(A).$$
Before proceeding, we must underline that the factorization is due solely to the map $\chi^\theta$; in fact, the map $P$ —respectively $\tilde{P}$— involved in its definition has only to be linear and filtration preserving. The role played by this map is drastically altered when we assume it moreover to be *Rota–Baxter* of weight $\theta$, on a complete filtered Rota–Baxter algebra. This we do next, to rederive and generalize the Magnus expansion. Also, it will soon become clear what $\chi^0$ is. One of the aims of this paper is to attack the solution of the CBHD recursion when $P$ is Rota–Baxter.
We noted earlier Atkinson’s multiplicative decomposition of associative complete filtered Rota–Baxter algebras. Let from now on $(A,R)$ denote one such, of weight $\theta\neq0$. Observe the useful identity $$\theta \prod_{i=1}^{n}R(x_i) = R\Bigl(\prod_{i=1}^{n} R(x_i) -
\prod_{i=1}^{n} \tilde{R}(-x_i)\Bigr), {\quad\mbox{for}\quad} x_i\in
A,\;i=1,\dots,n. \label{eq:theIdentity}$$ This comes from the Rota–Baxter relation . The case $n=2$ simply returns it. The reader should check it with the help of the double Rota–Baxter product (\[def:doubleRBprod\]). In the following we consider $\chi^{\theta}:=\chi^{\theta,\tilde{R}}$ on $A^1$. Using , for $\theta^{-1}\log(1_A-\theta
a)=:u \in A^1$ one readily computes In the last step we employed the factorization Theorem \[thm:bch\] corresponding to $\chi^{\theta}$. Therefore, on the one hand we have found that $X:=\exp\bigl(-R(\chi^\theta(u))\bigr) \in1_A+A^1$ solves $X=1_A+R(a\, X)$, one of Atkinson’s recursions in Theorem \[Atkinson2\]. On the other hand, a solution to this recursion follows from the iteration $$X = 1_A + \sum_{n>0}\underbrace{R\bigl(a R(a R(a\cdots
R(a)}_{n\;\mathrm{times}})\dots )\bigr). \label{eq:Chen1}$$ Hence:
\[OurSpitzer\] The natural generalization of Spitzer’s identity to noncommutative complete filtered Rota–Baxter algebras of weight $\theta\neq0$ is given by $$\exp\biggl(- R\biggl(\chi^{\theta}\biggl(\frac{\log(1_A - \theta
a)}{\theta}\biggr)\biggr)\biggr) = \sum_{n=0}^\infty
\underbrace{R\bigl(a R(a R(a\cdots R(a)}_{n\;\mathrm{times}})\dots
)\bigr), \label{eq:NC-SpitzerId-theta}$$ for $a\in A^1$. Recall that $\chi^{\theta}$ reduces to the identity for commutative algebras, yielding Spitzer’s classical identity.
So far we have achieved the following. First we derived the general factorization Theorem \[thm:bch\] for complete filtered algebras, upon the choice of an arbitrary linear filtration preserving map. Specifying the latter to be Rota–Baxter of weight $\theta$, that is, identity , we have been able to show that Atkinson’s recursion equations in Theorem \[Atkinson2\] have exponential solutions. It is now natural to ask whether the Bohnenblust–Spitzer formula valid for weight-$\theta$ commutative Rota–Baxter algebras can be generalized to noncommutative ones. The answer is yes! We outline next this generalization, postponing detailed proof to the forthcoming [@KuruJosePatras], to keep this long work within bounds. First, by using the pre-Lie and the double (\[def:doubleRBprod\]) Rota–Baxter products, we find $$R\bigl(x_1R(x_2)\bigr) + R\bigl(x_2R(x_1)\bigr) = R(x_1)R(x_2) +
R(x_2 \cdot_R x_1)= R(x_1 *_R x_2) + R(x_2 \cdot_R x_1).$$ Recall the relations . One may now check by a tedious calculation that We obtain special cases of the above when $x_1=x_2=x_3=x$ $$\begin{aligned}
\!\!\!&&\!\!\!3!R\Bigl(x R\bigl(x R(x)\bigr)\Bigr) = R(x *_R x *_R
x) + 2 R((x \cdot_R x) *_R x) + 2R(x \cdot_R ( x \cdot_R x))
\\
\!\!\!&+&\!\!\! R(x*_R(x \cdot_R x)) = R(x)^3 + 2 R(x \cdot_R x)R(x) +
2R(x \cdot_R ( x \cdot_R x)) + R(x) R(x \cdot_R x).\end{aligned}$$ Equation is an instance of the following result, that seems to be new:
\[prop:factorization\] Let $(A,R)$ be an associative Rota–Baxter algebra of weight $\theta$. For $x_i\in A,\,i=1,\dots,n$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{\sigma\in S_n}R\Bigl(x_{\sigma_1} R\bigl(x_{\sigma_2} \dots
R(x_{\sigma_n})\dots\bigr)\Bigr) = \sum_{\sigma\in S_n}
R\Bigl(x_{\sigma_1} \diamond_1 x_{\sigma_2} \diamond_2 \dots
\diamond_n x_{\sigma_n}\Bigr)\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
x_{\sigma_i} \diamond_i x_{\sigma_{i+1}} = \begin{cases} x_{\sigma_i}
*_R x_{\sigma_{i+1}}, & {\quad\mbox{$\sigma_i < {\rm{min}}(\sigma_j|
i<j)$}\quad}
\\
x_{\sigma_i} \cdot_R x_{\sigma_{i+1}}, & {\quad\mbox{otherwise;}\quad}
\end{cases}\end{aligned}$$ furthermore consecutive $\cdot_R$ products should be performed >from right to left, and always before the $*_R$ product.
This is the *noncommutative Bohnenblust–Spitzer* formula. Obviously, in the commutative case, i.e., when $a\cdot_R b=\theta ab$, we just recover the classical Bohnenblust–Spitzer identities and . On the other hand, anticipating on coming sections, the case $\theta=0$ reduces to Lam’s factorization theorem [@Lam], stated in the context of a weight-zero Rota–Baxter algebra of operator valued functions $(B,\int;0)$. Let us adopt Lam’s notation for the $n$-fold right bracketed pre-Lie product by $$C^R_n:= C^R_n(x) := R(x \cdot_R (x \cdot_R \dots (x \cdot_R
x)\dots)). \label{eq:LamsC}$$ Also, we introduce a notation for the so-called Rota–Baxter words: $$(Rx)^{[n+1]} = R\bigl(x(Rx)^{[n]}\bigr), \label{eq:RBwords}$$ with the convention that $(Rx)^{[0]}=1$. Then we obtain the general expression $$\begin{aligned}
(Rx)^{[n]} = \sum_{l=1}^n
\sum_{\substack{k_1,\dots ,k_l \in \mathbb{N}^\ast \\ k_1 + \dots +
k_l = n}}\,\frac{C^R_{k_1}\cdots C^R_{k_l}}{k_l(k_{l-1} + k_l) \cdots
(k_1 + \dots + k_l)}.
\label{eq:RBlevel}\end{aligned}$$ That is to say, we sum over the compositions of $n$. The simplest cases already examined now are written $$\begin{aligned}
2!(Rx)^{[2]} := 2!R\bigl(xR(x)\bigr) &=& (C^R_1)^2 + C^R_2,
\nonumber \\
3!(Rx)^{[3]} := 3!R\Bigl(xR\bigl(xR(x)\bigr)\Bigr) &=& (C^R_1)^3 +
2 C^R_2C^R_1 + C^R_1C^R_2 + 2C^R_3.
\label{eq:Lam-First}\end{aligned}$$ Later we make use of those expansions in relation with the Magnus expansion and the Dyson–Chen series. In fact, the left hand side of the above expressions are the second and third order terms in the path- or time-ordered expansion, in the context when the map $R$ is the Riemann integral. We just generalized this to general-weight Rota–Baxter operators.
The zero-weight recursion
=========================
Let us come back to the CBHD recursion $\chi^{\theta}$. The question of the limit $\theta\downarrow0$ becomes subtler than in the commutative case, due to the particular properties of relation . Now, in general we may write $\Phi(a,b) = \Phi_1(a,b) + \operatorname{CBHD}(a,b)$ as a sum $$\Phi(a,b) = \sum_{n\ge1}H_n(a,b),$$ where $H_n(a,b)$ is the part of $\Phi(a,b)$ which is homogenous of degree $n$ with respect to $a$. For $n=1$ we have [@Reutenauer]: $$H_1(a,b) = \frac{\hbox{ad}\,b}{ e^{\hbox{\eightrm ad}\,b} - 1_A}(a) =
\frac{\hbox{ad}\,b}{2}\Bigl(\coth\frac{\hbox{ad}\,b}{2} - 1\Bigr)(a).
\label{eq:manes-de-Bernouilli}$$ In the limit $\theta\downarrow0$ all higher order terms $H_{n>1}$ vanish and from we get a nonlinear map $\chi^0$ inductively defined on $A^1$ by the formula We may call this the *weight-zero [CBHD]{} recursion*. The coefficients are $b_n:=B_n/n!$ with $B_n$ the Bernoulli numbers. For $n=1,2,4$ we find $b_1=-1/2,b_2=1/12$ and $b_4=-1/720$. We have $b_3=b_5=\cdots=0$. The first terms in are then easily written down: $$\begin{aligned}
&\chi^0(a) = a - \frac 12[P(a),\,a] + \frac14 \big[P\bigl([P(a),
a]\bigr), \,a\big] + \frac{1}{12}\big[P(a), [P(a), a]\big]
\label{eq:pre-Magnus} \\
& -\frac{1}{24}P\Bigl(\bigl[P([P(a),[P(a),a]]),a\bigr] +
\bigl[P(a),[P([P(a),a]),a]\bigr] +
\bigl[[P([P(a),a]),[P(a),a]\bigr ]\Bigr)
\nonumber \\
& -\frac{1}{8} P\Bigl(\bigl[P([P([P(a),a]),a]),a\bigr]\Bigr) + \cdots.
\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ We pause here to note that is but an avatar of the formula $$D(e^a) = e^a\,\frac{1 - e^{-\hbox{\eightrm ad}\,a}}{\hbox{ad}\,a}Da,
{\quad\mbox{for $D$ a derivation;}\quad}$$ a noncommutative chain rule familiar from linear group theory. See [@Rossmann Chapter 1] for instance. Apparently this is due to F. Schur (1891), and was taken up later by Poincaré and Hausdorff. One may also consult the charming account of the determination of a local Lie group from its Lie algebra, using canonical coordinates of the first kind, in [@SudarshanM Chapter 13]. The appearance of the Bernoulli numbers is always fascinating. The deep reason for it is that we are trying to express elements of the enveloping algebra in terms of the symmetric algebra.
Now suppose $P$ is a weight-zero Rota–Baxter operator, denoted $R$ henceforth. The noncommutative generalization of Spitzer’s identity in the case of vanishing weight is captured in the following corollary.
\[corl:0-ncSpitzer\] Let $(A,R)$ be a complete filtered Rota–Baxter algebra of weight zero. For $a$ in $A^1$ the weight-zero $\CBHD$ recursion $\chi^0:A^1\to
A^1$ is given by equation : $$\chi^0(a) = \frac{\hbox{\rm ad}R\bigl(\chi^0(a)\bigr)}
{{\rm{e}}^{\hbox{\eightrm ad}R(\chi^0(a))} - 1_A}(a).$$ Moreover:
1. \[eq:exp1o\] The equation $x=1+R(a\, x)$ has a unique solution $x=\exp\bigl(R(\chi^0(a))\bigr)$.
2. \[eq:exp2o\] The equation $y=1-R(y\, a)$ has a unique solution $y=\exp\bigl(R(-\chi^0(a))\bigr)$.
We will see pretty soon that the $0$-CBHD recursion gives Magnus’ expansion. The diagram further below summarizes the foregoing relations, generalizing the simple initial value problem in a twofold manner. First we go to the integral equation . Then we replace the Riemann integral by a general Rota–Baxter map and assume a noncommutative setting. That is, we start with a complete filtered noncommutative associative Rota–Baxter algebra $(A,R)$ of nonzero weight $\theta$ in the appropriate field. The top of the diagram contains the solution to the equation $$X = 1_A + R(a\,X), {\quad\mbox{for}\quad} a\in A^1, \label{eq:recursion}$$ generalized to associative, otherwise arbitrary Rota–Baxter algebras , $$X = \exp\biggl(-R\biggl(\chi^{\theta}\biggl(\frac{\log(1_A - \theta
a)} {\theta}\biggr)\biggr)\biggr). \label{eq:solution}$$ The $\theta$-CBHD recursion $\chi^{\theta}$ is given in . The left wing of describes the case when first the weight $\theta$ goes to zero, hence reducing $\chi^\theta\to\chi^0$; see . This is the algebraic structure underlying Magnus’s $\Omega$ series of the next section. Then, we let the algebra $A$ become commutative, which reduces $\chi^0$ to ${{\mathrm{id}}}$. The right wing of diagram just describes the alternative reduction, i.e., we first make the algebra commutative, which gives the classical Spitzer identity for nonzero weight commutative Rota–Baxter algebras, see . Then we take the limit $\theta\downarrow0$. $$\xymatrix{
&
\underset{\theta \neq 0,\ \mathrm{noncom}}
{\exp\bigl( -R\bigl( \chi^\theta(
\theta^{-1} \log(1 - \theta a) ) \bigr) \bigr) }
\ar[dd]^{\substack{\mathrm{com} \\[\jot] \theta \downarrow 0}}
\ar[rd]_{\substack{\theta \neq 0 \\ \mathrm{com}}}
\ar[ld]^{\substack{\theta \downarrow 0 \\ \mathrm{noncom}}}
\\
\underset{\mathrm{Magnus}}
{\exp \bigl( R\bigl(\chi^0(a)\bigr) \bigr) }
\ar[rd]^{\mathrm{com}}
& &
\underset{\mathrm{Spitzer}}
{\exp \bigl( -R \bigl(\theta^{-1} \log(1 - \theta a)
\bigr) \bigr) }
\ar[ld]_{\theta \downarrow 0}
\\
&
\underset{\theta = 0,\ \mathrm{com}}{\exp(R(a))}
}
\label{eq:diag-general}$$ Both paths eventually arrive at the elementary fact that equation is solved by a simple exponential in a commutative, weight-zero Rota–Baxter setting. We have succeeded in finding the general algebraic structure underlying the initial value problem for generalized integrals, that is, Rota–Baxter operators.
On Magnus’ commutator series
============================
It is high time for us to declare why we choose to deal with first order non-autonomous differential equations primarily via the Magnus expansion method. The latter has a somewhat chequered history. To attack the initial value problem of the type : $$\frac{d}{dt}F(t) = a(t)F(t), \qquad F(0) = 1,
\label{eq:gato-con-siete-vidas}$$ with $F$ a matrix-valued function, say, Magnus proposed the exponential Ansatz $$F(t) = \exp\bigl(\Omega[a](t)\bigr),$$ with $\Omega[a](0)=0$. He found a series for $\Omega[a]$: $$\Omega[a](t) = \sum_{n>0}\Omega_{n}[a](t),
\label{eq:Magnus-Exp}$$ in terms of multiple integrals of nested commutators, and provided a differential equation which in turn can be easily solved recursively for the terms $\Omega_{n}[a](t)$ $$\frac{d}{dt}\Omega[a](t) = \frac{\hbox{ad}\,
\Omega[a]}{{\rm{e}}^{\hbox{\eightrm ad}\,\Omega[a]} - 1}(a)(t).$$ It is worth indicating that originally Magnus was motivated by Friedrich’s theorem of our Section 5. We already mentioned, however, that one of the papers most influential on the subject [@inflationbuster] was written without knowledge of Magnus’ paper. In the 1990’s, several mathematicians interested in approximate integrators for differential equations developed the discipline of geometrical integration. Originally also unaware of Magnus’ work, they derived anew Magnus’ expansion. The point was to make sure that the approximate solutions evolve in the Lie group if $\xi(t)$ in remains in the Lie algebra. This is *not* true of the iterative Dyson–Chen method —no finite truncation of the latter is the exact solution of any approximating system. By construction $\chi^0$ respects the Lie algebra structure in , and thus truncations of the series are sure to remain in the Lie group. This is one reason why —in view also of the considerations in Appendix C— we give priority to the Magnus method. For geometrical integration, consult [@IsNo; @IserlesAMS].
Comparison with settles the matter of the link between Magnus series and the CBHD recursion in the context of vanishing Rota–Baxter weight. Namely,
Let $A$ be a function algebra over ${\mathbb{R}}_t$ with values in an operator algebra. Let $R$ denote the indefinite Riemann integral operator. Magnus’ $\Omega$ expansion is given by the formula $$\Omega[a](t) = R\bigl(\chi^0(a)\bigr)(t).$$
In conclusion, we could say that the $\theta$-CBHD recursion generalizes Magnus’ expansion to general weight $\theta\neq0$ Rota–Baxter operators $R$ by replacing the weight-zero Riemann integral in $F=1+R\{aF\}$. Corollary \[corl:0-ncSpitzer\] represents a more modest generalization, to zero-weight Rota–Baxter operators different >from the ordinary integral.
Let us write explicitly the first few terms of the Magnus expansion using , when $R$ is the Riemann integral operator. The function $a=a(t)$ is defined over ${\mathbb{R}}$ and takes values in a noncommutative algebra, say of matrices of size $n{\times}n$. We obtain This gives indeed the first terms of the expansion *precisely* in the form that Magnus derived it. However, in later works [@inflationbuster; @MexicoLindo; @MexicoOtraVez; @Wilcox; @Salzman] the terms in the Magnus’ expansion are presented as iterated commutator brackets of strictly time-ordered Riemann integrals. Especially in [@inflationbuster] Strichartz succeeded in giving a closed solution to Magnus’ expansion —and hence to our recursion $\chi^{0,R}$ when $R$ is the Riemann integral. With the notation of Proposition \[pr:NotQuick\], he found $$\begin{aligned}
\Omega[a](t) &= \sum_{n > 0}\Omega_n[a](t), {\quad\mbox{with}\quad}
\label{eq:StrichartzMagnus} \\
\Omega_n[a](t) &= \sum_{{\sigma}\in S_n}
\frac{(-1)^{d({\sigma})}}{n^2\binom{n-1}{d({\sigma})\,}}
\int_0^t\int_0^{t_1}\dots \int_0^{t_{n-1}} \big[[\dots
[a(t_1),a(t_2)]\dots], a(t_n)\big]\,\,dt_n \dots dt_2\,dt_1.
\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ This formula clearly points to the close relation between the CBHD expansion and Magnus’ series, although the appearance of the number of descents is still ‘unexplained’. However, it is not to everyone’s taste. It is immediate from the formula that $$\Omega_2[a](t) = \frac 12\int_0^t\int_0^{t_1}[a(t_1), a(t_2)]
\,dt_2\,dt_1,$$ coincident with the second term in ; and clear enough that $$\Omega_3[a](t) =\frac{1}{6}\int_0^t \int_0^{t_1}\int_0^{t_{2}}
\Bigl(\big[[a(t_1), a(t_2)], a(t_3)\big] - \big[[a(t_2),a(t_3)],
a(t_1)\big] \Bigr)\,dt_3\,dt_2\,dt_1;
\label{eq:StrichartzMagnusThree}$$ however the number of terms grows menacingly with $n!$, it is never evident when we will find cancellations, and one quickly concludes that the beauty of hides its computational complexity. Nor is it entirely obvious, although of course it is true, that coincides with the sum of the third and fourth terms in .
The best policy, in our opinion, is to invoke the alternative Dyson–Chen solution at this point. This attacks three problems: systematic writing of the Magnus series simplifies; the zero-weight recursion is solved; and the comparison between different expressions for the same terms is made easier.
Enter the Dyson–Chen series
===========================
The first order initial value problem , respectively the corresponding recursion $$F(t) = 1 + R(aF)(t),$$ where $R$ is the Riemann integral operator, possess a natural solution in terms of iteration, see . The resulting infinite series is called here Dyson–Chen integral. In the physics literature those series are often referred to as time-ordered exponentials or path-ordered integrals; their importance can hardly be overstated. To reflect such nomenclature in the notation, write $$\operatorname{T}e^{\int_0^t a(t_1)\,dt_1} = \operatorname{T}e^{R(a)(t)} := 1 +
\sum_{n>0}\underbrace{R\bigl(aR(aR(a\cdots
R(a))}_{n\;\mathrm{times}}\dots)\bigr)(t).$$ The operator $\operatorname{T}$ implies the strict iteration of the integral corresponding to the ‘time ordering’. A short presentation of Chen’s work on this kind of integrals can be found in [@ShSt]; the findings of Magnus and Chen played a decisive role, especially for Rota and his followers. Directly from the group property of the flow, we have for the Dyson–Chen integral the factorization $$\operatorname{T}e^{\int_0^t a(t_1)dt_1} = \operatorname{T}e^{\int^{t'}_0 a(t_1)\,dt_1}
\,\operatorname{T}e^{\int_{t'}^t a(t_1)\,dt_1},$$ giving rise to many identities of integrals and concatenation products of series, which we need not go into. This factorization might be compared with the quite different decomposition induced by the CBHD recursion . The major result of the theory is the following theorem.
\[thm:Wanderlust\] The logarithm of a Chen series is a Lie series.
The direct proof of this statement uses Hopf algebra, to wit, the shuffle product algebra of our Section 5. It is just a matter of verifying Ree’s condition inductively. In our present context, the Dyson–Chen expansional is the solution to Atkinson’s recursion , and the theorem scarcely needs justification.
Simply by taking the logarithm in $$\exp(\Omega[a](t)) = \operatorname{T}e^{R(a)(t)},$$ we obtain $$\Omega_n[a] = \sum_{k=1}^{n}\frac{(-1)^{k+1}}{k} \sum_{\substack{l_1,
\dots ,l_k \in \mathbb{N}^\ast \\ l_1 + \cdots + l_k=n}} (Ra)^{[l_1]}
\dots (Ra)^{[l_k]}.
\label{eq:Chen-Magnus}$$ This was of course known to the practitioners —see [@Salzman; @KlOt] and references there. It is derived in [@Quaoar] by use of the Faà di Bruno Hopf algebra. Inverting these relations, one finds the $(Ra)^{[n+1]}$’s in terms of the $\Omega_m[a]$’s $$(Ra)^{[n]} = \sum_{k=1}^{n} \frac{1}{k!} \sum_{\substack{l_1,\dots,
l_k \in \mathbb{N}^\ast \\ l_1 + \cdots + l_k=n}}
\Omega_{l_1}[a] \dots \Omega_{l_k}[a].
\label{eq:Magnus-Chen}$$ The first examples are: $$\begin{aligned}
2!(Ra)^{[2]} &=& \Omega_1^2[a] + 2\Omega_2[a],
\\
3!(Ra)^{[3]} &=& \Omega_1^3[a] + 3\bigl(\Omega_1^2[a]\Omega_2[a] +
\Omega_2[a]\Omega_1^2[a]\bigr) + 6\Omega_3[a].\end{aligned}$$ that might be compared with ; of course $Ra=\Omega_1[a] =C^R_1$ in the occasion. Now, both sets of equations and simply describe how to link Magnus’ expansion to the Dyson–Chen expansional. They purely follow from the Rota–Baxter relation as well as the CBHD formula. Therefore they are valid for *any* weight-zero Rota–Baxter operator $R$.
By inverting the Rota–Baxter map, we solve moreover the zero-weight CBHD recursion: $$\begin{aligned}
\chi^0_n(a) &= \sum_{k=1}^{n}\frac{(-1)^{k+1}}{k}
\sum_{\substack{l_1,l_2, \dots,l_k \in \mathbb{N}^\ast \\ l_1 +
l_2 + \cdots + l_k=n}} \bigl(a(Ra)^{[l_1-1]} (Ra)^{[l_2]} \cdots
(Ra)^{[l_k]} +
\\
&+ (Ra)^{[l_1]} a(Ra)^{[l_2-1]} \cdots (Ra)^{[l_k]} + \cdots +
(Ra)^{[l_1]} (Ra)^{[l_2]} \cdots a(Ra)^{[l_k-1]}\bigr).\end{aligned}$$
Next we are set to give an alternative formula to , keeping left-to-right bracketing. This is better explained by way of example. Bring in Heaviside’s step function, with its help, iterated Riemann integrals can be rewritten $$R\bigl(aR(b)\bigr)(t) = \int_0^t
a(t_1)\int_0^{t_1}b(t_2)\,dt_2\,dt_1 =
\int_0^t\int_0^t{\Theta}(t_1-t_2)a(t_1)b(t_2)\,dt_2\,dt_1.
\label{eq:Strichartz}$$ More generally, $${\Theta}_{i,j}(t_1,t_2,\ldots,t_n) := {\Theta}(t_i-t_j),
{\quad\mbox{for $1\le i,j\le n$,}\quad}$$ and we can write $$\operatorname{T}e^{\int_0^t a(t_1)dt_1} = 1 + \int_0^t a(t_1)\,dt_1 +
\sum_{n=2}^\infty\int_0^t\cdots\int_0^t{\Theta}_{1,2}\cdots{\Theta}_{n-1,n}\,
a(t_1)\cdots a(t_n)\,dt_n \dots dt_1.$$ For instance, for the third term of the Magnus series, applying , $$\Omega_3[a] =
\int_0^t\int_0^t\int_0^t\bigl({\Theta}_{1,2}{\Theta}_{2,3} -
{\tfrac{1}{2}}{\Theta}_{1,2} - {\tfrac{1}{2}}{\Theta}_{2,3} + {\tfrac{1}{3}}\bigr)a(t_1)a(t_2)a(t_3) \,dt_3\,dt_2\,dt_1.$$ Now, we know —if only from theorem (\[thm:Wanderlust\])— this is a Lie element, so we can apply at once the Dynkin operator to rewrite it with nested commutators: $$\Omega_3[a] =
\int_0^t\int_0^t\int_0^t\bigl({\Theta}_{1,2}{\Theta}_{2,3} -
{\tfrac{1}{2}}{\Theta}_{1,2} - {\tfrac{1}{2}}{\Theta}_{2,3} + {\tfrac{1}{3}}\bigr)[[a(t_1),
a(t_2)], a(t_3)]\,dt_3\,dt_2\,dt_1.$$ We see now that the last term actually does not contribute to the integral. With very little work, just using ${\Theta}_{1,2}+{\Theta}_{2,1} ={\Theta}_{2,3}+{\Theta}_{3,2}=1$, one recovers . An explicit formula for all terms along these lines, fully equivalent to, but simpler to work with, than Strichartz’s, is easily obtained [@MexicoOtraVez]; we do not bother to write it. We must avow, however, that we do not see a way to write terms like the third one in the integral above as a combination of iterations and products of the $R$ operators; thus we must conclude that formulae like and are only valid for the Riemann integral.
For general zero-weight Rota–Baxter operators we may fall back on . Magnus himself did not use any property of the map $R$ beyond integration-by-parts, and only presented the expansion in a form equivalent to . Of course, even using purely the weight-zero Rota–Baxter relation, there are many equivalent ways of writing the same. For instance, simply by Proposition \[prop:LieRB\], one finds that the term at third order in Magnus’ expansion is rewritten $$\frac13 R\Bigl( \big[R\bigl([R(a), a]\bigr), a\big] \Bigr)(t) -
\frac{1}{12} \big[R\bigl([R(a), a]\bigr), R(a)\big](t).$$ It is worthwhile to mention that Iserles and Norsett use binary rooted trees to achieve a better understanding of Magnus’ expansion [@IsNo; @IserlesAMS].
We have long taken the algebraic tack. But what about convergence of the Magnus series? Note that Dyson–Chen series converge absolutely for all $t$ if $a$ is bounded, and this is why they are preferred in quantum field theory; however this good property is not transmitted in general to Magnus series via , as there is an infinite resummation involved. Excellent bounds at small $t$ have been found recently [@Dontmoan] for matrix systems. Strichartz linearizes arbitrary initial-value problems, for which we cannot expect convergence in general in the smooth category; but he does not fail to observe that Magnus’ expansion has especially good properties for Lie–Scheffers systems [@inflationbuster Section 3]. This is because the closing of the involved vector fields to a finite-dimensional Lie algebra sharply improves the estimates. Furthermore, for those systems Magnus’ exponential can be interpreted as the exponential map of Lie theory.
Towards solving the $\theta$-weight recursions
==============================================
Let us now come back to Proposition \[prop:factorization\] and take the first steps in going from the Dyson–Chen series to the $\theta$-weight CBHD recursion. This looks somewhat hard; but recall that Lam found, in the context of the Riemann integral, another way to relate the terms in the Dyson–Chen series to those in the Magnus expansion —consult[@Lam; @OteoRos]. In fact, Lam’s findings are true in a much more general sense, i.e., for general weight Rota–Baxter algebras, as we will indicate here. The attentive reader will remember the weight-zero pre-Lie product , that allows for the following way of writing the weight zero CBHD recursion $\chi^0(a)$, see : $$\begin{aligned}
\chi^0(a) &= a + \frac 12 a \cdot_R a + \Bigl(\frac14\bigl(a \cdot_R
(a \cdot_R a)\bigr) + \frac{1}{12} \bigl((a \cdot_R a) \cdot_R
a\bigr)\Bigr)
\nonumber \\
& +\frac{1}{24}R\Bigl(a \cdot_R \bigl( (a \cdot_R a)\cdot_R a\bigr) +
\bigl(a \cdot_R (a \cdot_R a)\bigr) \cdot_R a + (a \cdot_R a) \cdot_R
(a \cdot_R a)\Bigr)
\nonumber \\
& +\frac{1}{8} R\Bigl(a \cdot_R \bigl(a \cdot_R(a \cdot_R
a)\bigr)\Bigr) + \cdots.
\label{eq:pre-Lie-Magnus}\end{aligned}$$ This contains in germ the main idea. Remember in terms of the (double and) pre-Lie Rota–Baxter product. Lam made an exponential Ansatz $$\sum_{n \geq 0} R(a)^{[n]} = \exp\Bigl(\sum_{m>0} K_m(a)\Bigr)$$ and derived the following formulae for the $K_i$’s in terms of $C^R_1(a),\dots,C^R_i(a)$: $$\begin{aligned}
K_1(a) &=& C^R_1(a), \quad K_2(a) = \frac{1}{2}C^R_2(a), \quad K_3(a)
= \frac{1}{3}C^R_3(a) + \frac{1}{12}[C^R_2(a),C^R_1(a)],
\\
K_4(a) &=& \frac{1}{4}C^R_4(a) + \frac{1}{12}[C^R_3(a),C^R_1(a)],\dots\end{aligned}$$ The weight-$\theta$ Rota–Baxter relation enters at the level of identity , hence implying the particular form of the $K_i$’s. This naturally demands a comparison with the CBHD recursion, respectively the generalized Spitzer identity.
Let $(A,R)$ be an associative Rota–Baxter algebra of weight $\theta$. Then for $K_i=K_i(C^R_1(a),\dots,C_i^R(a);\theta)$ we have $$\sum_{i>0}K_it^i = -R\bigl(\chi^{\theta}\bigl(\theta^{-1}\log(1_A
- \theta at)\bigr)\bigr).$$ \[prop:solvingCHIviaRB\]
Hence, finding a formula for the $K_i$’s gives a solution, in the sense of a closed expression, to the CBHD recursion $\chi^{\theta}$, which follows from the Rota–Baxter relation. A full proof of this statement lies beyond the scope of this work and will be provided elsewhere [@KuruJosePatras]. In the context of Hopf and Rota–Baxter theory, it is the generalization of the shuffle relation to the quasi-shuffle (or mixed-shuffle) identity [@EbGu] underlying the algebraic structure encoded in the Rota–Baxter relation of nonzero weight, which generalizes the integration-by-parts rule corresponding to the shuffle relation.
Of course, when $\theta=0$ Lam’s $K_i$’s are just the Magnus ${\Omega}_i$’s. These are expressed as sums of commutators of *right-to-left* bracketed integrals, when $R$ is the Riemann operator. This turns out to be the most efficient method for the expansion, as well. For instance, the expression of $K_5$ contains just six terms, whereas ${\Omega}_5$ is written usually with 22 terms [@OteoRos].
We close this section with a simple but striking observation flowing >from the last theorem. Defining $u(at):=\theta^{-1}\log(1_A-\theta
at)$, we recover $-\chi^{\theta}(u(at))$ from $\chi^0(at)$, that is, from , simply by using the weight-$\theta$ pre-Lie product \[eq:preLie\]). A full proof of this statement will be given elsewhere. But we show this here up to third order. Using $\theta^{-1}\log(1_A-\theta at)=-\sum_{n>0}
\frac{{\theta}^{n-1}} {n}(at)^n$, we find for $$-\chi^{\theta}(u(at)) = at - \sum_{n>0}\chi_n^{\theta}(u(a))t^{n+1}$$ the following Let us go back to and use the pre-Lie product $a\cdot_R b:=[a,R(b)]+\theta ba$ of . We obtain at second order At third order we calculate: Earlier in Section 10 we have seen how the Magnus expansion naturally follows from the CBHD recursion in the limit $\theta\downarrow0$. In turn we see here the advantage of reformulating Magnus’ expansion in terms of the Rota–Baxter pre-Lie product of weight $\theta$ yielding the CBHD recursion.
Conclusion and outlook
======================
Our purpose in this paper was twofold. Starting from the innocent-looking dynamical system —of classical Lie–Scheffers type when $G$ is an ordinary Lie group— we sought to reformulate it in Hopf algebraic terms, thus being led to generalized derivation and integration (Rota–Baxter) operators. Whereby we show that two of the three main ordinary strategies to attack non-autonomous linear differential equations (linked respectively to the names of Magnus and Dyson–Chen) still make sense in the broader context. In particular, the noncommutative version of the Bohnenblust–Spitzer identity has been found, and we blaze a trail to solve the nonlinear recursion introduced earlier by one of us in relation with the noncommutative Spitzer formula.
There is no doubt that the product integral method to attack , often linked with the name of Fer [@Fer], is also susceptible to our kind of algebraic reinterpretation and generalization. However, with a heavy heart, we leave this for a later occasion: the present paper is already long enough.
Needless to say, the programmatic purpose of this work was to propagandize the Hopf algebra approach to differential equations. The lure of presenting classical subjects under a new light explains why we spent much space on a smooth transition from the standard to a Hopf-flavoured view of dynamical systems; and indeed this article became a powerful spur to revisit the traditional proof of the Lie–Scheffers theorem, and plug its gaps [@TresMosqueterosbis]. On the other hand, many of our findings and procedures will surely not raise an eyebrow of people working in sophisticated methods for control theory —on which we confess no expertise. There is, at any rate, plenty left to do. Avenues open for possible research include:
- The Cariñena–Ramos’ approach to Lie–Scheffers systems, based on connections, should be recast in the noncommutative mould, in the light of [@Bigotes2] and [@TheSecondComing].
- To relate and compare the action algebroid approach to group & Lie algebra actions with the Hopf algebra approach.
- Investigation of the product integral method.
- Further exploration of the theory of Rota–Baxter operators as natural inverses to skewderivations; that is, developing Rota’s proposal of an algebraic theory of integration.
- Definitive clarification of the noncommutative Spitzer formula and the noncommutative Bohnenblust–Spitzer identity in the light of Lam’s expansion.
- The bridge to control theory and chronological products, via Loday’s dendriform algebras in particular, should be enlarged and strengthened. In this respect, Lie–Butcher theory [@LastWillBeFirst; @LastWillBeSecond] shows great promise.
Précis on group actions
=======================
A (left) action of a Lie group $G$ on a manifold $M$ is a homomorphism $\Phi$ of $G$ into $\operatorname{Diff}M$. For $x\in M$, and $g\in G$ we denote $$\Phi_g := \Phi(g) {\quad\mbox{and}\quad} \Phi(g,x) := \Phi_g x.$$ A right action is just an antihomomorphism of $G$ into $\operatorname{Diff}M$. The orbits of $\Phi$ are the subsets of $M$ of the form $\Phi(G,x)$ for a fixed $x\in M$; they are homogeneous manifolds, on which the action is transitive. We will call $\Phi_x$ the map from $G$ to $M$ defined by $g\mapsto \Phi(g,x)$. Recall that a flow is an action of ${\mathbb{R}}$ on $M$. When $\Phi$ with the indicated properties is given, we say $M$ is a $G$-manifold. A Lie group action is proper if given any pair $K,L$ of compacts subsets of $M$, the set ${\{\,g\in G: gK\cap L \ne
\emptyset\,\}}$ is compact. The stabilizer or isotropy subgroups are then compact. Proper actions, in particular compact group actions of general Lie groups, have good properties: for instance the orbits of a proper action are closed submanifolds of $M$ [@MichorNotes]. An action is faithful (or effective, or essential) when the map $g\to\Phi_g$ is injective; if the kernel of this map is discrete, we say the action is almost faithful.
A good reference for Lie group actions is [@OldRedBook Chapter 4]. As for the examples, any Lie group $G$ acts on itself by left and right translations $L_g,R_g:G\to G$ respectively given for each $g\in G$ by $$g'\mapsto gg',\qquad g'\mapsto g'g.$$ The inverse diffeomorphisms are $L_g^{-1}=L_{g^{-1}}$ and $R_g^{-1}=R_{g^{-1}}$. This action is free and transitive. Also $G$ acts on itself by conjugation: $$g'\mapsto gg'g^{-1} =: \operatorname{Ad}(g)g'.$$ This action is neither free nor transitive; it is almost faithful iff the centre of $G$ is discrete.
Suppose $G$ acts both on $N$ by $\Phi^N$ and on $M$ by $\Phi^M$. A smooth map $f:N\to M$ between these manifolds is *equivariant* (with respect to the actions) if $f\circ\Phi^N_g= \Phi^M_g\circ f$ for each $g\in G$. The maps $\Phi_x:G\to M$, where $\Phi$ is a left (right) action are equivariant for all $x$, with respect to the left (right) action of $G$ on itself and $\Phi$: $$\Phi_x \circ L_g = \Phi_g \circ \Phi_x {\quad\mbox{or}\quad}
\Phi_x \circ R_g = \Phi_g \circ \Phi_x,
\label{eq:begs-the-question}$$ as the case may be.
If $G$ acts on $M$, then $G$ also acts on $TM$ by $$(g,v_x) \mapsto (\Phi_g x,T_x\Phi_gv_x) =: \Phi^T(g,v_x), {\quad\mbox{for
$v_x\in T_xM$.}\quad}$$ When $\Phi$ is described in local coordinates, say by $$\Phi_i(g,x) = h_i(g,x^1,\ldots,x^n), {\quad\mbox{then}\quad} T_x\Phi_gv_x =
\sum_{j=1}^n\frac{{\partial}h_i}{{\partial}x^j} (g,x^1,\ldots,x^n)v_x^j.$$ Clearly the map $v_x\mapsto\Phi^T(g,v_x)$ from $T_xM$ into $T_{\Phi(g,x)}M$ is linear and the canonical projection $\tau_M:TM\to
M$ is equivariant with respect to these actions: $\tau_M\bigl(\Phi^T(g,v_x)\bigr)=\Phi\bigl(g,\tau_M(v_x)\bigr)$. We then say that $\Phi$ is *equilinear* [@DieudonneIV]. For vector fields, then, there is the action: $$(g,X) \mapsto T\Phi_g\circ X\circ\Phi_{g^{-1}}.
\label{eq:insidious-thing}$$
Corresponding to group translations we have then equilinear left and right actions of $G$ on $TG$; as well as actions on ${\mathfrak{X}}(G)$. In view of , a vector field $X^L$ on $G$ is left invariant if for all $g\in G$, $X^L\circ L_g=TL_g\circ X^L$; this means that $X^L$ is $L_g$-related to itself for all $g\in G$. Therefore the left invariant vector fields constitute a Lie subalgebra ${\mathfrak{X}}^L(G)=:{\mathfrak{g}}_L$ of ${\mathfrak{X}}(G)$. Replacing $L_g$ by $R_g$ we obtain right invariant vector fields $X^R\in{\mathfrak{X}}^R(G)$ and a Lie subalgebra ${\mathfrak{X}}^R(G)=:{\mathfrak{g}}_R$. In particular, $X^L,X^R$ are determined by their values in the neutral element: $$X^L(g) = T_1L_gX^L(L_g^{-1}g) = T_1L_gX^L(1_G); {\quad\mbox{similarly}\quad}
X^R(g) = T_1R_gX^R(1_G);
\label{eq:morir-al-palo}$$ for typographical simplicity we write $T_1$ instead of $T_{1_G}$. The dimension of ${\mathfrak{X}}^L(G)$ or of ${\mathfrak{X}}^R(G)$ is thus that of the group. We denote by $X^L_\xi,X^R_\xi$ the left invariant, respectively right invariant, vector field associated to $\xi\in T_1G$. The (complete) flow of $X^L_\xi$ is $(t,g)\mapsto g\exp(tX^L_\xi)$ and the flow of $X^R_\xi$ is $(t,g)\mapsto\exp(tX^R_\xi)g$.
We remark that ${\mathfrak{g}}_L$ is the commutant of ${\mathfrak{g}}_R$ in ${\mathfrak{X}}(G)$, and vice versa. For instance, thinking of the affine group of orientation-preserving transformations of the line as a neighbourhood of $(1,0)$ with the multiplication rule: $$(x^1,x^2){\cdot}(y^1,y^2) = (x^1y^1, x^1y^2 + x^2),$$ then a basis for left (respectively right) invariant vector fields is $$(X^L_1, X^L_2) := (x^1{\partial}_1, x^1{\partial}_2); {\quad\mbox{respectively}\quad}
(X^R_1, X^R_2) := (x^1{\partial}_1 + x^2{\partial}_2, {\partial}_2).$$ With our Lie bracket, by the way: $[X^R_1, X^R_2]=X^R_2$. It is an easy exercise to check that if $a_1(x^1,x^2){\partial}_1+ a_2(x^1,x^2)
{\partial}_2$ commutes with $X^L_1,X^L_2$, then it is a linear combination of $X^R_1,X^R_2$ with scalar coefficients.
Consider the tangent map $T\imath:TG\to TG$ lifting the inversion diffeomorphism $\imath:g\mapsto g^{-1}$ on the base; it carries left invariant vector fields into right invariant ones. The vector fields $T\imath\circ X^L_\xi$ and $-X^R_\xi\circ\imath$ along $\imath$ coincide, that is, $X^L_\xi$ is $\imath$-projectable on $-X^R_\xi$. This simply because $\bigl(g^{-1}\exp(tX^L_\xi)\bigr)^{-1}=\exp(-tX^R_\xi)g$. Therefore $[X^L_\xi, X^L_\eta]$ projects into $[X^R_\eta,
X^R_\xi]$.
Now, $TG$ is itself a group, with product $T\mu$ lifted from the product $\mu:G{\times}G\to G$. The short exact sequence (where $T_1G$ is the additive group of this tangent linear space) $$0 \to T_1G \to TG \to G \to 1$$ splits, which means $TG\sim T_1G\rtimes G$, with $T_1G$ embedded in $TG$ as a normal subgroup. In particular $TG$ is a trivial vector bundle. We have in $TG$: $$gv_{g'} = TL_gv_{g'}; \qquad v_{g'}g = TR_gv_{g'}.
\label{eq:maestros-sutiles}$$ Clearly, the action of $G$ on $T_1G$ is just $\operatorname{Ad}_{1_G}^T$. Henceforth we write $\operatorname{Ad}$ for this adjoint action of $G$ on $T_1G$. A Lie bracket can now be defined directly on $T_1G$ by $[\xi,\eta]:=
\operatorname{ad}(\xi)\eta:=T_1\operatorname{Ad}(\xi)\eta$. One could also transfer to $T_1G$ the Lie algebra structure from ${\mathfrak{X}}^L(G)$ or ${\mathfrak{X}}^R(G)$, say $[\xi,\eta]:=
[X^R_\xi,X^R_\eta](1)$. That these and other natural definitions amount to the same is standard fare [@Cirilo Appendix III]. The space $T_1G$ with any of these equivalent structures is what people call the tangent (Lie) algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}$ of $G$.
A left (right) Lie algebra (infinitesimal) action ${\lambda}$ on $M$ is a Lie algebra homomorphism (antihomomorphism) ${\mathfrak{g}}\ni\xi\mapsto{\lambda}_\xi
\in{\mathfrak{X}}(M)$; we say $M$ is a ${\mathfrak{g}}$-manifold. The action is said *transitive* at $x$ when the ${\lambda}_\xi(x)$ span $T_xM$. It is furthermore *primitive* when the stabilizer ${\mathfrak{g}}_x$ is a maximal subalgebra; these concepts are analogous to the case of Lie group actions. When the action is transitive at all points of $M$, we say infinitesimally transitive. Given ${\lambda}:{\mathfrak{g}}\to{\mathfrak{X}}(M)$, if $\lambda_{\mathfrak{g}}$ is made up of complete vector fields (in particular when $M$ is compact, guaranteeing completeness of all vector fields) and $G$ is the simply connected Lie group with Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}$, then there is a unique $\Phi:G\to\operatorname{Diff}M$ such that $T_1\Phi={\lambda}$. This lifting to a group action always exists locally. We remark as well that our choice of sign for the bracket of vector fields insures that the derivative $T_1\Phi$ of a left action is a left action.
For the infinitesimal description of actions, the following notion is essential.
Let $\Phi$ denotes an action of $G$ on $M$. For $\xi\in{\mathfrak{g}}$, the map $(t,x)\mapsto\Phi(\exp t\xi,x)$ is a flow on $M$. The *fundamental vector field* or *infinitesimal generator* $\xi^\Phi_M$ of $\Phi$ corresponding to $\xi$ is the vector field $$\xi^\Phi_M(x) := {\frac{d}{dt}\biggr|_{t=0}}\Phi(\exp t\xi,x)=T_1\Phi_x(\xi)\,.
\label{eq:acabaramos}$$ The superscript $\Phi$ is omitted in the notation when the action is clear in the context. The image of ${\mathfrak{g}}$ under $T_1\Phi_x$ is the tangent bundle $T(G{\cdot}x)$ of the $\Phi$-orbit. The corresponding differential operator is given by $$\xi^\Phi_M f(x) := {\frac{d}{dt}\biggr|_{t=0}}f\bigl(\Phi(\exp t\xi,x)\bigr).$$ The anchor map $\xi\mapsto\xi^\Phi_M$ from the tangent algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}$ to ${\mathfrak{X}}(M)$ constitutes a Lie–Rinehart algebra; the corresponding Lie algebroid will be transitive when the action of ${\mathfrak{g}}$ on $M$ is infinitesimally transitive.
For example, when $\Phi$ is $L_g:G\to G$, we know that the corresponding flow is $(t,g')\mapsto R_{g'}\exp t\xi$. Therefore $$\xi_G(g') = T_1R_{g'}\xi = X^R_\xi(g'),
\label{eq:for-later-use}$$ the *right* invariant vector field associated to $\xi$. By the same token $\xi^R_G(g)=X^L_\xi(g)$.
If $M$ is a $G$-manifold, the flow of $\xi_M$ is given by $\Phi_{\exp
t\xi}$. Indeed, $$\begin{aligned}
&\frac{d}{dt}\Phi(\exp t\xi,x) = \frac{d}{ds}\biggr|_{s=0}
\Phi(\exp(s+t)\xi,x)
\\
&= \frac{d}{ds}\biggr|_{s=0}\Phi(\exp s\xi,x)\circ\Phi(\exp t\xi,x)
= \xi_M\circ \Phi_{\exp t\xi}(x).\end{aligned}$$ As a consequence $\xi_M$ is complete. The reader will have little difficulty in verifying the following
\[pr:equiflows\] Let $N,M$ be $G$-manifolds with respective actions $\Phi^N,\Phi^M$, and $f:N\to M$ a smooth map equivariant with respect to these actions; then $\xi_N\sim_f\xi_M$, that is $Tf\circ\xi_N=
\xi_M\circ f$. More precisely, $\xi_N\sim_f\xi_M$ iff the flows verify $$f\circ\Phi^N_{\exp(t\xi)}= \Phi^M_{\exp(t\xi)}\circ f.$$
\[pr:wow\] For every $\xi,\eta\in{\mathfrak{g}}$ we have $$[\xi_M, \eta_M] = [\xi, \eta]_M.$$ In other words: $\xi\mapsto \xi_M$ is a left Lie algebra action.
A simple calculation gives $$(\operatorname{Ad}_g\xi)_M = T\Phi_{g^{-1}}\xi_M.$$ We obtain the result immediately by differentiation. Our unconventional choice of sign for the Lie bracket of vector fields avoids the obnoxious minus signs of the usual treatments.
The action $\Phi$ of $G$ on $M$ lifts naturally to representations of $G$ on the various linear spaces associated with $M$ —for instance to representations on spaces of sections of vector bundles [@ACO] or on morphisms of vector bundles. We will limit ourselves to some simple cases, needed in the main text. For $f\in{\mathcal{F}}(M)$, we consider $(g{\cdot}f)(x) :=
f\bigl(\Phi(g^{-1},x)\bigr)$; then for $T\in{\mathcal{F}}'(M)$ and for $D\in{\mathbb{D}}(M)$: $$\<g{\cdot}T, f> := \<T, g^{-1}{\cdot}f>, {\quad\mbox{respectively}\quad} (g{\cdot}D)f :=
g{\cdot}D(g^{-1}{\cdot}f).$$ Invariant functions, distributions and differential operators are defined in the obvious way.
Differential equations on homogeneous spaces
============================================
The problem of solving non-autonomous differential equations on *homogeneous spaces* of Lie groups is intimately linked to Lie–Scheffers theory: given an arbitrary Lie group $G$ and an action of it on a manifold $M$, for most purposes one can restrict oneself to the orbits of the action, that is, the points of $M/G$; these are (immersed) submanifolds of $M$ of the form $G/G_x$, with $G_x:={\{\,g\in G:\Phi(g,x)=x\,\}}$ the stabilizer of a point $x$ of the orbit, a closed Lie subgroup of $G$. From this perspective, Lie–Scheffers systems are precisely those that can be rewritten in the form $$\dot x(t)= {\lambda}_{\xi(t)}\bigl(x(t)\bigr),
\label{eq:yetLS}$$ where $A:{\mathbb{R}}\to{\mathfrak{g}}$ is a curve on the Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}$ and ${\lambda}$ denotes an infinitesimal action. If ${\lambda}=T\Phi$ for some action $\Phi$ of $G$ on $M$ and $g(t)$ solves the initial value problem : $$\dot g(t) = \xi_G(t,g(t)); \qquad g(0) = 1_G,
\label{eq:fund-bis}$$ then the solution of with initial condition $x(0)=x_0$ is given by the integrated action: $x(t)=\Phi(g(t),x_0)$. At this point we again advise the reader to consult [@TresMosqueterosbis].
In practice we consider transitive actions on $M\equiv G/G_x$. Suppose that $x_{(1)}$ is a particular solution of satisfying $x(0)=x_0$. Let $g_1\in\operatorname{Map}({\mathbb{R}}_t,G)$ such that $x_{(1)}(t)=
\Phi(g_1(t),x_0)$. Such curve is not unique in general; but, if $g_2$ is another one, then $g_2(t)=g_1(t)h(t)$ with $h$ in $\operatorname{Map}({\mathbb{R}}_t,G_{x_0})$. It is convenient to choose $h$ so that $g_2$ is the fundamental solution of : $$\dot g_2(t) = T_1R_{g_2(t)}\xi(t),$$ upon using in the last equality. Then $h$ is the fundamental solution of the Lie–Scheffers system associated to the curve $B:{\mathbb{R}}\to{\mathfrak{g}}_{x_0}$, given by [@Luther]: $$B(t) = T_1L_{g_1(t)^{-1}}\bigl(T_1R_{g_1(t)}\xi(t) - \dot
g_1(t)\bigr).$$ Therefore the knowledge of a particular solution of that satisfies $x_{(1)}(0)=x_0$ reduces the problem of finding the fundamental solution for $G$ to finding the fundamental solution for the subgroup $G_{x_0}$. Naturally if more particular solutions are known, whose values at $0$ are $x_1,\dots,x_r$, then we can reduce the problem to solving a Lie–Scheffers system in the subgroup $G_{x_0}\cap\cdots\cap G_{x_r}$. When this group is discrete, one can explicitly compute the fundamental solution for $G$, from which the general solution of the original Lie–Scheffers system can be derived. This is known as the Lie reduction method.
A variant of the Lie reduction method was studied in the language of gauge theory in [@PBPepinArturo]. Without actually invoking connections, we illustrate the approach in this last reference with the Riccati equation . The latter seeks the integral curves of the vector field along $\pi_2:{\mathbb{R}}_t{\times}M\to M$: $$\bar Y = \bigl(a_0(t) + a_1(t)x + a_2(t)x^2\bigr)\frac{{\partial}}{{\partial}x}.$$ For vector fields $E_+={\partial}/{\partial}x,H=x\,{\partial}/{\partial}x$ and $E_-=x^2\,{\partial}/{\partial}x$ we observe the commutation relations $$[H,E_+] = E_+; \qquad [E_+,E_-] = -2H; \qquad [H,E_-] = -E_-,
\label{eq:porca-miseria}$$ exactly those of the matrices $E'_+ := \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0
\end{pmatrix}$; $H' :=\begin{pmatrix} {\tfrac{1}{2}}& 0 \\ 0 & -{\tfrac{1}{2}}\end{pmatrix}$; $E'_-:= \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 \\ -1 & 0
\end{pmatrix}$. Therefore $E_\pm,H$ realize the (perfect) Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{sl}}(2;{\mathbb{R}})$ of the group $SL(2;{\mathbb{R}})$. The corresponding flows of ${\mathbb{R}}$ are respectively $$x_0 \longmapsto x_0 + t; \qquad x_0 \longmapsto x_0e^t; \qquad x_0
\longmapsto \frac{x_0}{1-x_0t};$$ the last one blows up for $x_0>0$ in finite time, indicating that $E_-$ is not complete. This can be corrected by adding to ${\mathbb{R}}$ the point at infinity. More precisely, we have the well-known action of the projective group $SL(2;{\mathbb{R}})/Z_2$ on the projective line ${\mathbb{R}}\cup\infty$ —to wit, the projectivization of the fundamental action of $SL(2;{\mathbb{R}})$ on ${\mathbb{R}}^2$. Just as well, in the spirit of this article, we can decide to regard the action as a local one, defined on the open set of $SL(2;{\mathbb{R}}){\times}{\mathbb{R}}$ given by the pairs such that $cx+d\ne0$.
Now, consider the group $\operatorname{Map}\bigl({\mathbb{R}}_t,SL(2;{\mathbb{R}})\bigr)$ of curves acting on the set of Riccati equations (that is, the group of automorphisms of the trivial principal bundle $SL(2;{\mathbb{R}}){\times}{\mathbb{R}}_t\to{\mathbb{R}}_t$) corresponding to the indicated action, expressed by: $$\Phi\bigl(A(t),x(t)\bigr) = \Phi\biggl(\begin{pmatrix} {\alpha}(t) & {\beta}(t)
\\ {\gamma}(t) & {\delta}(t) \end{pmatrix},x(t)\biggr) = \frac{{\alpha}(t)x(t) +
{\beta}(t)}{{\gamma}(t)x(t) + {\delta}(t)},$$ together with the other obvious cases. When $x(t)$ is a solution of the Riccati equation , then $x'(t):=
\Phi\bigl(A(t),x(t)\bigr)$ is also a solution of a Riccati equation with coefficients $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{pmatrix} a'_2(t) \\ a'_1(t) \\ a'_0(t) \end{pmatrix}
= \begin{pmatrix} {\delta}^2 & -{\delta}{\gamma}& {\gamma}^2 \\
-2{\beta}{\delta}& {\alpha}{\delta}+{\beta}{\gamma}& -2{\alpha}{\gamma}\\
{\beta}^2 & -{\alpha}{\beta}& {\alpha}^2 \end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix} a_2(t) \\ a_1(t) \\ a_0(t) \end{pmatrix}
+ \begin{pmatrix} {\gamma}\dot{\delta}-{\delta}\dot{\gamma}\\
{\delta}\dot{\alpha}-{\alpha}\dot{\delta}+{\beta}\dot{\gamma}- {\gamma}\dot{\beta}\\
{\alpha}\dot{\beta}-{\beta}\dot{\alpha}\end{pmatrix}.\end{aligned}$$ The second term on the right hand side is a 1-cocycle for the linear action on the coefficients of the Riccati equation given by the first term. If a particular solution $x_{(1)}(t)$ of is known, the element $A_1(t) =
\begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0\\ -x_{(1)}^{-1}(t) & 1\end{pmatrix} \in
\operatorname{Map}\bigl({\mathbb{R}}_t,SL(2;{\mathbb{R}})\bigr)$, transforms the original Riccati equation into the linear equation $dx'/dt=
\bigl(2x_{(1)}^{-1}(t)a_0(t)+a_1(t)\bigr)x'+a_0$, thereby reducing the group $SL(2;{\mathbb{R}})$ to the subgroup $A(1;{\mathbb{R}})$. When a second particular solution $x_{(2)}(t)$ of is given, then $x'=x_{(1)}x_{(2)}/(x_{(1)}-x_{(2)})$ satisfies the linear equation, therefore we obtain the corresponding homogeneous linear equation using the matrix $A_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1 & -x_{(1)}x_{(2)}(x_{(1)} -
x_{(2)})^{-1}\\ 0 & 1\end{pmatrix}$. Concretely, the change of variables $$x'' = \Phi(A_2,x') = \Phi(A_2A_1,x) = \frac{x_{(1)}^2(x-x_{(2)})}
{(x_{(2)}-x_{(1)})(x - x_{(1)})}$$ leads to the homogeneous linear equation $dx''/dt=
\bigl(2x_{(1)}^{-1}(t)a_0(t)+a_1(t)\bigr)x''$. Finally, if $x_{(3)}$ is a third particular solution of , then $z=x_{(1)}^2(x_{(2)} -x_{(3)})/(x_{(2)} -x_{(1)})(x_{(1)} -x_{(3)})$ solves this linear equation, thus if $A_3 = \begin{pmatrix} z^{-1/2} &
0 \\ 0 & z^{1/2}\end{pmatrix}$, the transformation $$x'''=\Phi(A_3A_2A_1,x)
=\frac{(x -x_{(2)})(x_{(1)}-x_{(3)})}{(x-x_{(1)})(x_{(2)}-x_{(3)})}$$ gives the reduced equation $dx'''/dt=0$, which is the superposition principle for the Riccati equation.
We are not likely to find an exact solution for in most cases. This is one reason why we concentrate on approximate solutions in this paper. To attack , it is generally a good strategy to move on to an equivalent system on the tangent algebra of $G$ —a coordinate space for $G$ which enjoys the advantage of being a linear space. To effect properly the method of working on the tangent algebra, one needs to ponder equivariant maps between homogeneous spaces. We go to this in the next appendix.
More on the same
================
Consider again the canonical action of $G$ on its tangent algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}$, and let $f:{\mathfrak{g}}\to G$ be a local coordinate map. The exponential map is an example, but of course there are slight variants of it (see below); or we could employ, if available, the Cayley map [@KostantMichor]. A local action $B^f$ of $G$ on ${\mathfrak{g}}$ is constructed by $B^f_g = f^{-1}\circ L_g\circ f$. This is a (somewhat skew) generalized version of the CBHD map, since, if $f$ is the exponential map, then for $\eta\in{\mathfrak{g}}$ we obtain: $$B^{\exp}(g,\eta) = \log(g\exp\eta) = \log g + \eta + \CBHD(\log
g,\eta),$$ with the notation of Section 8. Similarly for right actions.
By definition the map $f$ is equivariant with respect to $B^f$ and left translations. Since the maps $\Phi_x$ are also equivariant, their composition $\Phi_x\circ f:{\mathfrak{g}}\to G\to M$ is equivariant, and we have the following commutative diagram relating the flows on $M,G$ and ${\mathfrak{g}}$: $$\xymatrix{&{\mathfrak{g}}\ar[r]^f & G \ar[r]^{\Phi_x} & M\\
& {\mathfrak{g}}\ar[u]^{B^f_{e^{t\xi}}} \ar[r]_f
& G \ar[u]^{L_{e^{t\xi}}} \ar[r]_{\Phi_x}
& M \ar[u]^{\Phi_{e^{t\xi}}},}$$ with the notation of Section 4 for $\exp(t\xi)$. By Proposition \[pr:equiflows\], this commutative diagram can be extended to: $$\xymatrix{& T{\mathfrak{g}}\approx{\mathfrak{g}}{\times}{\mathfrak{g}}\ar[r]^{\qquad Tf} & TG \ar[r]^{T\Phi_x}
& TM \\ & {\mathfrak{g}}\ar[u]^{\xi_{\mathfrak{g}}} \ar[r]^f & G \ar[u]^{\xi_G}
\ar[r]^{\Phi_x} & M \ar[u]^{\xi_M(x)} \\ & {\mathfrak{g}}\ar[u]^{B^f_{e^{t\xi}}}
\ar[r]_f & G \ar[u]^{L_{e^{t\xi}}} \ar[r]_{\Phi_x} & M
\ar[u]^{\Phi_{e^{t\xi}}};}$$ in particular $$\xi_M(x) \circ \Phi_x \circ f = T\Phi_x \circ Tf \circ \xi_{\mathfrak{g}}.
\label{eq:estas-avisado}$$ The overarching question is now: what is the concrete description of $\xi_{\mathfrak{g}}$? This we answer next, and we obtain a congenial reply. Write $g=f(u)$ with $u\in{\mathfrak{g}}$, to distinguish the role of the points of ${\mathfrak{g}}$ as coordinates for $G$. The map $T_uf:T{\mathfrak{g}}\to TG$ can be factorized into a map from $T_u{\mathfrak{g}}\approx{\mathfrak{g}}$ to ${\mathfrak{g}}$, say $A^f_u$, and the translation $T_1R_{f(u)}$. Now, in view of , $Tf\circ\xi_{\mathfrak{g}}=\xi_G\circ f$ gives $$T_1R_{f(u)}\circ A^f_u\circ\xi_{\mathfrak{g}}(u) = T_1R_{f(u)}\,\xi;$$ therefore $$\xi_{\mathfrak{g}}(u) = (A^f_u)^{-1}\xi,
\label{eq:te-lo-dije}$$ where $A^f_u=T_{f(u)}R_{f^{-1}(u)}\circ T_u f$ is the *Darboux derivative* of $f$, a map $T{\mathfrak{g}}\to{\mathfrak{g}}{\times}{\mathfrak{g}}$ yielding the pullback via $f$ of the right Maurer–Cartan form on $G$ (a ${\mathfrak{g}}$-valued 1-form on ${\mathfrak{g}}$). Then one recovers the ‘static’ version of from a slightly different viewpoint. Note the double role of ${\mathfrak{g}}$ in the construction: on the one hand, its elements are parameters of the infinitesimal generators on $M$; on the other hand they serve as coordinates of the *linear* space on which we want to solve a differential equation equivalent to the one originally given on $M$. The general Darboux derivative for group-valued maps on manifolds is a key ingredient in the study of connections via transitive Lie algebroids [@Mackenzie].
In summary, a differential equation on a homogenous $G$-manifold $M$ —described by infinitesimal generators of the Lie group action along the projection ${\mathbb{R}}_t{\times}M\to M$— has been transformed to a ‘pulled-back’ equation on the tangent algebra of the group: $$\dot u = \xi_{\mathfrak{g}}(u;t),
\label{eq:mama-de-Tarzan}$$ by means of the commutative diagram $$\xymatrix{& T{\mathfrak{g}}\ar[r]^{T\Phi_x\circ Tf} & TM \\
& {\mathbb{R}}_t{\times}{\mathfrak{g}}\ar[u]^{\xi_{\mathfrak{g}}} \ar[r]^{\!\!\!\!\Phi_x\circ f}
& {\mathbb{R}}_t{\times}M \ar[u]^{\xi_M},}$$ where $\xi_{\mathfrak{g}}$ is the vector field along ${\mathbb{R}}_t{\times}{\mathfrak{g}}\to{\mathfrak{g}}$ associated to the curve $t\mapsto\xi(t)$, explicitly given by formula . The equation evolving on the Lie algebra is susceptible of attack by geometrical integration techniques, a point made in [@Engo].
To exemplify, let us look at Riccati’s equation again. Consider $$L:= a_0(.)E'_+ + a_1(.)H' + a_2(.)E'_- \in
\operatorname{Map}\bigl({\mathbb{R}}_t,\mathfrak{sl}(2;{\mathbb{R}})\bigr).$$ We know that if we are able somehow to solve the equation $$\frac{dg}{dt} = L(t)g(t), {\quad\mbox{with}\quad} g(t_0) = 1_{SL(2;{\mathbb{R}})},
\label{eq:gato-encerradisimo}$$ then is entirely solved by the ‘Green operator’ $$x(t) = \Phi(g(t),x_0).$$ where $\Phi$ is the integrated action considered in the previous section. To search for that solution, let us bring in a variant of the exponential map [@PesoNormando]. Using canonical coordinates of the second kind for the element $g(t)\in G$, write: $$\begin{aligned}
g(t) = f(u(t)) &:= \exp(u^0(t)E'_+)\exp(u^1(t)H')\exp(u^2(t)E'_-)
\nonumber \\
&=: \exp(u^0(t)L'_0)\exp(u^1(t)L'_1)\exp(u^2(t)L'_2).
\label{eq:suerte-o-verdad}\end{aligned}$$ Therefore $f$ denotes the defined locally bijective map from $\mathfrak{sl}(2;{\mathbb{R}})$ onto $SL(2;{\mathbb{R}})$, with $u\equiv
(u^0,u^1,u^2)$. (Incidentally, this means that we seek the general solution of the Riccati equation under the form $$x(t) = \frac{e^{u^1(t)}x_0}{1 - u^2(t)x_0} + u^0(t);$$ then, taking $x_0=\infty,0,1$, three particular solutions are obtained, and the reader will see at once that the superposition formula follows from here.)
Replacing $g(t)$ in by , upon using the commutation relations we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{dg(t)}{dt} g^{-1}(t)
&= \dot u^0 E'_+ + \dot u^1 e^{u^0 E'_+}H' e^{-u^0 E'_+}
+ \dot u^2 e^{u^0 E'_+}e^{u^1 H'}E'_ - e^{-u^1 H'} e^{-u^0 E'_+}
\\
&= \dot u^0 E'_+ + \dot u^1 \exp(u^0 \operatorname{ad}E'_+) H' + \dot u^2
\exp(u^0 \operatorname{ad}E'_+) \exp(u^1 \operatorname{ad}H') E'_-
\\
&= \dot u^0 E'_+ + \dot u^1 (H' - u^0 E'_+) +
\dot u^2 e^{-u^1} \exp(u^0 \operatorname{ad}E'_+)E'_-
\\
&= \dot u^0 E'_+ + \dot u^1 (H' - u^0 E'_+)
+ \dot u^2 e^{-u^1} (E'_- - 2u^0 H' + (u^0)^2 E'_+)
\\
&= (\dot u^0 - u^0\dot u^1 + (u^0)^2 e^{-u^1} \dot u^2) E'_+
+ (\dot u^1 - 2u^0 e^{-u^1} \dot u^2) H' + e^{-u^1} \dot u^2 E'_-
\\
&= a_0(t) E'_+ + a_1(t) H' + a_2(t) E'_-.\end{aligned}$$ This leads to the following differential equations for the $u$-variables: $$\begin{aligned}
\dot u^0 &= a_0(t) + a_1(t)u^0 + a_2(t)(u^0)^2
\nonumber \\
\dot u^1 &= a_1(t) + 2a_2(t)u^0
\label{eq:mi-patin}
\\
\dot u^2 &= a_2(t)e^{u^1},
\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ to be solved under the initial conditions $u^0(t_0)=u^1(t_0)=
u^2(t_0)=0$. With the chosen map $f$, the first equation of this system is the same Riccati equation we started with. This we contrived to make the point again that *one* particular solution needs to be known, for the general solution to be obtainable by quadratures. The explicit form of the Darboux derivative $A^f_u$ in our example is $$(u^0,u^1,u^2; v^0,v^1,v^2) \mapsto
\sum_{k=0}^2\operatorname{Ad}_{\prod_{i=0}^{k-1}\exp(u^iL'_i)}v^kL'_k.$$ The inversion of this map was just performed, with result the field corresponding to the system , to wit, $$\bigl(a_0(t) + a_1(t)u^0 + a_2(t)(u^0)^2\bigr){\partial}_0 + \bigl(a_1(t)
+ 2a_2(t)u^0\bigr){\partial}_1 + a_2(t)e^{u^1}{\partial}_2,$$ which is our . Once the latter equation is solved, the rest is obvious: as repeatedly said, one just uses the map $\Phi\circ f$, to go back to $M$.
The perceptive reader would ask at this point: what about transferring the convolution algebra in Section 4 to the tangent algebra, too? We know nowadays that for conjugation invariant distributions this can be done [@Doomuch].
Further work on connections *à la* Lie–Rinehart in the respect of Lie–Scheffers systems is in progress [@NowHector].
Faà di Bruno Hopf algebra and the Lie–Engel theorem
===================================================
Due to its fundamental nature, the Hopf algebra we conjure next is ubiquitous. Let $\operatorname{Diff}^+_0({\mathbb{R}})$ be the group of orientation-preserving formal diffeomorphisms of ${\mathbb{R}}$ (similarly for ${\mathbb{C}}$) leaving 0 fixed. We think of them as exponential power series: $$f(t) = \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{f_n}{n!}
\,t^n {\quad\mbox{with}\quad} f_1 > 0. \label{eq:carpe-diem}$$ On $\operatorname{Diff}^+_0({\mathbb{R}})$ we consider the coordinate functions $$a_n(f) := f_n = f^{(n)}(0), \quad n \geq 1.$$ Now, $$h(t) = \sum_{k=1}^\infty\frac{f_k}{k!}\biggl(\sum_{l=1}^\infty
\frac{g_l}{l!}\,t^l\biggr)^k,$$ where $h$ is the composition $f\circ g$ of two such diffeomorphisms. Therefore, from Cauchy’s product formula, the $n$th coefficient $h_n
=a_n(h)$ is $$h_n = \sum_{k=1}^n \frac{f_k}{k!}\,\sum_{l_i\geq 1,\,l_1+\cdots+l_k=n}
\frac{n!\,g_{l_1}\cdots g_{l_k}}{l_1!\cdots l_k!}.$$ To rewrite $h_n$ in a compact form, it is convenient to introduce the notation $$\binom{n}{{\lambda};k} := \frac{n!}{{\lambda}_1!{\lambda}_2!\dots{\lambda}_n!
(1!)^{{\lambda}_1}(2!)^{{\lambda}_2}\dots(n!)^{{\lambda}_n}}.$$ Then, taking in consideration that the sum $l_1+\cdots+l_k=n$ can be rewritten as $${\lambda}_1 + 2{\lambda}_2 + \cdots + n{\lambda}_n = n, {\quad\mbox{where}\quad} {\lambda}_1 + \cdots +
{\lambda}_n = k$$ if there are ${\lambda}_1$ copies of $1,\,{\lambda}_2$ copies of $2$, and so on, among the $l_i$; and that the number of contributions from $g$ of this type is precisely the multinomial coefficient $$\binom{k}{{\lambda}_1 \cdots {\lambda}_n} = \frac{k!}{{\lambda}_1!\cdots{\lambda}_n!},$$ it follows: $$h_n = \sum_{k=1}^n f_k \sum_{{\lambda}\vdash n,|{\lambda}|=k}\binom{n}{{\lambda};k}\,
g_1^{{\lambda}_1} \dots g_n^{{\lambda}_n} =: \sum_{k=1}^n f_k \,
B_{n,k}(g_1,\dots,g_{n+1-k}).
\label{eq:wonder-series}$$ We have used notations of the theory of partitions of integers. The $B_{n,k}$ are called the (partial, exponential) *Bell polynomials*, often defined via the expansion $$\exp\biggl(u\sum_{m\geq 1}g_m\frac{t^m}{m!}\biggr) = 1 + \sum_{n\geq1}
\frac{t^n}{n!}\biggl[\sum_{k=1}^n u^k B_{n,k}(g_1,\dots,g_{n+1-k})
\biggr],$$ which is a particular case of . Each $B_{n,k}$ is a homogeneous polynomial of degree $k$.
According to , a coproduct on ${\mathcal{R}}(\operatorname{Diff}^+_0({\mathbb{R}}))$, which we realize as the polynomial algebra ${\mathbb{R}}[a_1,a_2,\dots]$, is given by ${\Delta}a_n(g,f)=a_n(f\circ g)$. This entails $${\Delta}a_n = \sum_{k=1}^n \sum_{{\lambda}\vdash n,|{\lambda}|=k}\binom{n}{{\lambda};k}
a_1^{{\lambda}_1} a_2^{{\lambda}_2}\dots a_n^{{\lambda}_n} {\otimes}a_k.
\label{eq:quam-minimum}$$ The flip of $f$ and $g$ is done to keep the tradition of writing the linear part on the right of the tensor product; this amounts to taking the opposite coalgebra structure. With we have a bialgebra structure. In a Hopf algebra grouplike elements are invertible: $g^{-1}=Sg$. Since $a_1$ is grouplike, to have an antipode one must either adjoin an inverse $a_1^{-1}$, or put $a_1 = 1$. The latter is equivalent to work with the subgroup $\operatorname{Diff}^+_{0,1}({\mathbb{R}})$ of $\operatorname{Diff}^+_0({\mathbb{R}})$, of diffeomorphisms tangent to the identity at $0$, that is, to consider power series such that $f_0=0$ and $f_1=1$. The coproduct formula is accordingly simplified to: $${\Delta}a_n = \sum_{k=1}^n\sum_{{\lambda}\vdash n,|{\lambda}|=k}\binom{n}{{\lambda};k}
a_2^{{\lambda}_2}a_3^{{\lambda}_3}\cdots {\otimes}a_k = \sum_{k=1}^n
B_{n,k}(1,\dots,a_{n+1-k}) {\otimes}a_k.$$ The resulting graded connected Hopf algebra ${\mathcal{F}}={\mathcal{R}}^{\rm cop}
(\operatorname{Diff}^+_{0,1}({\mathbb{R}}))$, where the superindex stands for the opposite coalgebra structure, was baptized Faà di Bruno Hopf algebra by Joni and Rota [@JoniR]. The degree is then given by $|a_n|=n-1$.
Several comments are in order. Formula can be directly expressed in terms of partitions of finite sets; consult [@Quaoar] or [@Livingstone Chapter 5]. The happy fact that the algebra of representative functions ${\mathcal{R}}^{\rm
cop}(\operatorname{Diff}^+_{0,1}({\mathbb{R}}))$ is graded is related to the linearity of the product $f\circ g$ in one of the coordinates. This also means that $\operatorname{Diff}^+_{0,1}({\mathbb{R}})$ is the inverse limit of finite-dimensional matrix groups, and that it possesses a (necessarily unique) right invariant connection with vanishing torsion and curvature. Also, although ‘formal’ may sound a bit dismissive, one should remember that, in view of E. Borel’s theorem, expression does represent a smooth function; and that can be used to show without having recourse to complex variables that the composition of analytic functions on appropriate domains is analytic [@Krank].
Let us turn our attention to the dual of the Faà di Bruno Hopf algebra ${\mathcal{F}}$. Since we are dealing with a graded connected Hopf algebra it is natural to consider the *graded dual*, that we denote simply by ${\mathcal{F}}'$; for which ${\mathcal{F}}''={\mathcal{F}}$. (From the discussion in Sections 4 and 5 we know there exist bigger duals, for instance ${\mathcal{F}}'$ does not have grouplike elements apart from its unit $\eta$.) Let $a_n'$ be the linear functionals defined by ${\langlea_n',P\rangle}={\partial}P/{\partial}a_n(0)$, where $P$ is a polynomial in ${\mathbb{R}}[a_2,a_3,\dots]$. In particular the $a_n'$ kill non-trivial products of the $a_q$ generators. Also, taking in consideration that the counit $\eta(P)=P(0)$ of ${\mathcal{F}}$ is the unit in ${\mathcal{F}}'$ $${\langle{\Delta}a_n',P{\otimes}Q\rangle} = {\langlea_n',m(P{\otimes}Q)\rangle} ={\langlea_n',PQ\rangle} =
{\frac{\partial(PQ)}{\partiala_n}}(0) = {\langlea_n'{\otimes}1 + 1 {\otimes}a_n',P{\otimes}Q\rangle},$$ Thus the $a_n'$ are primitive. Using the definition of the Bell polynomials $${\langlea_n'a_m',a_q\rangle} = {\langlea_n'{\otimes}a_m',{\Delta}a_q\rangle} = \begin{cases}
\binom{m+n-1}{n} & \text{if } q = m+n-1 \\ 0 & \text{otherwise}.
\end{cases}$$ On the other hand, note that $${\Delta}(a_q a_r) = a_q a_r {\otimes}1 + 1{\otimes}a_q a_r + a_q {\otimes}a_r +
a_r {\otimes}a_q + R,$$ where $R$ is either vanishing or a sum of terms of the form $b{\otimes}c$ with $b$ or $c$ a monomial in $a_2,a_3,\dots$ of degree greater than $1$. Therefore $${\langlea_n'a_m',a_q a_r\rangle} = {\langlea_n' {\otimes}a_m',{\Delta}(a_q a_r)\rangle}
=\begin{cases}
1 &\text{if } n = q \neq m = r \text{ or } n = r \neq m = q,
\\
2 &\text{if } m = n = q = r,
\\
0 &\text{otherwise}.
\end{cases}$$ Similarly, since all the terms of the coproduct of three or more $a_q$’s are the tensor product of two monomials where at least one of them is of order greater than $1$, it follows that $${\langlea'_n a'_m,a_{q_1}a_{q_2}a_{q_3}\cdots\rangle}=0.$$ Collecting all this together, $$a'_na'_m = \binom{m-1+n}{n}a'_{n+m-1} + \bigl(1 +
{\delta}_{nm}\bigr)(a_na_m)'.$$ In particular, $$[a'_n, a'_m] := a'_na'_m - a'_ma'_n = (m - n)\frac{(n+m-1)!}{n!m!}
\,a_{n+m-1}'.$$ Therefore, taking $b'_n := (n+1)!a'_{n+1}$, we get the simpler looking $$[b'_n, b'_m] = (m-n)\,b'_{n+m}.
\label{eq:credula postero}$$ The Cartier–Milnor–Moore theorem implies that ${\mathcal{F}}'$ is the enveloping algebra of the Lie algebra spanned by the $b'_n$ with commutators . Obviously ${\mathcal{F}}'$ can be realized by the vector fields $Z_n:=x^{n+1}\,{\partial}/{\partial}x$, for $n\ge1$, on the real line [@ConnesMHopf].
Consider the ‘regular representation’ of ${\mathcal{F}}$ given by $\<a\triangleright a', b>:=\<a', ba>$ on ${\mathcal{F}}'$. Since $$\<b\triangleright(a \triangleright a'), c> =\<a\triangleright a', cb>
= \<a', cba> =\<ba\triangleright a', c> {\quad\mbox{and}\quad}
\<1\triangleright a', b> := \<a', b>,$$ we do obtain a left module algebra over ${\mathcal{F}}$. Let now $a$ be a primitive element of ${\mathcal{F}}$; using the Sweedler notation: $$\begin{aligned}
\<a\triangleright b'a', c> &= \<b'a', ca> = \<b'{\otimes}a', {\Delta}(ca)> =
\<b'{\otimes}a', {\Delta}c{\Delta}a>
\\
&= \<b'{\otimes}a', c_{(1)}{\otimes}c_{(2)}(a{\otimes}1 + 1{\otimes}a)>
\\
&= \<a\triangleright b'{\otimes}a'+ b' {\otimes}a\triangleright a', c_{(1)}{\otimes}c_{(2)}>
\\
&= \<(a\triangleright b')a'+ b'(a\triangleright a'),c>,\end{aligned}$$ so $a$ acts as a derivation. In particular if $a\triangleright a'
=a\triangleright b'=0$, then $a\triangleright(a'b')=0$, hence the kernel of the map $a\triangleright\cdot$ is a Lie subalgebra of vector fields, and we conclude that primitive elements of ${\mathcal{F}}$ identify finite-dimensional Lie subalgebras of vector fields. Now, the space $P({\mathcal{F}})$ of primitive elements of ${\mathcal{F}}$ has *dimension two*. Indeed, $P({\mathcal{F}})=\bigl({\mathbb{R}}1\oplus{{\mathcal{F}}'_+}^2\bigr)^\perp$, where ${\mathcal{F}}'_+:=\ker\eta$ is the augmentation ideal of ${\mathcal{F}}'$. By there is a dual basis of ${\mathcal{F}}'$ made of products, except for its first two elements. Hence $\dim P({\mathcal{F}}) = 2$. A basis of $P({\mathcal{F}})$ is given by $\{a_2,a_3-\frac{3}{2}a_2^2\}$. This yields the equations $y''=0$ and $y'y'''-3(y'')^2/2=0$, respectively solved by dilations and by the action of $SL(2;{\mathbb{R}})$ we know; translations do not show up because we made $a_1=1$.
The previous argument, together with the part of classical one [@LieAngel] —more recently rehearsed in [@DieudonneIV Section XIX] or in [@Luther]— to the effect that infinitesimally transitive actions on the line must correspond to Lie algebras of vector fields of dimension at most three, shows that Riccati’s is the only nonlinear Lie–Scheffers differential equation on the real (or complex) line. Whether or not it is simpler to think in Hopf algebraic terms seems largely a matter of taste. We do contend that the Beatus Faà di Bruno algebra is too fundamental an object to ignore.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
---------------
We are very thankful to J. C. Várilly for helpful comments. The first named author acknowledges partial financial support through grants BFM-2003-02532 and DGA-Grupos Consolidados E24/1. KEF greatly acknowledges support from the European Post-Doctoral Institute. HF acknowledges support from the Vicerrectoría de Investigación of the Universidad de Costa Rica. The first and fourth named authors are grateful for discussions with J. Grabowski and G. Marmo, during a visit to Università di Napoli Federico II in November 2005. JMGB moreover acknowledges partial support from CICyT, Spain, through grant FIS2005-02309. KEF, HF and JMGB thank the Departamento de Física Teórica of the Universidad de Zaragoza for its warm hospitality.
[666]{}
S. Lie and G. Scheffers, *Vorlesungen über continuierliche Gruppen mit geometrischen und anderen Anwendungen*, Teubner, Leipzig, 1893.
R. Abraham and J. E. Marsden, *Foundations of Mechanics*, Benjamin, Reading, MA, 1978.
H. Figueroa and J. M. Gracia-Bondía, Rev. Math. Phys. [**17**]{} (2005) 881. G. M. Bergman, Contemp. Math. [**43**]{} (1985) 25. K. C. H. Mackenzie, *General theory of Lie groupoids and Lie algebroids*, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005.
W. Magnus, Commun. Pure Appl. Math. [**7**]{} (1954) 649. F. J. Dyson, Phys. Rev. [**84**]{} (1948) 486. K. T. Chen, Ann. Math. [**65**]{} (1957) 163.
H. Araki, Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. [**6**]{} (1973) 67. H. Omori’s, “Infinite-dimensional Lie groups”, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1997.
J. Huebschmann, J. reine angew. Math. [**408**]{} (1990) 57. J. C. Butcher, [*T*he numerical analysis of ordinary differential equations]{}, Wiley & Sons, Chichester, England, 2003.
J. Nasarre, “Aplicación de métodos algebraicos y geométricos al estudio de la evolución de sistemas dinámicos”, Ph. D. thesis, Zaragoza, 1999.
J. F. Cariñena, J. Grabowski and G. Marmo, *Lie–Scheffers system: a geometric approach*, Bibliopolis, Naples, 2000.
O. Stormark, *Lie’s structural approach to PDE systems*, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000.
J. F. Cariñena and A. Ramos, in *Differential Geometry and its applications*, Charles University, Prague, 2005; pp. 437–452.
J. F. Cariñena, J. Grabowski and G. Marmo, “Superposition rules, Lie theorem and partial differential equations”, arXiv: math-ph/0610013.
H. Figueroa, J. M. Gracia-Bondía and J. C. Várilly, “Faà di Bruno Hopf algebras”, in the *Encyclopaedia of Mathematics*, M. Hazewinkel (ed.), Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2007. arXiv: math.CO/0508337.
D. Kastler and R. Stora, J. Geom. Phys. [**2**]{}(3) (1985) 1. J. Huebschmann, Contemporary Mathematics [**227**]{} (1999) 145. J. Grabowski, Rep. Math. Phys. [**52**]{} (2003) 445. P. Aschieri, “Noncommutative symmetries and gravity”, arXiv: hep-th/0608172.
G. Rinehart, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. [**108**]{} (1963) 195.
M. Kawski and H. J. Sussmann, in *Operators, systems, and linear algebra*, Teubner, Stuttgart, 1997; pp. 111–128.
A. A. Agrachev and Y. L. Sachkov, *Control theory from the geometric viewpoint*, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2004.
M. Hazewinkel, CWI Quarterly [**4**]{} (1991) 3. J. Dieudonné, *Éléments d’Analyse III*, Gauthier-Villars, Paris, 1970.
J. Dieudonné, *Éléments d’Analyse IV*, Gauthier-Villars, Paris, 1971.
K. Ebrahimi-Fard, J. M. Gracia-Bondía and F. Patras, “A Lie theoretic approach to renormalization”, arXiv: hep-th/0609035.
A. Connes and M. Marcolli, “From physics to number theory via noncommutative geometry II”, to appear in *Frontiers in Number Theory, Physics and Geometry*. arXiv: hep-th/0411114.
G. Warner, *Harmonic Analysis on semi-simple Lie Groups I*, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1972.
M. E. Taylor, *Noncommutative Harmonic Analysis*, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1986.
P. Cartier, A primer on Hopf algebras, IHES preprint, August 2006.
C. Reutenauer, *Free Lie Algebras*, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1993.
D. Wigner, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. (1989) 639. F. Patras and C. Reutenauer, Adv. Appl. Math. [**28**]{} (2002) 560. R. Ree, Ann. Math. [**68**]{} (1958) 210.
F. Patras, Ann. Inst. Fourier Grenoble [**43**]{} (1993) 1067. F. Patras, J. Algebra [**170**]{} (1994) 547.
M. Gerstenhaber and S. D. Schack, J. Pure Appl. Algebra [**48**]{} (1987) 229. J. L. Loday, Invent. Math. [**96**]{} (1989) 205. M. Gerstenhaber and S. D. Schack, J. Pure Appl. Algebra [**70**]{} (1991) 263. R. S. Strichartz, J. Func. Anal. [**72**]{} (1987) 320. B. Mielnik and J. Plebański, Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré A [**XII**]{} (1970) 215. R. Suárez and L. Saénz, J. Math. Phys. [**42**]{} (2001) 4582. V. S. Varadarajan, *Lie groups, Lie algebras and their representations*, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1974.
C. Reutenauer, Springer Lecture Notes in Mathematics [**1234**]{} (1986) 267. J. L. Loday, Expos. Math. [**12**]{} (1994) 165.
E. R. Kolchin, *Differential Algebras and Algebraic Groups*, Academic Press, New York, 1973.
G.-C. Rota, DMV Mittellungen, Heft [**2**]{} (1998) 45. A. Joseph, *Quantum groups and their primitive ideals*, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1995.
W. Zudilin, “One parameter models of Hopf algebras associated with multiple zeta values”, preprint, 2001. M. A. Semenov-Tian-Shansky, Funct. Anal. Appl. [**17**]{} (1983) 254.
J.-L. Loday, Springer Lecture Notes in Mathematics [**1763**]{} (2001) 7.
K. Ebrahimi-Fard, Lett. Math. Phys. [**61**]{} (2002) 139.
K. Ebrahimi-Fard and Ph. Leroux, “Generalized shuffles related to Nijenhuis and $TD$-algebras”, arXiv: math.RA/0606164.
F. Spitzer, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. [**82**]{} (1956) 323. G. Baxter, Pacific J. Math. [**10**]{} (1960) 731. G.-C. Rota, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. [**75**]{} (1969) 325; *ibidem* 330. G.-C. Rota, in *Gian-Carlo Rota on Combinatorics, Introductory papers and commentaries*, J. P. S. Kung (ed.), Birkhäuser, Boston, 1995.
G.-C. Rota and D. A. Smith, Istituto Nazionale di Alta Matematica, [**IX**]{} (1972) 179. J. F. C. Kingman, J. London Math. Soc. [**37**]{} (1962) 309. P. Cartier, Adv. Math. [**9**]{} (1972) 253. K. Ebrahimi-Fard and L. Guo, “Rota–Baxter Algebras in renormalization of perturbative quantum field theory”, to appear in Fields Institute Communications. arXiv: hep-th/0604116.
D. Kreimer, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. [**3**]{} (2000) 627. A. Connes and D. Kreimer, Commun. Math. Phys. [**210**]{} (2000) 249. K. Ebrahimi-Fard and D. Kreimer, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. [**38**]{} (2005) R385.
F. V. Atkinson, J. Math. Anal. and Applications [**7**]{} (1963) 1. K. Ebrahimi-Fard, L. Guo and D. Manchon, Commun. Math. Phys. [**267**]{} (2006) 821.
K. Ebrahimi-Fard, L. Guo and D. Kreimer, J. Phys. A [**37**]{} (2004) 11037. K. Ebrahimi-Fard, L. Guo and D. Kreimer, Ann. Henri Poincar[é]{} [**6**]{} (2005) 369. K. Ebrahimi-Fard, J. M. Gracia-Bondía and F. Patras, forthcoming.
C. S. Lam, J. Math. Phys. [**39**]{} (1998) 5543.
W. Rossmann, *Lie groups. An introduction through linear groups*, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2002.
E. C. G. Sudarshan and N. Mukunda, *Classical dynamics: a modern perspective*, Wiley & Sons, New York, 1974.
A. Iserles and S. P. Norsett, Philos Trans. R. Soc. London A [**357**]{} (1999) 983. A. Iserles, Notices of the AMS [**49**]{} (2002) 430. R. M. Wilcox, J. Math. Phys. [**8**]{} (1967) 962. W. R. Salzman, J. Chem. Phys. [**82**]{} (1985) 822.
S. Shnider and S. Sternberg, *Quantum groups. From coalgebras to Drinfel’d algebras. A guided tour*, Graduate Texts in Mathematical Physics, International Press, Cambridge, MA, 1993.
S. Klarsfeld and J. A. Oteo, Phys. Rev. A [**39**]{} (1989) 3270.
C. Moan and J. Niesen, “Convergence of the Magnus series”, arXiv: math.CA/0609198.
J. A. Oteo and J. Ros, J. Math. Phys. [**41**]{} (2000) 3268.
K. Ebrahimi-Fard and L. Guo, J. Alg. Comb. [**4**]{} (2006) 83.
F. Fer, Bull. Classe des Sci. Acad. Roy. Belg. [**44**]{} (1958) 818. H. Z. Munthe-Kaas and W. M. Wright, On the Hopf algebraic structure of Lie group integrators, arXiv: math.AC/0603023.
D. Harrivel, Butcher series and control theory, arXiv: math.0C/0603133.
P. W. Michor, Isometric actions of Lie groups and invariants, preprint, Wien, 1997.
A. A. Kirillov, *Lectures on the orbit method*, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2004.
M. Asorey, J.F. Cariñena and M.A. del Olmo, J. Phys. A [**16**]{} (1983) 1603.
R. L. Bryant, in *Geometry and quantum field theory*, D. S. Freed and K. K. Uhlenbeck (eds.), American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1995; pp. 1–181.
B. Kostant and P. W. Michor, in *The orbit method in geometry and physics: in honor of A. A. Kirillov*, C. Duval, L. Guieu and V. Ovsienko (eds.), Birkhäuser, Basel, 2003; pp. 259–296.
K. Engø, BIT [**40**]{} (2000) 41.
J. Wei and E. Norman, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. [**15**]{} (1964) 327. A. H. Dooley and N. J. Wildberger, Can. Math. Bull. [**27**]{} (1993) 25. J. F. Cariñena and H. Figueroa, forthcoming.
S. A. Joni and G.-C. Rota, Contemp. Math. [**6**]{} (1982) 1.
R. P. Stanley, *Enumerative combinatorics*, vol. 2, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999.
S. G. Krantz and H. R. Parks, *A Primer of Real Analytic Functions*, Birkhäuser, Boston, 2002.
A. Connes and H. Moscovici, Commun. Math. Phys. [**198**]{} (1998) 198. S. Lie and F. Engel, *Theorie der Transformationsgruppen III*, Teubner, Leipzig, 1893.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'While a number of weak consistency mechanisms have been developed in recent years to improve performance and ensure availability in distributed, replicated systems, ensuring correctness of transactional applications running on top of such systems remains a difficult and important problem. Serializability is a well-understood correctness criterion for transactional programs; understanding whether applications are serializable when executed in a weakly-consistent environment, however remains a challenging exercise. In this work, we combine the dependency graph-based characterization of serializability and the framework of abstract executions to develop a fully automated approach for statically finding bounded serializability violations under *any* weak consistency model. We reduce the problem of serializability to satisfiability of a formula in First-Order Logic, which allows us to harness the power of existing SMT solvers. We provide rules to automatically construct the FOL encoding from programs written in SQL (allowing loops and conditionals) and the consistency specification written as a formula in FOL. In addition to detecting bounded serializability violations, we also provide two orthogonal schemes to reason about unbounded executions by providing sufficient conditions (in the form of FOL formulae) whose satisfiability would imply the absence of anomalies in any arbitrary execution. We have applied the proposed technique on TPC-C, a real world database program with complex application logic, and were able to discover anomalies under Parallel Snapshot Isolation, and verify serializability for unbounded executions under Snapshot Isolation, two consistency mechanisms substantially weaker than serializability.'
author:
- Kartik Nagar and Suresh Jagannathan
bibliography:
- 'db.bib'
title: 'Automated Detection of Serializability Violations under Weak Consistency (Extended Version)'
---
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
We investigate the computational complexity of the empire colouring problem (as defined by Percy Heawood in 1890) for maps containing empires formed by exactly $r > 1$ countries each. We prove that the problem can be solved in polynomial time using $s$ colours on maps whose underlying adjacency graph has no induced subgraph of average degree larger than $s/r$. However, if $s
\geq 3$, the problem is NP-hard even if the graph is a forest of paths of arbitrary lengths (for any $r \geq 2$, provided $s < 2r - \sqrt{2r + \frac{1}{4}}+ \frac{3}{2}$). Furthermore we obtain a complete characterization of the problem’s complexity for the case when the input graph is a tree, whereas our result for arbitrary planar graphs fall just short of a similar dichotomy. Specifically, we prove that the empire colouring problem is NP-hard for trees, for any $r \geq 2$, if $3 \leq s \leq 2r-1$ (and polynomial time solvable otherwise). For arbitrary planar graphs we prove NP-hardness if $s<7$ for $r=2$, and $s < 6r-3$, for $r
\geq 3$. The result for planar graphs also proves the NP-hardness of colouring with less than 7 colours graphs of thickness two and less than $6r-3$ colours graphs of thickness $r \geq 3$.
author:
- |
Andrew R. A. McGrae $\quad$ Michele Zito\
Department of Computer Science,\
University of Liverpool,\
Liverpool, L69 3BX, UK\
e-mail: `\{A.McGrae, M.Zito\}@liverpool.ac.uk`
bibliography:
- '../../../../../lib/bib/references.bib'
title: 'The Complexity of the Empire Colouring Problem[^1]'
---
Introduction
============
Let $r$ and $s$ be fixed positive integers. Assume that a partition is defined on the $n$ vertices of a planar graph $G$. In this paper we usually call the blocks of such partition the [*empires*]{} of $G$ and we assume that each block contains exactly $r$ vertices. The graph $G$ along with a partition of this type will be referred to as an [*$r$-empire graph*]{}. The [*$(s,r)$-colouring*]{} problem ($s$-COL$_r$) asks for a colouring of the vertices of $G$ that uses at most $s$ colours, never assigns the same colour to adjacent vertices in different empires and, conversely, assigns the same colour to all vertices in the same empire, disregarding adjacencies.
For $r=1$, the problem coincides with the classical vertex colouring problem on planar graphs. The generalization for $r \geq 2$ was defined by Heawood [@heawood90:_map] in the same paper in which he refuted a previous “proof” of the famous Four Colour Theorem. It has since been shown that $6r$ colours are always sufficient and in some cases necessary to solve this problem [@jackson84:_solut].
In [@mcgrae10:_colour_empir_random_trees] (also see [@mcgrae08:_colour_random_empir_trees]), we proved that $2r$ colours suffice and are sometimes needed to colour a collection of empires defined in an arbitrary tree. We also looked at the proportion of $(s,r)$-colourable trees on $n$ vertices. We showed that, as $n$ tends to infinity, for each $r$ there exists a value $s_r$ such that almost no tree can be coloured with at most $s_r$ colours and, conversely, for $s$ sufficiently larger than $s_r$, $s$ colours are sufficient with (at least) constant positive probability. Later on [@cooper09:_martin_trees_and_empir_chrom] we improved on this showing that, as $n$ tends to infinity, the minimum value $s$ for which a random tree is $(s,r)$-colourable is concentrated in a very short interval with high probability.
Although our investigation considerably expanded the state of knowledge on $s$-COL$_r$, it failed to shed light on its computational complexity. Heawood [@heawood90:_map] was the first to argue that there is a simple algorithm that can find a $(6r,r)$-colouring in any planar graph $G$ in polynomial time. The same process uses at most $2r$ colours if $G$ is a tree. But what if we only have $r$ available colours? How difficult is it to decide whether $G$ has an $(r,r)$-colouring? In this paper we show that $s$-COL$_r$ can be solved in polynomial time on planar graphs containing no induced subgraph of average degree greater than $s/r$. This implies that, for instance, $(2r-1)$-COL$_r$ (resp. $(6r-1)$-COL$_r$) can be solved in polynomial time on forests consisting of paths of length at most $2r-1$ (resp. planar graphs with components of size at most $12r$). Unfortunately, the outcome of our investigation seems to indicate that such algorithmic results cannot be extended much further. If $r \geq 2$ and $s \geq 3$, we prove that $s$-COL$_r$ NP-hard on linear forests if $s < 2r - \sqrt{2r + \frac{1}{4}}+ \frac{3}{2}$. Furthermore, the hardness extends to $s < 6r-3$ (resp. $s< 7$) when $r \geq 3$ (resp. for $r=2$) on arbitrary planar graphs. Finally, for trees, our argument entails a nice dichotomy: $s$-COL$_r$ is NP-hard for any fixed $r \geq 2$, if $s \in \{3, \ldots, 2r-1\}$ and solvable in polynomial time for any other positive value of $s$.
The hardness proofs mentioned above hinge on the fact that the connectivity within empires has no effect on the graph colourability. Essentially, to find an $(s,r)$-colouring in a planar graph $G$, it suffices to be able to colour with at most $s$ distinct colours (in such a way that no two distinct vertices connected by an edge receive the same colour) its [*reduced graph*]{} $R_r(G)$. This is a (multi)graph obtained by contracting each empire to a distinct pseudo-vertex and adding an edge between a pair of pseudo-vertices $u$ and $v$ for each edge connecting two vertices in the original graph, one belonging to the empire represented by $u$, the other one to that represented by $v$. The algorithmic results are based on the use of simple minimum degree greedy colouring strategies [@heawood90:_map] or more refined heuristics providing algorithmic proofs (see [@G Theorem 7.9] or [@lovasz93:_combin_probl_exerc Exercises 9.12, 9.13]) of the well-known Brooks theorem [@B41] on such reduced graphs.
The reader at this point may question the reasons for studying this type of colourings. Our main interest in the problem comes from its relationship with other important colouring problems. Each instance of $s$-COL$_r$ can be translated to an instance of the classical colouring problem, but it is not clear to what extent the two problems are equivalent. The empire colouring problem is also related to the problem of colouring graphs of given thickness (a graph has [*thickness*]{} $t$ [@hutchinson93:_color; @mutzel98; @maekinen09], if $t$ is the minimum integer such that its edges can be partitioned into at least $t$ planar graphs). Bipartite graphs can have high thickness [@bhm64] but only need two colours, and on the other hand a graph of thickness $t$ may have chromatic number as larger as $6t$. Theorem \[t2:planar\] in this paper implies that deciding whether a graph of thickness $t \geq 3$ can be coloured with $s < 6t-3$ colours is NP-hard.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section \[easy\] we present our positive results concerning sparse planar graphs. We then move on (Section \[key-red\]) to describe a new reduction from the well-known satisfiability problem to the problem of colouring a particular type of graph. Hardness results for the colourability of these graphs will be instrumental to our main results. The next Section is devoted to the definition and analysis of a number of gadgets that will be used in the subsequent reductions. Section \[paths\] deals with the hardness result for forests of paths. The last two sections deal with the hardness results for trees and arbitrary planar graphs.
Let $k$ and $s$ be positive integers greater than two. In what follows $k$-SAT (resp. $s$-COL) denotes the well known [@GJ79; @K72] NP-complete problem of checking the satisfiability of a $k$-CNF boolean formula (resp. deciding whether the vertices of a graph $G$ can be coloured using at most $s$ distinct colours in such a way that no edge of $G$ is monochromatic). Also, if $\Pi$ is a decision problem and $\cal
I$ is a particular set of instances for it, then $\Pi({\cal I})$ will denote the restriction of $\Pi$ to instances belonging to $\cal I$. If $\Pi_1$ and $\Pi_2$ are decision problems, then $\Pi_1 \leq_p \Pi_2$ will denote the fact that $\Pi_1$ is polynomial-time reducible to $\Pi_2$. Unless otherwise stated we follow [@diestel99:_graph_theor] for all our graph-theoretic notations.
Algorithms {#easy}
==========
The main outcome of our work is that the empire colouring problem is much harder than the problem of colouring planar graphs in the classical sense. However there are cases where things are easy. Let $\sigma$ be an arbitrary positive real number. In the following result SPARSE$(\sigma)$ denotes the class of planar graphs $G$ containing no induced subgraph of average degree larger than $\sigma$.
\[positive\] Let $r$ be an arbitrary positive integer and $\sigma$ be a positive real number such that $r
\sigma$ is a whole number. The decision problem [ $r \sigma$-COL$_r$(SPARSE$(\sigma)$)]{} can be solved in polynomial time.
[**Proof.**]{} Let $r$ and $\sigma$ be two positive numbers satisfying the assumptions above, and assume that $G \in$ SPARSE$(\sigma)$, and its vertex set is partitioned into empires of size $r$.
If $R_r(G)$ contains a copy of $K_{r\sigma+1}$ then there can be no $(r\sigma,r)$-colouring of $G$. We now argue that if $R_r(G)$ does not contain a copy of $K_{r\sigma+1}$ then it is $r \sigma$-colourable (and therefore $G$ admits an $(r \sigma,r)$-colouring).
Let $S$ be a connected component of $R_r(G)$. In what follows we denote by $G^S$ the subgraph of $G$ such that $R_r(G^S) \equiv S$. Because all edges of $S$ are edges in $G^S$, the average degree of this graph satisfies $$|E(S)| = |E(G^S)| = \frac{{d}(G^S) \cdot |V(G^S)|}{2}.$$ From this, using the fact that $|V(S)| = |V(G^S)|/r$ and the definition of SPARSE$(\sigma)$, we have $$|E(S)| \leq \frac{r\sigma}{2} \cdot |V(S)|.$$ This implies that the average degree of $S$ is at most $r \sigma$. It follows that $S$ is either a regular graph of degree $r \sigma$ or it must contain at least a vertex of degree less than $r \sigma$. In the former case $S$ can be coloured with $r \sigma$ colours using, say, the algorithm in the proof of Brooks’ Theorem described in [@G]. If $S$ contains a vertex of degree less than $r \sigma$ we argue that, in fact, the assumptions about the average degree of all subgraphs of $G$ imply that any induced subgraph of $S$ is either $r \sigma$-regular or, in turn, contains a vertex of degree at most $r \sigma-1$. Assume that some induced subgraph of $S$, $S'$ is not $r\sigma$-regular and its minimum degree is at least $r \sigma$. This implies that in particular ${d}(S') \geq r \sigma$. But, by the assumptions on $G$ the average degree of $S'$ cannot exceed $r \sigma$. Therefore ${d}(S') = r \sigma$ and this implies $S'$ must contain a vertex of degree less than $r \sigma$.
The result above has a number of interesting consequences. Let $k$ be a positive integer. Any induced subgraph on $n$ vertices of a forest of paths of length at most $k$ cannot span more than $k n/(k+1)$ edges. Hence Theorem \[positive\] implies, for instance, that $\left\lceil\frac{2kr}{k+1}\right\rceil$-COL$_r$ can be decided in polynomial time for forests of paths of length at most $k$. Similarly $(6r-1)$-COL$_r$ can be decided in polynomial time for graphs $G$ formed by arbitrary planar components of size at most $12r$.
Theorem \[positive\] also implies that the minimum $s$ for which $G$ admits an $(s,r)$-colouring can be determined in polynomial time for any $G \in$ SPARSE$(\sigma)$, with $r \sigma \leq 3$.
A Useful Reduction {#key-red}
==================
Let $s$ and $k$ be positive integers with $s > \max(2,k)$. An $(s,k)$-[*formula graph*]{} is an undirected graph $\Phi$ such that $V(\Phi) = {\cal T} \cup {\cal C} \cup {\cal A}$ where ${\cal T} = \{T,F,X^1, \ldots,
X^{s-2}\}$, ${\cal C}$ contains $m$ groups of vertices $\{c^{1,1}, \ldots, c^{1,s-1}\}$, $\{c^{2,1}, \ldots
c^{2,s-1}\}, \ldots, \{c^{m,1}, \ldots, c^{m,s-1}\}$ and ${\cal A}$ is a set of $2n$ vertices paired up in some recognizable way. In particular, in what follows we will denote the elements of ${\cal A}$ by $a_1,\ldots, a_n,\overline{a_1}, \ldots,
\overline{a_n}$, and we will say that for each $i \in \{1, \ldots,
n\}$, $a_i$ and $\overline{a_i}$ are a [*pair of complementary vertices*]{}. Set ${\cal T}$ spans a complete graph; for each pair of complementary vertices $a$ and $\overline{a}$, $\{a,\overline{a},X^j\}$ spans a complete graph for each $j \in \{1, \ldots, s-2\}$; for each $i \in \{1, \ldots, m\}$, $\{T, c^{i,1}, \ldots, c^{i,s-1}\}$ spans a complete graph and if $j \in \{1, \ldots, k\}$ then there is a single edge connecting $c^{i,j}$ to some vertex in ${\cal
A}$, else if $j \geq k+1$ then $\{c^{i,j}, F\} \in
E(\Phi)$. Figure \[f-g\] gives a simple example of a $(5,3)$-formula graph.
![\[f-g\]A small formula graph](fg-5-3){width="6cm"}
Let FG$(s,k)$ denote the class of all $(s,k)$-formula graphs. We will now describe a reduction from $k$-SAT to the problem of colouring using at most $s$ distinct colours the vertices of a given $(s,k)$-formula graph. The reduction shows the NP-hardness of $s$-COL(FG$(s,k)$) for any $k \geq 3$ and $s > k$. This in turn will be used repeatedly to prove our hardness results on $s$-COL$_r$.
\[fg\] Let $s$ be an integer with $s \geq 3$. Then [$k$-SAT $\leq_p s$-COL(FG$(s,k)$)]{} for any positive integer $k < s$.
[**Proof.**]{} Given a $k$-CNF formula $\phi \equiv C_1 \wedge \ldots \wedge
C_m$ where $C_i$ is the disjunction of $k$ literals ${\sf c}^{i,1},
\ldots, {\sf c}^{i,k}$ for each $i \in \{1, \ldots, m\}$, we devise an $(s,k)$-formula graph $\Phi$ that admits an $s$-colouring if and only if $\phi$ is satisfiable. The graph $\Phi$ will consist of one [*truth gadget*]{}, one [*variable gadget*]{} for each variable in $\phi$, and one [*clause gadget*]{} for each clause in $\phi$.
The truth gadget is a complete graph on $s$ vertices labelled $T$, $F$, and $X^1, \ldots, X^{s-2}$. Note that every vertex in this gadget must be given a different colour in any $s$-colouring. Hence w.l.o.g. we call these colours “TRUE", “FALSE", “OTHER$^1$", $\ldots$, “OTHER$^{s-2}$" respectively. For each variable $\sf a$ of $\phi$ the variable gadget consists of two complementary vertices labelled $a$, and $\overline{a}$, connected by an edge and also adjacent to $X^1, \ldots, X^{s-2}$. There are therefore only two ways to colour $a$ and $\overline{a}$: either $a$ is TRUE and $\overline{a}$ is FALSE or $a$ is FALSE and $\overline{a}$ is TRUE. Thus the two colourings of $a$ and $\overline{a}$ encode the two truth-assignments of the variable ${\sf a}$. Each clause ${\sf c}^{i,1} \lor \ldots \lor {\sf c}^{i,k}$ will be represented by $s+k+1$ vertices of $\Phi$. Of these, $k$ will correspond to the clause literals and will be labelled $c^{i,1}, \ldots, c^{i,k}$, $s-1-k$ will be labelled $c^{i,k+1}, \ldots, c^{i,s-1}$, and the remaining $k + 2$ will be $k$ vertices from variable gadgets and the vertices $T$ and $F$ from the truth gadget. Vertices $T, c^{i,1}, \ldots, c^{i,s-1}$ form a clique and, furthermore, for each $j \in \{1, \ldots, k\}$, the vertex $c^{i,j}$ is connected to the corresponding literal in a variable gadget. For $k\leq s-2$ vertices $c^{i,j}$, for $j \in \{k+1, \ldots,
s-1\}$, are adjacent to $F$. Note that, in any colouring of a clause gadget, vertices $c^{i,j}$, for $j \leq k$, cannot have the same colour of vertex $T$, and vertices $c^{i,j}$ for $j \geq k$ cannot be coloured like $F$ either. The reader can readily verify that $\Phi \in $FG$(s,k)$. The graph in Figure \[f-g\] is the $(5,3)$-formula graph corresponding to the formula $\phi$ consisting of the single clause ${\sf a}_1 \lor {\sf a}_2 \lor
\overline{{\sf a}_3}$.
If $\phi$ is satisfiable, the elements of ${\cal A}$ in $\Phi$ can be assigned a colour in $\{$TRUE, FALSE$\}$ so that, for each $i \in \{1, \ldots, m\}$ at least one of the $c^{i,j}$ (say for $j=j^*$) is adjacent to some literal coloured TRUE. This implies that $c^{i,j^*}$ can be coloured FALSE, while all other $c^{i,j}$ for $j \in \{1, \ldots, s-1\} \setminus \{j^*\}$ can be assigned a distinct colour in $\{$OTHER$^1,$ OTHER$^2, \ldots,$ OTHER$^{s-2}\}$. Conversely if there is no way to colour ${\cal A}$ so that for each $i \in \{1, \ldots, m\}$ at least one of the $c^{i,j}$ is adjacent to some literal coloured TRUE, then the clause gadget will need $s+1$ colours as the $s-1$ vertices $c^{i,j}$ only have $s-2$ colours available (as TRUE and FALSE are used up by $T$, $F$, and the corresponding literals). From this we can see that $\Phi$ admits an $s$-colouring if and only if there is some way to assign the variables of $\phi$ as TRUE or FALSE in such a way that every clause contains at least one TRUE literal.
Gadgetry {#G}
========
Before moving to our hardness results it is convenient to introduce a number of gadgets.
#### Clique Gadgets.
Let $r$ and $s$ be positive integers with $s < 2r$. In what follows the [*clique gadget*]{} $B_{r,s}$ is an $r$-empire graph satisfying the following properties.
1. Its graph has $r(s+1)$ vertices partitioned into $s+1$ empires of size $r$.
2. The graph of $B_{r,s}$ is a forest consisting of $r$ paths.
3. No path in the graph of $B_{r,s}$ contains two vertices from the same empire.
4. The reduced graph of $B_{r,s}$ contains a copy of $K_{s+1}$. Hence $B_{r,s}$ admits an $(s+1,r)$-colouring and cannot be coloured with fewer colours.
![\[FrsPic\] Top row: Decomposition of $K_9$ into Hamiltonian cycles. Middle row: $B_{4,7}$. Bottom row: $B_{4,5}$.](K9walecki)
\[B\] Let $r$ and $s$ be positive integers with $s < 2r$. Then there exists an $r$-empire graph $B_{r,s}$ satisfying properties [**B0**]{}, [**B1**]{}, [**B2**]{}, [**B3**]{}. Furthermore $B_{r,s}$ can be constructed in time polynomial in $r$.
[**Proof.**]{} For any positive integer $r$, the clique $K_{2r+1}$ can be decomposed into $r$ edge-disjoint Hamiltonian cycles. The result, reported in [@bryant07:_cycle p. 71], is attributed to Walecki (see [@lucas92:_recreat_mathem_vol]). A dummy $\infty$ is added to the vertex set of $K_{2r+1}$. The sequence $$0, 1, 2r-1,2,2r-2,3, 2r-3, \ldots, r-1,r+1,r,\infty$$ can be seen as a Hamiltonian cycle of $K_{2r+1}$ after label “$\infty$” is identified with vertex $2r$. The remaining cycles are obtained as cyclic rotations of the first one.
Given one such decomposition (see top row in Figure \[FrsPic\]) we define $B_{r,2r-1}$ (see middle part of Figure \[FrsPic\]) by copying cycle $i$ from the decomposition onto vertices $0_i, \ldots, (2r)_i$, and then taking the induced graph formed by deleting the vertex $0_i$ from the cycle on $0_i, \ldots, (2r)_i$. Also, if $r>1$, for any $s \in \{1, \ldots, 2r-2\}$ graph of $B_{r,s}$ is obtained from that of $B_{r,s+1}$, by removing all vertices in the empire labelled ${\bf s+2}$ and adding an edge $\{u,v\}$ whenever $u$ and $v$ are the only two neighbours of $(s+2)_i$.
Our results on trees will also need variants of these gadgets having particular connectivity features. Thus if $r>1$ and ${\bf v} \equiv \{v_1,
\ldots, v_r\}$ is some set of $r$ vertices, the [*connected clique gadget rooted at ${\bf v}$*]{}, $B^+_{r,s}({\bf v})$, is formed from $B_{r,s}$, as defined in Theorem \[B\], by adding
(300,85) (0,70)[(1,0)[75]{}]{} (0,40)[(1,0)[75]{}]{} (0,10)[(1,0)[75]{}]{}
(0,82)[(0,0)\[t\][$1_1$]{}]{} (15,82)[(0,0)\[t\][$5_1$]{}]{} (30,82)[(0,0)\[t\][$2_1$]{}]{} (45,82)[(0,0)\[t\][$4_1$]{}]{} (60,82)[(0,0)\[t\][$3_1$]{}]{} (75,82)[(0,0)\[t\][$6_1$]{}]{}
(0,52)[(0,0)\[t\][$2_2$]{}]{} (15,52)[(0,0)\[t\][$1_2$]{}]{} (30,52)[(0,0)\[t\][$6_2$]{}]{} (45,52)[(0,0)\[t\][$4_2$]{}]{} (60,52)[(0,0)\[t\][$5_2$]{}]{} (75,52)[(0,0)\[t\][$3_2$]{}]{}
(0,22)[(0,0)\[t\][$4_3$]{}]{} (15,22)[(0,0)\[t\][$1_3$]{}]{} (30,22)[(0,0)\[t\][$3_3$]{}]{} (45,22)[(0,0)\[t\][$2_3$]{}]{} (60,22)[(0,0)\[t\][$6_3$]{}]{} (75,22)[(0,0)\[t\][$5_3$]{}]{}
(37,0)[(0,0)\[t\][$B_{3,5}$]{}]{}
(0,70) (15,70) (30,70) (45,70) (60,70) (75,70)
(0,40) (15,40) (30,40) (45,40) (60,40) (75,40)
(0,10) (15,10) (30,10) (45,10) (60,10) (75,10)
(105,70)[(1,0)[75]{}]{} (105,40)[(1,0)[75]{}]{} (105,10)[(1,0)[75]{}]{}
(105,70)[(1,-2)[15]{}]{} (120,40)[(0,-1)[30]{}]{}
(105,82)[(0,0)\[t\][$1_1$]{}]{} (120,82)[(0,0)\[t\][$5_1$]{}]{} (135,82)[(0,0)\[t\][$2_1$]{}]{} (150,82)[(0,0)\[t\][$4_1$]{}]{} (165,82)[(0,0)\[t\][$3_1$]{}]{} (180,82)[(0,0)\[t\][$6_1$]{}]{}
(105,52)[(0,0)\[t\][$2_2$]{}]{} (120,52)[(0,0)\[t\][$1_2$]{}]{} (135,52)[(0,0)\[t\][$6_2$]{}]{} (150,52)[(0,0)\[t\][$4_2$]{}]{} (165,52)[(0,0)\[t\][$5_2$]{}]{} (180,52)[(0,0)\[t\][$3_2$]{}]{}
(104,22)[(0,0)\[t\][$4_3$]{}]{} (115,22)[(0,0)\[t\][$1_3$]{}]{} (135,22)[(0,0)\[t\][$3_3$]{}]{} (150,22)[(0,0)\[t\][$2_3$]{}]{} (165,22)[(0,0)\[t\][$6_3$]{}]{} (180,22)[(0,0)\[t\][$5_3$]{}]{}
(142,0)[(0,0)\[t\][$B^+_{3,5}({\bf 1})$]{}]{}
(105,70) (120,70) (135,70) (150,70) (165,70) (180,70)
(105,40) (120,40) (135,40) (150,40) (165,40) (180,40)
(105,10) (120,10) (135,10) (150,10) (165,10) (180,10)
(230,70)[(1,0)[60]{}]{} (215,40)[(1,0)[75]{}]{} (215,10)[(1,0)[75]{}]{}
(215,82)[(0,0)\[t\][$1_1$]{}]{} (230,82)[(0,0)\[t\][$5_1$]{}]{} (245,82)[(0,0)\[t\][$2_1$]{}]{} (260,82)[(0,0)\[t\][$4_1$]{}]{} (275,82)[(0,0)\[t\][$3_1$]{}]{} (290,82)[(0,0)\[t\][$6_1$]{}]{}
(215,52)[(0,0)\[t\][$2_2$]{}]{} (230,52)[(0,0)\[t\][$1_2$]{}]{} (245,52)[(0,0)\[t\][$6_2$]{}]{} (260,52)[(0,0)\[t\][$4_2$]{}]{} (275,52)[(0,0)\[t\][$5_2$]{}]{} (290,52)[(0,0)\[t\][$3_2$]{}]{}
(215,22)[(0,0)\[t\][$4_3$]{}]{} (230,22)[(0,0)\[t\][$1_3$]{}]{} (245,22)[(0,0)\[t\][$3_3$]{}]{} (260,22)[(0,0)\[t\][$2_3$]{}]{} (275,22)[(0,0)\[t\][$6_3$]{}]{} (290,22)[(0,0)\[t\][$5_3$]{}]{}
(252,0)[(0,0)\[t\][$B^-_{3,5}({\bf 1},{\bf 5})$]{}]{}
(215,70) (230,70) (245,70) (260,70) (275,70) (290,70)
(215,40) (230,40) (245,40) (260,40) (275,40) (290,40)
(215,10) (230,10) (245,10) (260,10) (275,10) (290,10)
edges $\{v_i,
v_{i+1}\}$ for all $i$ such that $1 \leq i \leq r-1$. Note that the graph of such gadget is a tree. Furthermore $B^+_{r,s}({\bf v})$ still satisfies [**B0**]{}, and [**B3**]{}. Finally, if ${\bf u}$ and ${\bf v}$ are two sets of $r$ vertices, the $({\bf u},{\bf v})$-[*colour constraining gadget*]{} $B^-_{r,s}({\bf u}, {\bf v})$ is an $r$-empire graph obtained from $B_{r,s}$, without loss of generality, by removing a single edge connecting the end-point $u_1$ of a path to its neighbour $v_1$. Thus $u_1$ becomes isolated in the graph of $B^-_{r,s}({\bf u}, {\bf v})$. The graph $R_r(B^-_{r,s}({\bf u}, {\bf v}))$ contains a copy of $K_{s-1}$ in which every vertex is also adjacent to the vertices corresponding to ${\bf u}$ and ${\bf v}$. Thus any $(s,r)$-colouring of $B^-_{r,s}({\bf u}, {\bf v})$ must give ${\bf u}$ and ${\bf v}$ the same colour. Figure \[FrsPlusMinus\] gives a few examples. In the remainder of the paper we will often need to describe schematically the colour constraining gadgets. Figure \[ccg\] gives an example of the graphical notation that will be used.
![\[ccg\] A schematic representation of a $({\bf u},{\bf
v})$-colour constraining gadget. the diagram shows the isolated vertex in empire ${\bf u}$. The two dashed blobs denote, respectively, the other vertices in ${\bf u}$ and the vertices in ${\bf v}$. The thick black line stands for the part of the gadget constraining the colour of ${\bf u}$ and ${\bf v}$: the two empires must be given the same colour in any $s$-colouring of $B^-_{r,s}({\bf u}, {\bf v})$.](ccg.pdf)
#### Connectivity Gadgets.
For positive integers $r$, $s$ and $m$ with $r \geq 2$ and $s \geq 3$, an $m$-[*connector*]{}, denoted by $A_{r,s,m}$, is an $r$-empire graph satisfying the following conditions:
1. The graph in $A_{r,s,m}$ contains $r \times [1+ (s+q-1)t]$ vertices split into empires of size $r$.
2. The graph in $A_{r,s,m}$ is a linear forest.
3. There is a set of at least $m$ isolated vertices in the graph of $A_{r,s,m}$ and such vertices must be given the same colour in any $(s,r)$-colouring of $A_{r,s,m}$. These vertices define the so called [*monochromatic set*]{} of the gadget and will collectively be denoted by $Z$. The elements of such set will generically denoted by $z$.
Let $q$ and $t$ be arbitrary positive integers. In what follows $E_{s,q,t}$ is a (non-empire) graph satisfying the following properties:
1. $E_{s,q,t}$ contains $(s+q-1)t+1$ vertices.
2. $E_{s,q,t}$ contains a set of $qt+1$ [*monochromatic vertices*]{}. Each of these must be given the same colour in any proper $s$-colouring of the graph. Among these we identify a [ *plug vertex*]{} which we denote by $u^0$, and $q$ [*socket vertices*]{} denoted by $u^1, \ldots, u^q$, all of degree exactly $s-1$. The remaining $q(t-1)$ monochromatic vertices are termed [*internal monochromatic vertices*]{}. The remaining $(s-1)t$ vertices in $E_{s,q,t}$ are called [*colour constraining vertices*]{}, and usually denoted by the letter $w$, appropriately indexed.
3. The maximum degree of $E_{s,q,t}$ is at most $s+q-1$.
4. When $s-1$ and $q$ are both even, every vertex in the graph has even degree.
Figure \[EulerGraph\] shows the graph $E_{5,4,2}$. Graphs $E_{s,q,t}$ will “guide” the constrution of gadgets $A_{r,s,m}({\bf
v})$ in the sense that for each $r$, $s$, and $m$ there will be values of $q$ and $t$ such that $E_{s,q,t}$ will be the reduced graph of $A_{r,s,m}({\bf
v})$.
![\[EulerGraph\] The graph $E_{5,4,2}$, vertices in the monochromatic set are green, edges within the clique are shown in red, and edges connecting a clique to the plug vertex or socket vertices used in its place are blue.](EulerGraph.pdf)
\[EGraph\] Let $s$, $q$ and $t$ be positive integers such that $s \geq 3$, and $q
\geq \sqrt{s-1}$. Then there exists a graph $E_{s,q,t}$ satisfying conditions [**E0**]{}, [**E1**]{}, [**E2**]{}, and [**E3**]{}.
[**Proof.**]{} The graph $E_{s,q,1}$ consists of a [*plug vertex*]{} $u^0$, $s-1$ [*colour constraining vertices*]{} $w^1, \ldots, w^{s-1}$, and $q$ [*socket vertices*]{} $u^1, \ldots, u^q$. We can see immediately that condition [**E0**]{} is satisfied. The edges of $E_{s,q,1}$ are defined as follows: there is a clique on the $s-1$ vertices $w^1, \ldots, w^{s-1}$, also for every $i \in \{0, \ldots, q\}$ and $j \in \{1, \ldots, s-1\}$ there is an edge $\{u^i, w^j\}$. In any proper $s$-colouring of $E_{s,q,1}$ the vertices $u^0, \ldots, u^q$ must use a colour not used by the $s-1$ vertices in the clique, condition [**E1**]{} follows from this. The vertices $w^1, \ldots, w^{s-1}$ all have degree $s+q-1$ while the vertices $u^0, \ldots, u^q$ all have degree $s-1$, conditions [**E2**]{} and [**E3**]{} follow from this.
For $t>1$, assume that we already have a graph $E_{s,q,t-1}$ satisfying all the required conditions. To create the graph $E_{s,q,t}$, we add $E_{s,q,1}$, with its plug vertex removed, to $E_{s,q,t-1}$, and we use the socket vertices of $E_{s,q,t-1}$ to connect the two graphs. More precisely, the vertices of $E_{s,q,t}$ are $$V(E_{s,q,t-1}) \cup \left(V(E_{s,q,1}) \backslash \{u^0\}\right).$$ Note that [**E0**]{} is satisfied and $E_{s,q,t}$ contains a single plug vertex and $s-1$ socket vertices. In what follows $w^1, \ldots, w^{s-1}$ are the $s-1$ colour constraint vertices belonging to the copy of $E_{s,q,1}$ used to define $E_{s,q,t}$. The edge set of $E_{s,q,t}$ contains all the edges of $E_{s,q,t-1}$ and $E_{s,q,1} - u^0$ plus $s-1$ additional edges to connect the socket vertices of $E_{s,q,t-1}$ to the colour constraining vertices of $E_{s,q,1}$. Each of the colour constraining vertices in $E_{s,q,1}$ is connected to a socket vertex of $E_{s,q,t-1}$, in such a way that, after this, the total degree of the socket vertices is $(q+1)(s-1)$. The assumption $q \geq \sqrt{s-1}$ is needed at this point, for otherwise the average degree of the socket vertices would be $$\frac{(q+1)(s-1)}{q} = s-1 + (s-1)/q > s-1 + \sqrt{s-1} > s-1+q$$ where the expression on the right-hand side is the claimed bound on the maximum degree of $E_{s,q,t}$. Thus, if $q < \sqrt{s-1}$ at least one of the sockets would have degree larger than $s-1+q$ (thus contradicting [**E2**]{}).
In details, for $s$ odd, we add edges $\{u^{i\ {\rm
mod}\ q}, w^{2i-1}\}$, and $\{u^{i \ {\rm mod}\ q}, w^{2i}\}$ for $i \in \{1, \ldots,
(s-1)/2\}$. Note that we connect an even number of vertices to each socket vertex thus preserving condition [**E3**]{}. For $s$ even, we first add the edge $\{u^i, w^i\}$ for $i \in \{1,
\ldots, \min(s-1,q)\}$. If $s-1<q$ some sockets are not used by any of these edges and this completes the construction of $E_{s,q,t}$. Otherwise for $1 \leq i \leq (s-1-q)/2$ we also add edges $\{u^{i \ {\rm mod}\ q}, w^{q+2i-1}\}$, $\{u^{i\ {\rm mod}\ q},
w^{q+2i}\}$. Finally, if $q$ is even, we add $\{u^q, w^{s-1}\}$.
As each of the colour constraining vertices of $E_{s,q,1}$ is adjacent to a socket vertex of $E_{s,q,t-1}$, the clique on these vertices must use all of the $s-1$ other colours in any proper $s$-colouring. The socket vertices of $E_{s,q,1}$ must therefore use the one remaining colour and hence are in the monochromatic set, condition [**E1**]{} follows.
\[Arsm\] Let $m$, $r$, and $s$ be positive integers, with $r \geq 2$, and $s$ satisfying $$3 \leq s < 2r - \sqrt{2r + \frac{1}{4}}+ \frac{3}{2}.$$ Then there exists a graph $A_{r,s,m}$ satisfying conditions [**A0**]{}, [**A1**]{}, and [ **A2**]{}. Furthermore $A_{r,s,m}$ can be constructed in time polynomial in $r$, $s$ and $m$.
[**Proof.**]{} For $m \leq r$ a single empire of size $r$ with no edges satisfies all conditions defining $A_{r,s,m}$. If $m > r$, we define $A_{r,s,m}$ in such a way that $R_r(A_{r,s,m})$ coincides with $E_{s,q,t}$, where $q= 2r - (s-1)$ and $t$ is the smallest positive integer such that $$r-1 + t\left(qr-{(q+1)(s-1) \over 2}\right) \geq m.$$ Note that the stated bounds on $s$ imply that $q$ satisfies the conditions of Lemma \[EGraph\].
In what follows the empires of $A_{r,s,m}$ will be denoted by bold type-face letters corresponding to the labels used to denote the vertices of $E_{s,q,t}$.
When $s$ is odd, $q$ is even and hence by condition [**E3**]{} every vertex in $E_{s,q,t}$ has even degree. By a well-known result of Euler the graph contains an Euler tour, and one such tour can be found in time polynomial in the size of the graph (see for instance [@G Chapter 6]). Given one such tour $\cal T$ we can construct the graph $A_{r,s,m}$ as follows. Let $A_{r,s,m}$ be the edgeless graph on $(s+q-1)t+1$ empires of $r$ vertices, we visit the edges of $\cal T$ and add corresponding edges to $A_{r,s,m}$ keeping the invariant that one of the two end-points of the latest added edge has degree one in $A_{r,s,,m}$. Without loss of generality we first add the edge $\{{u^0}_1, {w^1}_1\}$. Then, assuming we have visited the first $i-1$ edges of $\cal T$ and $v_k$ is the vertex of degree one incident to the latest added edge, we connect $v_k$ to an isolated vertex of empire ${\bf u}$, if $\{v,u\}$ is the next edge we visit in $\cal T$.
The edge set of graph $A_{r,s,m}$ consists of a single long path, and hence condition [**A1**]{} is satisfied. The degree distribution of $A_{r,s,m}$ is described in the following table.
[p[4cm]{}lll]{} vertex set & degree two & degree one & degree zero\
${\bf u}^0$ & $\frac{s-1}{2}-1$ & two & $r - \frac{s-1}{2}-1$\
\
[an empire corresponding to a colour constraining vertex]{} & $r$ & &\
\
[one of the $t-1$ groups of $q$ empires corresponding to internal monochromatic vertices]{} & $(q+1)\frac{s-1}{2}$ & & $qr - (q+1)\frac{s-1}{2}$\
\
${\bf u}^i$ for $i>0$ & $\frac{s-1}{2}$ & & $r
- \frac{s-1}{2}$\
Thus $A_{r,s,m}$ has $$r-1 + t\left(qr-{(q+1)(s-1) \over 2}\right)$$ isolated vertices within the monochromatic set. Increasing the value of $t$ will increase this number provided that $$\label{Eq:odd}
qr > {(q+1)(s-1) \over 2}.$$
When $s$ is even, $q = 2r-(s-1)$ is odd. As before, we define $A_{r,s,m}$ using the graph $E_{s,q,t}$. However this time $E_{s,q,t}$ is not Eulerian. In particular, all colour constraining vertices have even degree $s+q-1$. However, by the construction used in Lemma \[EGraph\], in each set of internal monochromatic vertices there are $\min\{s - 1, q\}$ of even degree. Denote by $u^1, . . . ,
u^{q-s-1}$ the odd degree vertices in that set. Furthermore, the plug vertex $u^0$, and the final set of $q$ socket vertices are all of odd degree. To understand the definition of $A_{r,s,m}$ we define a subgraph $H$ of $E_{s,q,t}$. The edge set of $H$ are defined as follows.
1. $H$ contains a long path $P_0$ starting at $u^0$ and passing through $w^{s-1}$ and $u^q$ of each set of colour constraining and internal monochromatic vertices.
2. When $s-1 < q$, for each set of internal monochromatic vertices and for all $i \in \{1, \ldots, (q-s-1)/2\}$, $H$ contains a path $\{u^{2i-1}, w^{i\ {\rm mod} (s-1)}, u^{2i}\}$.
3. Finally, for all $i$ such that $i \leq (q-1)/2$, there is a path $\{u^{2i-1}, w^i, u^{2i}\}$, where $u^1, \ldots, u^q$ are the socket vertices of $E_{s,q,t}$.
![\[G-s-even\] The graph $G_{s,q,t}$, when $q>s-1$.](A-s-even)
Note that $E_{s,q,t} - H$ is Eulerian. We construct $A_{r,s,m}$ in two stages. We first use the edges of an Euler tour of $E_{s,q,t} - H$ as we did in the case $s$ odd. Then we define edges corresponding to the edges of $H$. This second type of edges involve different vertices from those used to deal with the Euler tour. Finally, if ${u^0}_1$ and ${u^0}_{s/2}$ are the start and the end point of the long path in $A_{r,s,m}$ corresponding to $E_{s,q,t} - H$ Euler tour, and ${u^0}_{s/2+1}$ is the starting point of the path $P_0$ in $H$, then we can actually attach the edge from ${u^0}_{s/2+1}$ to ${u^0}_{s/2}$. By doing this vertex ${u^0}_{s/2+1}$ becomes isolated, we lose a vertex of degree one, and gain a vertex of degree two.
The degree distribution of $A_{r,s,m}$ is given in the following table.
[p[3cm]{}lll]{} vertex set & degree two & degree one & degree zero\
${\bf u}^0$ & $\frac{s}{2}-1$ & one & $r - \frac{s}{2}$\
\
an empire corresponding to a colour constraining vertex & $r$ & &\
\
one of the $t-1$ groups of $q$ empires corresponding to internal monochromatic vertices & $(q+1)\frac{s-1}{2} - \max(q-s-1,0)$& $\max(q-s-1,0)$& $qr - (q+1)\frac{s-1}{2}- \max(q-s-1,0)$\
\
${\bf u}^i$ for $i>0$ & $\frac{s}{2}-1$ & one & $r
- \frac{s}{2}$\
In total this gives us $$(q+1)\left(r-{s \over 2}\right) + (t-1)\left(qr- {(q+1)(s-1) \over 2} - \max(q-s-1, 0)\right)$$ isolated vertices within the monochromatic set. Increasing $t$ will increase this number provided that $$\label{Eq:even}
qr > {(q+1)(s-1) \over 2} + \max(q-s-1, 0) > 0.$$ When $s<r+1$ and hence $\max(q-s-1, 0) = r - s + 1$, the above inequality is always true. We therefore need only consider the case for larger $r$, in this case the bound (\[Eq:odd\]) on graphs where $s$ is even is the same as the bound when $s$ is odd. The bound can be rewritten as $$\frac{(s-1)^2}{2} - \left(2r + \frac{1}{2}\right)(s-1) + 2r^2 > 0.$$ This inequality is satisfied for $$s <2r - \sqrt{2r + \frac{1}{4}}+ \frac{3}{2},$$ and hence for any $m$ and any $s$ and $r$ satisfying the above inequality, there exists some $A_{r,s,m}$ satisfying conditions [ **A0**]{}, [**A1**]{}, and [ **A2**]{}.
Let $r$ be a positive integer. Given an $r$-empire graph $G$, and an empire $\bf v$ in $G$, the [*$r$-degree of ${\bf v}$*]{} is simply the degree of vertex ${\bf v}$ in the reduced graph of $G$ (of course the 1-degree of a vertex in a graph is just its (ordinary) degree). Let $r'$, $s$, and $m$ be positive integers as specified at the beginning of this section. Gadgets $A_{r',s,m}$ will be used in the forthcoming reductions to replace particular empires with high $r$-degree by an array of vertices of degree one or two, chosen among the monochromatic vertices of the gadget. Let $m$ be an integer at least as large as the $r$-degree of ${\bf v}$. The [ *linearization of ${\bf v}$ in $G$*]{} is the process of replacing ${\bf v}$ in $G$ with a copy of $A_{r',s,m}$ attaching each edge incident with some element of $v$ to a distinct element of $Z$ in $A_{r,s,m}$. We will say that these chosen elements of $Z$ [*simulate*]{} the empire ${\bf v}$. Note that, in general, $r'$ may be different from $r$. Thus repeated linearizations may be used to introduce larger empires in a given $r$-empire graph or even transform a standard graph into an $r'$-empire graph, for some fixed $r' > 1$.
#### Planar Gadgets.
Let ${\bf u}$ and ${\bf v}$ be given set of $r$ vertices and denote by $\delta_{x,y}$ the Kroeneker delta function. For positive integers $r$, and $s$ with $r \geq 2$ and $s < 6r-3
-2\delta_{r,2}$, it is possible to define a family of $r$-empire graphs $D_{r,s}({\bf u},{\bf v})$ satisfying the following properties:
1. The graph of $D_{r,s}({\bf u},{\bf v})$ has $r(s+1)$ vertices partitioned into $s+1$ empires all of size $r$.
2. The graph of $D_{r,s}({\bf u},{\bf v})$ contains an isolated vertex $v_1$.
3. No connected component of the graph of $D_{r,s}({\bf u},{\bf v})$ contains two vertices from the same empire.
4. The graph $K_{s+1}$ minus the edge $\{{\bf u},{\bf
v}\}$ is a subgraph of $R_r(D_{r,s}({\bf u},{\bf v}))$.
$D_{r,s}({\bf u},{\bf v})$ will serve a similar purpose in Theorem \[NPhardPlanar\] to that of $B^-_{r,s}({\bf u},{\bf v})$ in Theorem \[NPhard\].
\[beineke\] Let $r$ and $s$ be positive integers with $r \geq 2$ and $s < 6r-3
-2\delta_{r,2}$. Let ${\bf u}$ and ${\bf v}$ be two disjoint sets of $r$ vertices. There exists an $r$-empire graph $D_{r,s}({\bf u},{\bf v})$ satisfying conditions [**D0**]{}, [**D1**]{}, [**D2**]{}, and [**D3**]{}. Furthermore $D_{r,s}({\bf u},{\bf v})$ can be constructed in time polynomial in $r$.
[**Proof.**]{} For $r=2$, $s=6$ a suitable graph is shown in Figure \[D27\]. For $r
\geq 3$, we can derive $D_{r,6r-4}({\bf u},{\bf v})$ from the proof in [@beineke65] that the thickness of $K_{6r-3}$ is equal to $r$. In what follow we describe Beineke’s construction highlighting few points that are important to prove properties [**D0**]{}, [**D1**]{}, [**D2**]{}, and [**D3**]{}.
![\[D27\] The graph $D_{2,6}(u,v)$](P27)
Beineke’s construction starts by showing that there is a graph of thickness $r-1$ on $6(r-1)$ vertices labelled $u(i)$, $v(i)$, $w(i)$, $u'(i)$, $v'(i)$, $w'(i)$ for all $i \in \{1, \ldots, r-1\}$ in which there are edges connecting every pair of vertices except $\{u(i), u'(i)\}$, $\{v(i),
v'(i)\}$ and $\{w(i), w'(i)\}$ for each $i \in \{1, \ldots,
r-1\}$.
To do this, he defines $D'_{r}$ to be a graph consisting of $r-1$ connected components $G_1, \ldots, G_{r-1}$ (see Figure \[Hi\]), such that for each $i \in \{1 \ldots r-1\}$ $G_i$ consists of $6(r-1)$ vertices labelled $u(j)_i$, $v(j)_i$, $w(j)_i$, $u'(j)_i$, $v'(j)_i$, $w'(j)_i$ for all $j \in \{1, \ldots, r-1\}$. Vertices $u(i)_i$, $v(i)_i$, $w(i)_i$, $u'(i)_i$, $v'(i)_i$, $w'(i)_i$ will be called [*external*]{}, all others [*internal*]{} (as they are part of a copy of graph $H$). This satisfies property [**D2**]{}.
If corresponding vertices in distinct copies of $G_i$ are grouped into empires of size $r-1$, the reduced graph of $D'_{r}$ is a graph meeting Beineke’s initial claim. It has $6(r-1)$ vertices labelled $u(i)$, $v(i)$, $w(i)$, $u'(i)$, $v'(i)$, $w'(i)$ for all $i \in \{1, \ldots, r-1\}$ in which there are edges connecting every pair of vertices except $\{u(i), u'(i)\}$, $\{v(i), v'(i)\}$ and $\{w(i), w'(i)\}$ for each $i \in \{1, \ldots, r-1\}$.
![\[Hi\] The graphs $H_i$ and $G_i$, the triangles labelled $1, \ldots 6$ in $G_i$ contain copies of $H_i$ in which the vertex $v_i$ corresponds to $v(i)_i$, $u'(i)_i$, $w(i)_i$, $v'(i)_i$, $u(i)_i$, $w'(i)_i$ respectively. The labelling of the interior vertices of the $H_i$ subgraphs is described in [@beineke65].](Hi.pdf)
Three more empires $\bf a$, $\bf b$ and $\bf c$, each of size $r-1$ are added to $D'_r$ and connected to it in the following way: $$\begin{aligned}
& v\left(\left\lfloor{r-1 \over 2}\right\rfloor\right)_1, v\left(\left\lfloor{r-1 \over 2}\right\rfloor+1\right)_1 & \textrm{ are adjacent to } a_1\\
& u(i)_i, u'(i+1)_i, v(i)_i & \textrm{ are adjacent to } a_i (i>1), \\ \\
& v(1)_1, v(2)_1, u'(1)_1 & \textrm{ are adjacent to } b_1\\
& u(1)_{\lceil{r-1 \over 2}\rceil + 1}, u'(2)_{\lceil{r-1 \over 2}\rceil + 1} & \textrm{ are adjacent to } b_{\lceil{r-1 \over 2}\rceil + 1}\\
& v'(i)_i, v(i+1)_i, u(i)_i & \textrm{ are adjacent to } b_i (i \in \{1, \ldots, \lceil{r-1 \over 2}\rceil\})\\
& v(i)_i, v'(i+1)_i, u'(i)_i & \textrm{ are adjacent to } b_i (i \in
\{\lceil{r-1 \over 2}\rceil+2, \ldots, r-1\}), \\ \\
& w'(2)_1 & \textrm{ is adjacent to } c_1\\
& w(i)_i, w'(i+1)_i & \textrm{ are adjacent to } c_i (i>1).\end{aligned}$$ As each vertex from empires $\bf a$, $\bf b$ and $\bf c$ was added to a single component of $D'_{r}$, property [**D2**]{} is still satisfied. Let $G_r$ be the complement of $R_{r-1}(D'_r + \{{\bf a},{\bf b},{\bf
c}\})$. It is not difficult to see that $G_r$ is planar. Therefore by adding the vertices $u(j)_r$, $v(j)_r$, $w(j)_r$, $u'(j)_r$, $v'(j)_r$, $w'(j)_r$ for all $j \in \{1, \ldots, r-1\}$ with the same edge set as $G_r$ we have a graph consisting of $r$ planar components (that’s $G_r$ along with the components of the augmented graph $D'_r + \{{\bf a},{\bf b},{\bf
c}\}$) that reduces to $K_{6r-3}$.
$G_1$ contains a vertex $c_1$ of degree one which is adjacent to $w'(2)_1$. We can now form the graph $D_{r,6r-4}({\bf u}, {\bf v})$ from $G_r$ along with the components of the augmented graph $D'_r + \{{\bf a},{\bf b},{\bf
c}\}$ by renaming empires $c$ and $w'(2)$ as $\bf v$ and $\bf u$ respectively and removing all edges between $\bf u$ and $\bf v$. $D_{r,6r-4}({\bf u},
{\bf v})$ satisfies property [**D0**]{}, [**D1**]{} (as the only edge incident to $\bf v$ has been deleted), [**D2**]{} and [**D3**]{} as the graph reduces to $K_{6r-3}$ minus the edge $\{u,v\}$. For $s < 6r-4$, note that the induced graph formed by removing any empire other than $\bf u$ or $\bf v$ from $D_{r,s+1}({\bf u}, {\bf v})$ is an example of $D_{r,s}({\bf
u},{\bf v})$. As the size of the graph $D_{r,s}({\bf u}, {\bf v})$ depends only on $r$ and $s$, the graph can be constructed in polynomial time.
Linear Forests {#paths}
==============
In Section \[easy\] we showed (amongst other things) that there are specific values for $s$ such that $s$-COL$_r$ becomes easy if the input graph is a collection short paths. Here we argue that if the paths are allowed to have arbitrary length (let LFOREST denote the set of all forests of this form) then the problem becomes NP-hard. We will prove the following result.
\[Paths\] Let $r$ and $s$ be positive integers with $r \geq 2$ and $3 \leq s < 2r - \sqrt{2r + \frac{1}{4}}+ \frac{3}{2}$. Then the [$s$-COL$_r$(LFOREST)]{} problem is [NP]{}-hard.
Note that it follows from results in [@mcgrae08:_colour_random_empir_trees] that any $r$-empire graph defined on a linear forest can be coloured in polynomial time using $2r$ colours. Thus Theorem \[Paths\] is, at least for large values of $r$, close to best possible, in the sense that the largest values of $s$ for which it holds are $2r-1+o(r)$.
The proof is split into two parts. The argument for $s=3$ is based on a direct construction which is reminiscent of a well-known hardness proof for $3$-COL [@cormen09:_introd_algor p.1103]. For $s>3$, the hardness of $s$-COL$_r$(LFOREST) will then follow from that of $s$-COL(FG$(s,s-1)$).
We start from the case $s=3$.
\[r2s3\] Let $r$ be an integer with $r \geq 2$. Then [3-SAT $\leq_p$ 3-COL$_r$(LFOREST)]{}.
[**Proof.**]{} The proof construction is reminiscent of that used to show that 3-COL is NP-hard [@cormen09:_introd_algor p.1103].
Given an instance $\phi$ of 3-SAT we can produce a linear forest $P(\phi)$ and a partition of $V(P(\phi))$ into empires of size $r$ such that $P(\phi)$ admits a $(3,r)$-colouring if and only if $\phi$ is satisfiable. $P(\phi)$ consists of one [*truth gadget*]{}, one [*variable gadget*]{} for each variable used in $\phi$, and one [*clause gadget*]{} for each clause in $\phi$.
![\[varS3\] The shape of a variable gadget for $s=3$.](new-s3var.pdf)
To define the truth gadget, we start by adding $r-2$ distinct isolated vertices to each empire in $B_{2,2}$. The empires in the resulting graph (which we denote by $B_{2,2}^{+r}$) will be labelled ${\bf T}$, ${\bf F}$ and ${\bf X}$. Then, if $\phi$ uses $n$ different variables and $m$ clauses, we linearize [**T**]{} and [**X**]{} in $B_{2,2}^{+r}$, using one copy of $A_{r,3,\deg({\bf T})+2m}$, and one copy of $A_{r,3,\deg({\bf
X})+n}$ (here $\deg({\bf v})$ is the degree of empire ${\bf v}$ in $B_{2,2}^{+r}$), respectively. We denote such gadgets by $A({\bf T})$ and $A({\bf X})$ respectively. This completes the definition of the truth gadget. Since ${\bf T}$, ${\bf F}$ and ${\bf X}$ are all adjacent (in $B_{2,2}^{+r}$) and the linearization preserves colour constraints (because of property [**A2**]{}), the vertices of the truth gadget simulating the three empires of $B_{2,2}^{+r}$ must have different colours in any 3-colouring of the truth gadget. Without loss of generality we call TRUE, FALSE and OTHER respectively such colours.
For each variable ${\sf a}$ in $\phi$, $P(\phi)$ contains a variable gadget. Let occ$( \cdot )$ be a function taking as input a literal of $\phi$ and returning the number of occurrences of its argument in the given formula. The variable gadget for [a]{} is defined as the graph formed by the two connectivity gadgets $A_{r,3,{\rm occ}({\sf a})+2}$ and $A_{r,3,{\rm occ}(\overline{\sf a})+2}$, along with a single monochromatic vertex $z$ in $A({\bf X})$ (a distinct monochromatic vertex is used for each variable of $\phi$). The edges in the variable gadgets will be those of $A_{r,3,{\rm occ}({\sf a})+2}$ and $A_{r,3,{\rm occ}(\overline{\sf a})+2}$ plus three further edges: $\{z,z_{\bf a}\}$, $\{z,z_{\bf\overline{a}}\}$, and $\{z'_{\bf a},z'_{\bf\overline{a}}\}$. Here $z_{\bf a}$ and $z'_{\bf
a}$ (resp. $z_{\bf\overline{a}}$ and $z'_{\bf\overline{a}}$) are monochromatic vertices in $A_{r,3,{\rm occ}({\sf a})+2}$ and $A_{r,3,{\rm occ}(\overline{\sf a})+2}$. Figure \[varS3\] gives a schematic view of the truth gadget for an arbitrary variable ${\sf a}$. Since ${\bf X}$ has colour OTHER, there are only two possible colourings for the vertices corresponding to ${\bf a}$ and ${\bf \overline{a}}$ — either all vertices for ${\bf
a}$ are coloured TRUE and those for ${\bf \overline{a}}$ are coloured FALSE, or the vertices for ${\bf a}$ are coloured FALSE and those for ${\bf \overline{a}}$ TRUE.
Finally, for each clause in $\phi$, $P(\phi)$ contains a gadget like the one depicted in Figure \[PathClauseGadget\]. This is connected to the rest of the graph via four connectivity gadgets. More specifically, the two vertices labelled $T_1$ and $T_2$ (in the Figure) are two monochromatic vertices in $A({\bf T})$ (a distinct pair of such monochromatic vertices for each case clause gadget). Also, vertices labelled $a$, $b$ and $d$ in the Figure belong to the monochromatic set of three connectivity gadgets of the form $A_{r,3,{\rm occ}({\sf
\ell})+2}$ where $\ell$ is a literal (${\bf \ell} = {\sf
a}$, ${\sf b}$, and ${\sf d}$ in the given example). Since the vertices of $A(T)$ corresponding to ${\bf T}$ will always be coloured TRUE, it can be shown that each clause gadget admits a proper $(3,r)$-colouring if and only if at least one of the empires corresponding to a literal in the clause is coloured TRUE.
(230,45)
(10,35)[(1,0)[30]{}]{} (10,5)[(1,0)[30]{}]{} (40,35)[(1,0)[30]{}]{} (70,35)[(1,0)[30]{}]{} (40,5)[(1,0)[30]{}]{} (100,5)[(0,1)[30]{}]{} (100,5)[(1,0)[30]{}]{} (160,5)[(0,1)[30]{}]{} (190,5)[(0,1)[30]{}]{} (220,5)[(0,1)[30]{}]{}
(10,52)[(0,0)\[t\][$T_1$]{}]{} (10,0)[(0,0)\[t\][$T_2$]{}]{} (40,0)[(0,0)\[t\][${c^2}_1$]{}]{} (40,52)[(0,0)\[t\][${c^1}_1$]{}]{} (70,0)[(0,0)\[t\][${c^1}_2$]{}]{} (70,52)[(0,0)\[t\][${c^3}_1$]{}]{} (100,0)[(0,0)\[t\][${c^5}_1$]{}]{} (100,52)[(0,0)\[t\][${c^4}_1$]{}]{} (130,0)[(0,0)\[t\][${c^3}_2$]{}]{} (160,0)[(0,0)\[t\][${c^4}_2$]{}]{} (160,47)[(0,0)\[t\][$a$]{}]{} (190,0)[(0,0)\[t\][${c^5}_2$]{}]{} (190,50)[(0,0)\[t\][$b$]{}]{} (220,0)[(0,0)\[t\][${c^2}_2$]{}]{} (220,50)[(0,0)\[t\][$d$]{}]{}
(10,35) (10,5) (40,5) (70,5) (100,5) (40,35) (70,35) (100,35) (130,5) (160,5) (190,5) (220,5) (160,35) (190,35) (220,35)
Note that $P(\phi)$ is $(3,r)$-colourable if and only if $\phi$ is satisfiable. This follows from the properties of the well known reduction 3-SAT $\leq_p$ 3-COL, as the graph obtained from $P(\phi)$ by shrinking each connectivity gadget first and then each remaining empire in $P(\phi)$ to a distinct (pseudo-)vertex coincides with that created from $\phi$ using the classical 3-COL reduction.
For $s>3$ the NP-hardness of $s$-COL$_r$(LFOREST) follows from that of $s$-COL(FG$(s,s-1)$). The argument is much simpler than in the case described above. Given an $(s, s-1)$-formula graph $\Phi$, the $r$-empire graph obtained by linearizing all vertices of $\Phi$ is an instance of $s$-COL$_r$(LFOREST). This immediately gives the following result.
\[Paths2\] Let $r$ and $s$ be fixed positive integers with $r \geq 3$, and $3 < s < 2r - \sqrt{2r + \frac{1}{4}}+ \frac{3}{2}$. Then [$s$-COL(FG$(s,s-1)$) $\leq_p s$-COL$_r$(LFOREST)]{}.
Trees
=====
The result on linear forests of Section \[paths\] already proves that $s$-COL$_r$ is NP-hard on planar graphs if $s \geq 3$ is sufficiently small. In this section we investigate the effect of connectedness on the computational complexity of the $s$-COL$_r$ problem. The outcome of our investigation is the following dichotomy result (in the next theorem TREE is the class of all trees).
\[t1:trees\] Let $r$ and $s$ be fixed positive integers with $r \geq 2$, then the [$s$-COL$_r$(TREE)]{} problem is [NP]{}-hard if $2 < s < 2r$, and polynomial time solvable otherwise.
The proof of Theorem \[t1:trees\] is split into two parts. The argument for $s=3$ is very similar to the one we used for forests of paths, but simpler, as trees are allowed to have vertices of arbitrary large degree. We present the proof in some details only for the case $r=2$ (see Theorem \[r2s3-tree\] below). For $r>2$ note that a tree $T_1$ with empires of size $r_1$ can be translated into a tree $T_2$ with empires of size $r_2 > r_1$ by simply attaching $r_2-r_1$ new leaves to a fixed element in each empire of $T_1$. For $s>3$ we argue as in Section \[paths\], translating formula graphs into pairs formed by a tree and a partition of its vertices into empires. The hardness of $s$-COL$_r$(TREE) follows from Theorem \[fg\]. Details in Theorem \[NPhard\] below.
\[r2s3-tree\] [3-SAT $\leq_p$ 3-COL$_2$(TREE)]{}.
[**Proof.**]{} (Sketch) Given an instance $\phi$ of 3-SAT we define a tree $T(\phi)$ and a partition of its vertices into empires such that $T(\phi)$ admits a (3,2)-colouring if and only if $\phi$ is satisfiable. $T(\phi)$ will consist of one [*truth gadget*]{}, one [*variable gadget*]{} for each variable used in $\phi$, and one [*clause gadget*]{} for each clause in $\phi$.
The truth gadget is a copy of $B^+_{2,2}({\bf T})$. Since empires $\bf T$, $\bf F$ and $\bf X$ are adjacent to each other (in the gadget’s reduced graph) w.l.o.g. we assume they are coloured TRUE, FALSE and OTHER respectively. For each variable $\sf a$ in $\phi$, $T(\phi)$ contains a copy of $B_{2,2}$ spanned by empires labelled ${\bf a}$, ${\bf {\overline
a}}$, and ${\bf X}$. The construction forces empires ${\bf a}$, ${\bf {\overline
a}}$ to be coloured differently from ${\bf X}$ (and each other). Finally, for each clause in $\phi$, we use a clause gadget like the one in Figure \[PathClauseGadget\].
Arguing like in the proof of Theorem \[r2s3\] it is easy to see that $T(\phi)$ is $(3,2)$-colourable if and only if there is some way to assign the variables of $\phi$ as TRUE or FALSE so that every clause contains at least one TRUE literal.
\[NPhard\] [$s$-COL(FG$(s,s-1))\leq_p s$-COL$_r$(TREE)]{}, for any $r \geq 3$ and $3 < s< 2r$.
[**Proof.**]{} As in the proof of Theorem \[Paths2\] we give a set of replacement rules that translate an $(s,s-1)$-formula graph $\Phi$ into a tree $T(\Phi)$ and a partition of $V(T(\Phi))$ into empires of size $r$ such that $T(\Phi)$ is $(s,r)$-colourable if and only if the formula graph is $s$-colourable. This time there is no need to use the connectivity gadgets $A_{r,s,m}$ as the vertices of $T(\Phi)$ can have arbitrarily large degrees. However some care is needed to make sure that the resulting graph is in fact a tree.
In details, the complete graph on $\{T,F,X^1, \ldots, X^{s-2}\}$ is replaced by a copy of $B^+_{r,s-1}({\bf T})$ with empires labelled ${\bf T}$, ${\bf F}$, and ${\bf X}^1, \ldots, {\bf X}^{s-2}$. Note that, as discussed in Section \[G\], this graph is in fact a tree (Figure \[FrsPlusMinus\] displays the connected clique gadget for $r=3$ and $s=5$). Also, because of constraint [**B3**]{} in the definition of $B_{r,s}$, w.l.o.g. we may assume that colours “TRUE", “FALSE", “OTHER$^1$", $\ldots$, “OTHER$^{s-2}$" are assigned to empires ${\bf T}$, ${\bf F}$, ${\bf X}^1
\ldots, {\bf X}^{s-2}$ respectively.
![\[Variable\] The gadget for the complementary pair $a$ and $\overline a$ when $r=3$, $s=5$. The dashed blobs represent either empires, or part of them. The diagram clearly shows all copies of $B^-_{3,5}({\bf W}^i(\ell),{\bf X}^i)$, following the graphical notation introduced in Figure \[ccg\].](Variable-new-complete)
For each complementary pair $a, \overline{a}$ of $V(\Phi)$ we create $2s-5$ empires ${\bf W}^2(a), \ldots, {\bf W}^{s-2}(a)$ and ${\bf W}^1(\overline{a}), \ldots, {\bf W}^{s-2}(\overline{a})$. These are then connected to $B^+_{r,s-1}({\bf T})$ using the graphs $B^-_{r,s}({\bf W}^i(a),
{\bf X}^i)$, and $B^-_{r,s}({\bf W}^i(\overline{a}), {\bf X}^i)$ for all $i \in \{1, \ldots, s-2\}$. For each $a \in {\cal A}$ the subgraph of $\Phi$ spanned by $\bigcup_i \{a,\overline{a},X^i\}$ is represented by a graph like the one sketched in Figure \[Variable\] for $r=3$ and $s=5$. This graph involves empires $\bf a$, ${\bf \overline{a}}$, ${\bf X}^1, \ldots, {\bf X}^{s-2}$, ${\bf W}^2(a), \ldots, {\bf W}^{s-2}(a)$ and ${\bf W}^1(\overline{a}), \ldots, {\bf W}^{s-2}(\overline{a})$. Empires $\bf a$, and ${\bf \overline{a}}$, each span a tree with one vertex, w.l.o.g. $a_1$ (resp. $\overline{a}_1$) of degree $r-1$ and $r-1$ vertices of degree one, all adjacent to it. These two trees are connected by the edge $\{a_1,\overline{a}_1\}$. Vertex $a_1$ (resp. $\overline{a}_1$) is also connected to the vertex in ${\bf W}^2(a), \ldots, {\bf
W}^{s-2}(a)$ left isolated in the graph $B^-_{r,s}({\bf W}^i(a),
{\bf X}^i)$ (resp. to the isolated vertex in ${\bf W}^1(\overline{a})_1, \ldots, {\bf
W}^{s-2}(\overline{a})_1$ belonging to $B^-_{r,s}({\bf W}^i(\overline{a}),
{\bf X}^i)$). Finally $a_1$ is connected to $X^1_1$. The edge $\{a_1,X^1_1\}$ ensures that the union of $B^+_{r,s-1}({\bf
T})$ and the graph spanned by empires $\bf a$, ${\bf \overline{a}}$, ${\bf X}^1$, ${\bf W}^2(a), \ldots, {\bf W}^{s-2}(a)$ and ${\bf W}^1(\overline{a}), \ldots, {\bf W}^{s-2}(\overline{a})$ is just a single tree. The edges connecting empires $\bf a$, ${\bf \overline{a}}$, with ${\bf W}^2(a), \ldots, {\bf W}^{s-2}(a)$ and ${\bf W}^1(\overline{a}), \ldots, {\bf W}^{s-2}(\overline{a})$, because of the properties of the $({\bf W}^i(\ell),{\bf X}^i)$-colour constraining gadgets, prevent ${\bf a}$ and ${\bf {\overline
a}}$ from being able to use the colours of the ${\bf X}^i$ in any colouring of $T(\Phi)$.
Each group $\{c^{1}, \ldots, c^{s-1}\}$ in ${\cal C}$ is replaced by empires ${\bf c}^{1}, \ldots, {\bf
c}^{s-1}$ (different groups replaced by different sets of empires). The complete graph on $\{T,c^{1}, \ldots, c^{s-1}\}$ is replaced by a copy of $B_{r,s-1}$ on the corresponding empires (this ensures that the union of $B^+_{r,s-1}({\bf T})$ and such $B_{r,s-1}$ form a single tree). We then attach to this graph $s-1$ graphs $B^-_{r,s}({\bf b}^{j},{\bf c}^{j})$, for $j \in \{1, \ldots,
s-1\}$. Empire ${\bf b}^{j}$ must have the same colour as ${\bf
c}^{j}$ and it has, in $B^-_{r,s}({\bf b}^{j},{\bf c}^{j})$, an isolated vertex, $b^{j}_1$. If $\ell$ is the unique element of $\cal A$ adjacent to $c^{j}$ in the formula graph then $\{b^{j}_1, \ell_1\}$ is an edge of $T(\Phi)$. A schematic representation of the subgraph induced by [**T**]{}, empires ${\bf c}^1, \ldots, {\bf c}^{s-1}$, along with the copies of $B^-_{r,s}({\bf b}^{j},{\bf c}^{j})$ is given in Figure \[cl\].
![\[cl\] A schematic representation of [**T**]{}, empires ${\bf c}^1, \ldots, {\bf c}^{s-1}$, all edges among these along with the copies of $B^-_{r,s}({\bf b}^{j},{\bf c}^{j})$.](Clause)
The overall construction is such that for each vertex in $V(\Phi)$ there is an equivalent empire in $V(T(\Phi))$, and for each edge in $E(\Phi)$ there is an edge $\{u,v\} \in E(T(\Phi))$ that either connects the corresponding empires $\bf u$ and $\bf v$ or connects $\bf u$ to an empire that must be given the same colour as $\bf v$ in any $(s,r)$-colouring of $T(\Phi)$. From this we can see that $T(\Phi)$ admits an $(s,r)$-colouring if and only if $\Phi$ admits an $s$-colouring.
General Planar Graphs {#planar}
=====================
Theorem \[t1:trees\] of last section does not exclude the possibility that $s$-COL$_r$ be solvable in polynomial time for arbitrary planar graphs provided $s \geq 2r$. Here we show that in fact this is not the case. The main result of this section is the following:
\[t2:planar\] Let $r$ and $s$ be fixed positive integers with $r \geq 2$, then the [$s$-COL$_r$]{} problem is [NP]{}-hard if $3 \leq s <
6r-3-2\delta_{r,2}$, and solvable in polynomial time if $s=2$ or $s
\geq 6r$.
Note that $s$-COL$_r$ can be solved in polynomial time for $s=2$ (as checking if the reduced graph of a planar graph is bipartite is easy) and for $s \geq 6r$ (because of Heawood’s result). Also, Theorem \[t1:trees\] proves the case $s
< 2r$. Therefore only the case $s \geq 2r$ needs further discussion. The bulk of the argument is similar to that of Theorem \[Paths2\] and \[NPhard\] with a couple of differences. First, this time we only need the graph resulting from the transformation of the initial formula graph to be planar (note that the formula graph in general is NOT planar). On the other hand, we want the transformation to work for much larger values of $s$. Our solution hinges on proving that all complete subgraphs of the starting formula graph and a number of other gadgets attached to them have sufficiently large thickness. For the complete graphs we may use well-known results [@beineke97:_biplan], whereas for the specific gadgets we need a bespoke construction.
Using the gadgets descrived above we can prove the following result, which completes the proof of Theorem \[t2:planar\].
\[NPhardPlanar\] [$s$-COL(FG$(s,s-1))\leq_p s$-COL$_r$]{}, for any $r \geq 2$ and $2r
\leq s < 6r-3- 2\delta_{r,2}$.
[**Proof.**]{} The proof mirrors that of Theorem \[NPhard\]. We once again give a set of replacement rules to convert a $(s,s-1)$-formula graph $\Phi$ into a planar graph $G(\Phi)$ that is $(s,r)$-colourable if and only if $\Phi$ is $s$-colourable.
The copy of $K_s$ induced by the vertex set $\cal T$ in $\Phi$ is replaced by $r$ edge disjoint subgraphs of $K_s$. For $s \leq 6r-4$ the existence of such graphs is granted by known results on the thickness of $K_s$ [@beineke97:_biplan]. W.l.o.g. we may assume that the empires of the resulting graph (which, as usual, we label ${\bf T}$, ${\bf F}$, and ${\bf X}^1,
{\bf X}^2, \ldots$) are coloured “TRUE", “FALSE", “OTHER$^1$", $\ldots$, “OTHER$^{s-2}$" respectively. The graph is then expanded, for each $a, \overline{a} \in {\cal A}$ using empires ${\bf W}^2(a),
\ldots,{\bf W}^{s-2}(a)$ and ${\bf W}^1(\overline{a}), \ldots, {\bf W}^{s-2}(\overline{a})$ and the graphs $D_{r,s}({\bf W}^i(a), {\bf X}^i)$ for all $i$ such that $2 \leq i
\leq s-2$, and $D_{r,s}({\bf W}^i(\overline{a}), {\bf X}^i)$ for all $i$ such that $1 \leq i \leq s-2$. The graphs $\Phi[\bigcup \{a,\overline{a},X^j\}]$ and $\Phi[\{T\} \cup {\cal C}]$ are subject to transformations similar to those in Theorem \[NPhard\] but using the planar decomposition of the complete graph instead of copies of $B_{r,s}$ and graphs $D_{r,s}({\bf u},{\bf v})$ instead of $B_{r,s}^-({\bf u}, {\bf v})$.
As in Theorem \[NPhard\], every vertex in $V(\Phi)$ has a corresponding empire in $V(G(\Phi))$, and every edge $\{u, v\} \in E(\Phi)$ has a corresponding edge in $E(G(\Phi))$ that connects either the empires ${\bf u}$ and ${\bf v}$ or empires that must be given the same colour as them in any proper $(s,r)$-colouring. It follows that $G(\Phi)$ admits a proper $(s,r)$-colouring if and only if $\Phi$ admits a proper $s$-colouring.
The reduction in the proof of Theorem \[NPhardPlanar\] shows that for any given formula graph $\Phi$ one can define a planar graph $G(\Phi)$ which is formed by (at least) $r$ connected components and reduces to $\Phi$. Thus the proof is actually showing, for $s
\geq 2r$, the NP-hardness of colouring, in the traditional sense, graphs of thickness $r$. The following result can be obtained extending the proof to any $s>3$ and using a more direct reduction from 3-SAT for $s=3$.
It is [NP]{}-hard to decide whether a graph of thickness $r>1$ can be coloured with $s < 6r - 3 - 2\delta_{r,2}$ colours.
An obvious way to improve Theorem \[NPhardPlanar\] (and perhaps close the small gap between NP-hard and polynomially decidable cases) would be to use different gadgets to replace the complete subgraphs of $\Phi$. However, it seems difficult to devise a graph with high thickness that shares the colour constraining properties of the complete graph. Perhaps, a more direct reduction from the satisfiability problem may provide a handle on the remaining open cases.
[^1]: A preliminary version of this work was presented at the 37th International Workshop on Graph-Theoretic Concepts in Computer Science (Teplá Monastery, Czech Rep., June 2011).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We report magnetic and spectroscopic observations and modeling of the Of?p star [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}. Using more than 75 new spectra, we have measured the equivalent width variations and examined the dynamic spectra of photospheric and wind-sensitive spectral lines. A period search results in an unambiguous $73.41$ d variability period. High resolution spectropolarimetric data analyzed using Least-Squares Deconvolution yield a Zeeman signature detected in the mean Stokes $V$ profile corresponding to phase 0.5 of the spectral ephemeris. Interpreting the 73.41 d period as the stellar rotational period, we have phased the equivalent widths and inferred longitudinal field measurements. The phased magnetic data exhibit a weak sinusoidal variation, with maximum of about 565 G at phase 0.5, and a minimum of about -335 G at phase 0.0, with extrema approximately in phase with the (double-wave) H$\alpha$ equivalent width variation. Modeling of the H$\alpha$ equivalent width variation assuming a quasi-3D magnetospheric model produces a unique solution for the ambiguous couplet of inclination and magnetic obliquity angles: $(i, \beta)$ or $(\beta, i)=(35\degr,90\degr)$. Adopting either geometry, the longitudinal field variation yields a dipole polar intensity $B_{\rm d}=2.6\pm 0.9$ kG, consistent with that obtained from direct modelling of the Stokes $V$ profiles. We derive a wind magnetic confinement parameter $\eta_*\simeq 100$, leading to an Alfvén radius $R_{\rm A}\simeq 3-5~R_*$, and a Kepler radius $R_{\rm K}\simeq 20~R_*$. This supports a physical scenario in which the H$\alpha$ emission and other line variability have their origin in an oblique, co-rotating ’dynamical magnetosphere’ structure resulting from a magnetically channeled wind. Nevertheless, the details of the formation of spectral lines and their variability within this framework remain generally poorly understood.'
author:
- |
G.A. Wade[^1]$^1$, R.H. Barbá$^2$, J. Grunhut$^3$, F. Martins$^4$, V. Petit$^5$[^2], J.O. Sundqvist$^6$,\
$^{1}$Department of Physics, Royal Military College of Canada, PO Box 17000 Station Forces, Kingston, ON, Canada K7K 7B4\
$^{2}$Departamento de Física, Universidad de La Serena, Av. Cisternas 1200 Norte, La Serena, Chile\
$^{3}$European Southern Observatories, Karl-Schwarzschild-Str. 2, 85748, Garching, Germany\
$^{4}$LUPM-UMR5299, CNRS & Université Montpellier II, Place Eugène Bataillon, F-34095, Montpellier, France\
$^5$Department of Physics and Astronomy, Bartol Research Institute, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, USA\
$^6$Institut für Astronomie und Astrophysik der Universität München, Scheinerstr. 1, D-81679 München, Germany\
$^7$Department of Astronomy, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 475 N Charter Street, Madison, WI 53706, USA\
$^8$Space Telescope Science Institute, 3700 San Martin Drive, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA\
$^9$UJF-Grenoble 1/CNRS-INSU, Institut de Planétologie et d’Astrophysique de Grenoble (IPAG) UMR 5274, 38041, Grenoble, France\
$^{10}$Instituto de Astrofísica de Andaluc' ia-CSIC, Glorieta de la Astronomía s/n, E-18008 Granada, Spain\
$^{11}$Instituto de Astrofísica de La Plata (CCT La Plata-CONICET, Universidad Nacional de La Plata), Paseo del Bosque s/n, 1900 La Plata, Argentina\
$^{12}$Las Campanas Observatory, Observatories of the Carnegie Institution of Washington, La Serena, Chile\
$^{13}$FNRS-GAPHE, Département AGO, Université de Liège, Allée du 6 Août 17, Bat. B5C, B4000-Liège, Belgium\
$^{14}$Groupe d’Astrophysique des Hautes Energies, Institut d’Astrophysique et de Géophysique, Université de Liège, 17, Allée du 6 Août, B5c, B-4000 Sart Tilman, Belgium\
$^{15}$Penn State Worthington Scranton, Dunmore, PA 18512, USA
bibliography:
- 'cpd.bib'
date: 'Accepted . Received , in original form '
title: 'Rotation, spectral variability, magnetic geometry and magnetosphere of the Of?p star [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}[^3]'
---
\[firstpage\]
Stars : rotation – Stars: massive – Instrumentation : spectropolarimetry.
Introduction
============
The Of?p stars are mid-O-type stars identified by a number of peculiar observational properties. The classification was first introduced by @1972AJ.....77..312W according to the presence of C [iii]{} $\lambda 4650$ emission with a strength comparable to the neighbouring N [iii]{} lines. Well-studied Of?p stars are now known to exhibit recurrent, and apparently periodic, spectral variations (in Balmer, He [i]{}, C [iii]{} and Si [iii]{} lines), narrow P Cygni or emission components in the Balmer lines and He [i]{} lines, and UV wind lines weaker than those of typical Of supergiants .
Only 5 Galactic Of?p stars are known [@Walbetal10a]: HD 108, HD 148937, HD 191612, NGC 1624-2 and [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}. Four of these stars - HD 108, HD 148937, HD 191612 and NGC 1624-2 - have been studied in detail based on optical spectra, and in some cases UV spectra as well. In recent years, they have been carefully examined for the presence of magnetic fields [@2006MNRAS.365L...6D; @2010MNRAS.407.1423M; @2011MNRAS.416.3160W; @2012MNRAS.419.2459W; @2012MNRAS.425.1278W] and all have been clearly detected. It therefore appears that the particular spectral peculiarities that define the Of?p classification are a consequence of their magnetism. Indeed, reported 4 FORS+VLT measurements of the longitudinal magnetic field of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} at the few hundred G level, several of which correspond to detections at somewhat more than 3$\sigma$ significance.
Like HD 108, HD 191612, HD 148937 and NGC 1624-2, [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} is a spectroscopic variable star [e.g. @Walbetal10a]. The spectrum of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} was first described as a peculiar Of type by @1973AJ.....78.1067W and @1977ApJS...35..111G. Garrison et al. commented: ’Very peculiar spectrum. Carbon (C [iii]{} $\lambda$4070) is strong, nitrogen weak. H and He [ii]{} lines are broad, while He [i]{} lines are sharp,’ Walborn classified the spectrum as O6.5fp. The outstanding peculiarity was that although He [ii]{} $\lambda$4686 emission was very strong, appropriate for an Of supergiant, the N [iii]{} $\lambda$4640 emission was incompatibly not.
While @1973AJ.....78.1067W announced HD 191612 as a new, third member of the Of?p class, it is significant that no such association was made for [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}. The reason was that no C [iii]{} $\lambda$4650 emission was detected in [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}, while a comparable emission strength to that of N [iii]{} was the primary defining Of?p characteristic. (Of course, it was subsequently discovered that the C [iii]{} emission disappears entirely at the minimum phase of HD 191612 [@2004ApJ...617L..61W; @2007MNRAS.381..433H; @2011MNRAS.416.3160W]). It was not until the intensive OWN survey’s high-resolution monitoring of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} [@2010RMxAC..38...30B] revealed extreme variations in $\lambda$4686 and Balmer lines, analogous to those of HD 191612, that the association was made [@Walbetal10a] and [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} identified as an Of?p star.
In this paper we perform a first detailed investigation of the combined magnetic and variability properties of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} using an extensive spectroscopic and high-resolution spectropolarimetric dataset. In Sect. 2 we discuss the data acquired and the methods of analysis used. In Sect. 3 we re-examine the physical properties of the star, as well as its projected rotational velocity. In Sect. 4 we examine the spectral characteristics and variability, identifying periodic variability of the H$\alpha$ and other emission and absorption lines and deriving the rotational period of the star. In Sect. 5 we analyse in detail the magnetic data acquired at the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope (CFHT). In Sect. 6 we employ the H$\alpha$ EW variation and CFHT magnetic data to constrain the stellar and magnetic geometry and the surface field strength. In Sect. 7 we derive the magnetospheric properties of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}. Finally, in Sects. 8 we summarize our results, and explore the implications of our study, particularly regarding the variability and other properties of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}, the confinement and structure of its stellar wind, and of the properties of the general class of Of?p stars.
Observations
============
------------------ ------------------- ---------------- ----------- -- -- -- --
Spectrograph Telescope Spectral Range Resolving
(Å) Power
Echelle 2.5 m LCO/du Pont 3600 – 9200 46,000
FEROS 2.2 m ESO/MPI 3500 – 9200 48,000
REOSC 2.15 m CASLEO 3800 – 6000 15,000
Boller & Chivens 2.5 m LCO/du Pont 3900 – 5500 2,500
ESPaDOnS 3.6 m CFHT 3650 – 10000 65,000
------------------ ------------------- ---------------- ----------- -- -- -- --
: Spectrographs used for the acquisition of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} spectroscopy and spectropolarimetry.[]{data-label="spectrographs"}
------------- ------- ----------- -------------- -- -- -- -- -- --
HJD Phase Exp. time Spectrograph
(s)
2453875.483 0.511 600 Echelle
2454246.515 0.565 1800 FEROS
2454610.486 0.523 900 B&C
2454627.467 0.754 1800 FEROS
2454786.865 0.926 900 Echelle
2454842.716 0.687 1800 REOSC
2454846.677 0.741 1800 REOSC
2454847.609 0.753 2000 REOSC
2454848.650 0.767 1800 REOSC
2454954.537 0.210 1800 FEROS
2454955.500 0.223 1800 FEROS
2454964.476 0.345 1500 Echelle
2455341.455 0.481 1200 Echelle
2455495.865 0.584 900 B&C
2455604.796 0.068 1800 REOSC
2455641.586 0.569 1800 REOSC
2455643.569 0.596 1800 REOSC
2455646.597 0.637 900 B&C
2455669.553 0.950 900 B&C
2455672.532 0.990 1200 Echelle
2455696.473 0.317 2700 REOSC
2455697.494 0.331 2400 REOSC
2455698.518 0.344 2400 REOSC
2455699.508 0.358 2400 REOSC
2455716.479 0.589 900 B&C
2455898.729 0.072 900 B&C
2455976.599 0.133 1200 Echelle
2456053.500 0.180 900 B&C
2456080.469 0.547 1800 Echelle
2456098.461 0.793 2000 FEROS
2456340.705 0.092 900 B&C
2456367.653 0.460 900 B&C
2456381.587 0.649 900 B&C
------------- ------- ----------- -------------- -- -- -- -- -- --
: Log of spectroscopic observations showing heliocentric Julian Date, rotational phase according to Eq. (1), and exposure time. The column ’Spectrograph’ corresponds to the facilities described in Table 1.[]{data-label="table:spectroscopy"}
Spectroscopic observations
--------------------------
Spectroscopic observations of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} were obtained in the framework of two spectroscopic surveys: the [High-resolution spectroscopic monitoring of Southern O and WN-type Stars]{} [The “OWN Survey”, @2010RMxAC..38...30B] and the [Galactic O Star Spectroscopic Survey]{} [“GOSSS”, @2011hsa6.conf..467M] In the OWN Survey program, high-resolution and high signal-to-noise spectra are being acquired for a sample of 240 massive southern stars selected from the [ Galactic O Star Catalogue]{} [GOSC version 1, @2004ApJS..151..103M]. One of the goals is to determine precise radial velocities in order to detect new binaries among these stars for which there is scarce or no indication of multiplicity. An additional goal is to detect possible spectral variations which can be related to multiplicity, the presence of magnetic fields, pulsation, or eruptive behaviour. [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} was included early in the observed sample, and monitored systematically as large variations in the intensity of the He [ii]{} $\lambda 4686$ emission line were detected. The star was observed spectroscopically from three different locations: Las Campanas Observatory (LCO), and La Silla Observatory (LSO), both in Chile, and Complejo Astronómico El Leoncito (CASLEO), in Argentina, during 33 nights between 2006 and 2012.
Seven spectrograms were obtained with an échelle spectrograph attached to the 2.5 m LCO/du Pont telescope. The spectral resolving power is about 46,000. Twelve spectrograms were obtained with the FEROS échelle spectrograph attached to the 2.2 m ESO/MPI telescope. In this case, the spectral resolving power is about 48,000. Additionally, four spectrograms were obtained with the REOSC échelle spectrograph[^4] attached to the 2.15 m CASLEO/Jorge Sahade telescope, with a resolving power of about 15,000. Thorium-Argon comparison lamp exposures were obtained before or after the science exposures. LCO and CASLEO échelle spectrograms were reduced using the [Echelle]{} package layered in IRAF[^5], while FEROS spectrograms were reduced using the standard MIDAS pipeline. All spectrograms were bias subtracted, flat-fielded, echelle order identified, and extracted, and finally wavelength calibrated. Table \[spectrographs\] presents technical details of the different spectrographs utilized.
Under the GOSSS program, we have obtained ten spectrograms of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}between 2008 and 2013 using the Boller & Chivens spectrograph attached to the 2.5 m LCO/du Pont telescope, with a spectral resolving power of about 2,500. Helium-Neon-Argon comparison lamps were used for wavelength calibration. A dedicated pipeline was developed for the complete reduction of GOSSS observations. Detailed description about the observing procedures and data reduction are described by Sota et al. (2011) and Sota et al. (2014).
The log of spectroscopic observations is reported in Table \[table:spectroscopy\].
Spectropolarimetric observations
--------------------------------
Spectropolarimetric observations of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} were obtained using the ESPaDOnS spectropolarimeter at the CFHT in 2012 and 2013 within the context of the Magnetism in Massive Stars (MiMeS) Large Program [@2014IAUS..302..265W Wade et al., in prep.]. Altogether, 44 Stokes $V$ sequences were obtained.
Each polarimetric sequence consisted of four individual subexposures taken in different polarimeter configurations. From each set of four subexposures we derive a mean Stokes $V$ spectrum following the procedure of @1997MNRAS.291..658D, ensuring in particular that all spurious signatures are [ suppressed]{} at first order. Diagnostic null polarization spectra (labeled $N$) are calculated by combining the four subexposures in such a way that polarization cancels out, allowing us to check that no spurious signals are present in the data (see @1997MNRAS.291..658D for more details on how $N$ is defined). All frames were processed using the Upena pipeline feeding Libre ESpRIT [@1997MNRAS.291..658D], a fully automatic reduction package installed at CFHT for optimal extraction of ESPaDOnS spectra. The peak signal-to-noise ratios per 1.8 kms$^{-1}$ velocity bin in the reduced spectra range from about 70 to nearly 266, with a median of 200, depending on the exposure time and on weather conditions.
The log of CFHT observations is presented in Table \[tab:specpol\].
[ We also obtained one observation of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} with the HARPS instrument in polarimetric model. The observing procedure was fundamentally the same as that described above for ESPaDOnS. Two consecutive observations were acquired with exposure times of 3600s apiece. The peak SNR of the combined spectrum was 110 per 1 km/s spectral pixel. The mean HJD of the observation is 2455905.798, corresponding to phase 0.168 according to the ephemeris defined in Eq. (1).]{}
---------- ------------- ------ -------- ------- ------------------- ------------------------ ------------- ------------------------------------- --------- ------------- ------------------------------------- --------- -- --
Odometer HJD Exp SNR Phase $\overline{\rm Phase}$ $P_{\rm V}$ ${\ensuremath{\langle B_z\rangle}}$ $|z_V|$ $P_{\rm N}$ ${\ensuremath{\langle N_z\rangle}}$ $|z_N|$
(s) (/pix) (%) (%)
1051146 2454844.994 4340 204 0.718
1051150 2454845.047 4340 204 0.718
1513790 2455931.006 4340 264 0.511
1513798 2455931.084 4340 244 0.513
1513935 2455931.861 4340 235 0.523
1513939 2455931.913 4340 238 0.524
1514254 2455933.035 4340 235 0.539
1514415 2455934.004 4340 211 0.552 } [-6]{}[0.1in]{}
1514600 2455935.001 4340 266 0.566
1514818 2455936.014 4340 243 0.580
1515076 2455936.952 4340 252 0.592
1515397 2455938.928 4340 263 0.619 } [-4]{}[0.1in]{}
1515606 2455940.963 4340 191 0.647
1516007 2455942.995 4340 265 0.675
1516011 2455943.048 4340 241 0.675
1516165 2455943.988 4340 259 0.688 } [-4]{}[0.1in]{}
1524346 2455967.882 4340 212 0.014
1524350 2455967.936 4340 209 0.015
1524524 2455968.943 4340 204 0.028
1524528 2455968.997 4340 178 0.029
1524741 2455969.865 4340 233 0.041
1524745 2455969.918 4340 247 0.042 } [-6]{}[0.1in]{}
1597878 2456259.116 3000 188 0.981
1597882 2456259.153 3000 168 0.982
1601442 2456283.041 3000 127 0.307
1601446 2456283.079 3000 128 0.307
1601450 2456283.116 3000 145 0.308
1601454 2456283.153 3000 138 0.308
1602166 2456285.940 3000 200 0.346
1602170 2456285.977 3000 200 0.347
1602174 2456286.013 3000 205 0.347
1602178 2456286.050 3000 198 0.348 } [-8]{}[0.1in]{}
1603502 2456290.985 3000 139 0.415
1603506 2456291.022 3000 131 0.416
1603510 2456291.059 3000 139 0.416
1603514 2456291.095 3000 138 0.417 } [-4]{}[0.1in]{}
1604359 2456294.875 3000 142 0.468
1604363 2456294.912 3000 111 0.469
1604367 2456294.949 3000 107 0.469
1604371 2456294.986 3000 105 0.470
1604375 2456295.023 3000 102 0.470
1604379 2456295.060 3000 67 0.471
1604383 2456295.097 3000 73 0.471
1604387 2456295.134 3000 76 0.472 } [-8]{}[0.1in]{}
---------- ------------- ------ -------- ------- ------------------- ------------------------ ------------- ------------------------------------- --------- ------------- ------------------------------------- --------- -- --
Stellar physical and wind properties
====================================
------------------------------------------------- --------------------------- --
Spectral type Of?p
$T_{\rm eff}$ (K) 35 000 $\pm$ 2000
$\log g$ (cgs) 4.0 $\pm$ 0.1
R$_{\star}$ (R$_\odot$) 12.9 $\pm 3.0$
$\log (L_\star/L_\odot)$ 5.35$\pm 0.15$
$M_{\rm evol}$ ($M_{\odot}$) 35$\pm$6
$M_{\rm spec}$ ($M_{\odot}$) 61$\pm$33
$v\sin i$ (kms$^{-1}$) $\ltsim 80$
$P_{\rm rot}$ (d) $73.41\pm 0.05$
$\log \dot{M}_{\rm B=0}$ (M$_{\odot}$yr$^{-1}$) $-6.0$
$v_{\infty}$ (kms$^{-1}$) 2400
$B_{\rm d}$ (G) $2600\pm 900$
$i$ ($\degr$) $35\pm 3$
$\beta$ ($\degr$) $90\pm 4$
$\eta_*$ 20-900 (93)
$R_{\rm A}$ ($R_*$) 2.1-5.5 (3.4)
$R_{\rm K}$ ($R_*$) 14.2-29.9 (18.7)
$\tau_{\rm spin}$ 0.45 Myr
N/H $<5\times$10$^{-5}$
C/H $(5\pm 3)\times$10$^{-5}$
------------------------------------------------- --------------------------- --
: Summary of physical, wind and magnetic properties of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}. Apart from the luminosity $L/L_\odot$ (which was adopted), all parameters are derived in this paper. The mass-loss rate corresponds to the CMFGEN radiatively-driven rate required to reasonably reproduce the H$\alpha$ profile; this value is only indicative, since the spherical symmetry assumed by CMFGEN is clearly broken in the case of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}. The wind magnetic confinement parameter $\eta_*$, the rotation parameter $W$ and the characteristic spin down time $\tau_{\rm spin}$ are defined and described in Sect. 7. Values in brackets for $\eta_*$, $R_{\rm A}$ and $R_{\rm K}$ correspond to the best-fit parameters.
\[params\]
We have used the atmosphere code CMFGEN [@hm98] to determine the stellar parameters of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}. CMFGEN computes non-LTE, spherical models including an outflowing wind and line-blanketing. A complete description of the code is given by Hillier & Miller (1998). We have included the following elements in our models: H, He, C, N, O, Ne, Mg, Si, S, Ar, Ca, Fe and Ni. A solar metallicity was adopted.
![Best fit CMFGEN model (red) of the observed ESPaDOnS spectrum (black, [ phase 0.72, average of spectra \#s 1051146/50]{}) for [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}.[]{data-label="fig_fit"}](fit_cpd.eps){width="9cm"}
We used the classical helium ionization balance method to constrain the effective temperature. As shown in Sect. 4, spectral variability is observed in He [i]{} lines. Part of the variability may be due to emission from [ the stellar wind (i.e. the magnetosphere inferred later in the paper),]{} contaminating the underlying photospheric features. The determination of $T_{\rm eff}$ is thus difficult. It was performed using spectra [ \#1051146/50 (corresponding to phase 0.718 of the rotational ephemeris described in Sect. 4)]{} where the [ He [i]{} lines were the strongest, presumably minimizing contamination from the wind and]{} leaving access to the [ cleanest]{} photospheric profiles. [ Nevertheless, some wind-sensitive lines are poorly reproduced. Notably He [ii]{} $\lambda 4686$ exhibits a P Cyg-like profile, with a strong redshifted absorption that (unlike most other absorption features in the spectrum) is under-fit by the model. The profile of this line may be suggestive of accretion.]{}
The relative strength of He [i]{} and He [ii]{} lines indicates a temperature of about 35000 K, with an uncertainty of 2000 K. The surface gravity was determined from the wings of the numerous Balmer lines available in the ESPaDOnS spectrum. The line cores are variable but are not the main gravity diagnostics so that our $\log g$ estimate is safe. We found that $\log g$ = 4.0$\pm$0.1 provided the best fit. In absence of strong constraint on the distance of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}, we decided to adopt a luminosity of $10^{5.35\pm0.15}$ $L_\odot$. This value is intermediate between that of an O6.5 dwarf and giant [@msh05], and similar to that of the Of?p star HD 191612 [@2007MNRAS.381..433H]. The corresponding radius is thus 12.9$\pm$3.0 $R_{\odot}$. The best fit of the spectrum with maximum He [i]{} 4471 absorption is shown in Fig. \[fig\_fit\].
The evolutionary mass, determined from the position in the HR diagram and interpolation between the tracks of Meynet & Maeder (2005), is 35$\pm$6 $M_{\odot}$. The spectroscopic mass, obtained from the surface gravity and the radius, is 61$\pm$33 $M_{\odot}$. The mass estimates are consistent within the error bars, which remain large because of the uncertainties on the distance (and thus on the luminosity). We also note that the evolutionary tracks adopted here do not include the effects of a strong, large-scale stellar magnetic field.
The shape of the photospheric lines could be reproduced with different combinations of rotational velocities and macroturbulence. In the extreme cases, a macroturbulent isotropic velocity of 40 [kms$^{-1}\,$]{} and a negligible rotational velocity, or no macroturbulence and [$v\sin i\,$]{} = 80 [kms$^{-1}\,$]{}, correctly reproduce the shape of the photospheric lines. Using C [iii]{} and N [iii]{} lines as indicators (C [iii]{} $\lambda$4070 and N [iii]{} $\lambda$4505–4515 being the main diagnostics), we estimated the nitrogen and carbon content to be N/H$<$5.0$\times$10$^{-5}$ and C/H=(5.0$\pm$3.0)$\times$10$^{-5}$. Both elements are underabundant compared to the Sun, which seems consistent with the location of the star in the outer part of the disk, beyond the solar circle. The carbon to nitrogen ratio is consistent with little enrichment: N/C$<$1.0, compared to 0.25 for the sun . There is no evidence for strong He enrichment. Hence the abundances of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} have barely been affected by chemical processing occurring inside the star.
Finally, we adopted a wind terminal velocity of 2400 km s$^{-1}$, and a velocity field slope $\beta$=1.0. These values are typical of O dwarfs/giants. We found that a mass loss rate of 10$^{-6}$ M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ leads to a density $\rho = {\dot M_{\rm B=0}}/(4 \pi r^2 v)$ able to correctly reproduce the shape of H${\alpha}$ in the spectrum showing the weakest nebular contamination. We caution that this value of $\dot M$ should not be blindly interpreted as the true mass loss rate of this magnetic star’s outflow. As discussed in detail in Sect. 7, the circumstellar structure of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} is expected to be highly aspherical and dominated by infalling material. MHD models by ud-Doula et al. (2008) show that for a star like [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}, the true rate of mass lost from the star into interstellar space (i.e. from the top of the magnetosphere) is reduced by a factor of about 5, i.e. $\sim 80$% of the material leaving the surface actually falls back upon the star. Hence the true mass loss rate is most likely significantly lower than 10$^{-6}$ M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$. Rather, the CMFGEN $\dot M_{\rm B=0}$ should be viewed as a parameter giving a first rough estimate of the expected circumstellar density (see further Sect. 7).
Spectral variability and period {#sect_var}
===============================
![Binned ASAS photometry phased with the spectroscopic ephemeris given by Eq. (1). Only a marginal variation is detected.[]{data-label="phot"}](asas.ps){width="8cm"}
![Periodogram obtained from the H$\alpha$ EW (solid black) and He[ii]{} $\lambda$4686 EW (solid red) measurements. A clear and unique signal at 36.7d is detected.[]{data-label="periodogram"}](periodogram_noharm.eps){width="8cm"}
Many lines in the spectrum of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} show significant variability.
Following a similar analysis as applied by the MiMeS collaboration to other magnetic O-type stars [e.g. @2012MNRAS.426.2208G; @2012MNRAS.419.2459W], we first characterise the line variability using the equivalent width (EW). Before measuring the EW, each spectral line was locally re-normalised using the surrounding continuum, and the EWs were computed by numerically integrating over the line profile. The 1$\sigma$ uncertainties were calculated by propagating the individual pixel uncertainties in quadrature. Precomputed pixel error bars were only available for the ESPaDOnS and HARPS spectra, which required us to assign a single uncertainty to each pixel for the other spectra that was inferred from the RMS scatter of the Stokes $I$ flux in the continuum regions around each spectral line.
A period search was performed on the EW measurements from all spectra using the Lomb-Scargle technique [@1992nrfa.book.....P] and an extension of this technique to higher harmonics [@1996ApJ...460L.107S]. [ In this approach, a harmonic function with free parameters $a_1, a_2, a_0$ and $P$ (the latter being the period) corresponding to the form $a_1\sin(\omega t) + a_2\cos(\omega t) + a_0$, where $\omega = 2\pi/P$, is fit to the data. Adding the first harmonic leads to the introduction of additional terms of the form $a_3\sin(2\omega t) + a_4\cos(2\omega t)$. The resulting periodograms are defined as the power $\sum\limits_{i=1}^4 a_i^2$ versus period $P$. ]{}
The periodograms from the strongly variable lines (such as H$\alpha$, H$\beta$, He[i]{} $\lambda$5876 and He[ii]{} $\lambda$4686) show significant power at $\sim$36.7d. When phased with this period, the EW variations show clear sinusoidal variations. However, the sinusoidal variations of the He[i]{} $\lambda$5876 measurements show considerably more scatter than the other lines. Furthermore, a comparison of spectra obtained at different epochs, but at similar phases according to the $\sim$36.7d period, show [ important differences. These include a]{} systematic velocity offset, a difference in peak emission flux, and opposite skew, of the emission line profiles. This effect is particularly striking for [ H$\alpha$ and]{} He [ii]{} $\lambda 4686$, and is illustrated in Fig. \[periodogram2\]. [ Lines in the spectrum of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} that are primarily in absorption are much more weakly variable; they are therefore poor probes of the wind variability reflected in the emission lines. Nevertheless, the behaviour of lines that are formed deeper in the photosphere (e.g. He [ii]{} $\lambda 4542$, C [iv]{} $\lambda\lambda 5801, 5811$) are indicative of a stable photospheric spectrum that is not plausibly responsible for the phenomenon discussed above.]{}
The detailed explanation is no different then the implementation used in fsrch:
We therefore carried out a new period search including the contributions from the first harmonic - by including additional harmonics we change not only the relative power in each peak, but also the precise location of the peaks. The resulting periodograms showed two clear peaks, one consistent with the previous periodogram at $\sim$36.7d and a new peak at 73.41$\pm0.05$d, twice the previously identified period. When phased with this longer period, the EW variations [ continue to]{} phase coherently. [ However, this new phasing achieves a much better]{} agreement between the line profile shapes from spectra corresponding to similar phases, but obtained at different epochs. [ We therefore conclude that a period of 74.41d provides a much better solution to the phase variability of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}, and we adopt this period]{} as the stellar rotation period within the context of a magnetically-confined wind and the oblique rotator model [@1950MNRAS.110..395S; @1997ApJ...485L..29B; @2011MNRAS.416.3160W]. Adopting maximum H$\alpha$ emission (minimum EW) as the reference date we derive the following ephemeris: $${\rm HJD}^{\rm max}_{\rm emis} = 2454645.49(05) + 73.41(05)\cdot E,$$ where the uncertainties (1$\sigma$ limits) in the last digits are indicated in brackets. [ The uncertainties represent the formal 1$\sigma$ uncertainty computed from the $\chi^2$ statistic corresponding to second-order harmonic fits carried out on the EW variations for periods near 73d.]{}
![Comparison of H$\alpha$ and He[ii]{} $\lambda$4686 profiles obtained at similar phases, but at different epochs. [ [*Left -*]{} Assuming a period of 36.7d, profile shapes at similar phases do not agree. [*Right -*]{} Assuming a period of 73.4d, profile shapes at similar phases agree well.]{} As discussed in the text, we identify the $P=73.41\pm0.05$ as the rotation period based on the better agreement of the profiles at all phases.[]{data-label="periodogram2"}](halpha_comp.eps "fig:"){width="3.2in"} ![Comparison of H$\alpha$ and He[ii]{} $\lambda$4686 profiles obtained at similar phases, but at different epochs. [ [*Left -*]{} Assuming a period of 36.7d, profile shapes at similar phases do not agree. [*Right -*]{} Assuming a period of 73.4d, profile shapes at similar phases agree well.]{} As discussed in the text, we identify the $P=73.41\pm0.05$ as the rotation period based on the better agreement of the profiles at all phases.[]{data-label="periodogram2"}](he2_4686_comp.eps "fig:"){width="3.2in"}
The phased EW measurements are illustrated in Fig. \[eqw\_fig\]. [ The measurements obtained from the various spectral datasets agree reasonably well.]{} Examination of Fig \[eqw\_fig\] shows that most lines with significant variability exhibit double-wave variations. H$\alpha$ shows the most significant variability with a peak-to-peak EW variation of $\sim$5 Å. Maximum emission occurs at phase 0 for most lines, while another emission peak occurs one-half of a cycle later. The value of the EW measurements of H$\alpha$ and He[ii]{} $\lambda$4686 at maximum emission are similar at both emission maxima, while a higher emission level occurs at phase 0.5 for some other lines (this is most evident in the EW curves of H$\beta$ and He[i ]{} $\lambda$5876), although there is considerable scatter at these phases. Unlike HD148937, which showed clear variability in C[iii]{} $\lambda$4647 and C[iv]{} $\lambda$5811 [@2012MNRAS.419.2459W], [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} shows no significant variability in these lines. We also include EWs measured from the DIB at 5797Å to illustrate the lack of variability of a reference line that is not formed in the environment of the star.
Hipparcos and ASAS data are also available for this star, and we used these data to attempt to detect photometric variability and confirm the derived period. Only the best quality data were kept : for Hipparcos, this means keeping only data with flag 0; for ASAS data, two filterings were used - either keeping only data with grade A (and discarding four strongly discrepant points with $V>10.1$ mag) or keeping data only at 3 $\sigma$ from the mean (both filtering yielded the same results). Errors amount typically to 0.03 mag for $H_{\rm p}$ (Hipparcos), 0.2 mag for $B_{\rm T}$ and $V_{\rm T}$ (Tycho), and 0.04 mag for $V$ (ASAS). A $\chi^2$ test for constancy was performed on each dataset. Only $H_{\rm p}$ data were found to be significantly variable with significance level $SL<1$%. However, a Fourier period search on those data reveals only white noise, without any significant peaks (or in particular a peak at the expected period of 73.41d). Furthermore, that period does not yield a significant coherent phased variation. Fourier period searches on the Tycho data yield similar conclusions. Period searches (Fourier [@2001MNRAS.327..435G], PDM [@1978ApJ...224..953S], and entropy [@1995ApJ...449..231C]) on the ASAS data result in the detection of marginal signals with periods of 63.69 $\pm$ 0.13d and 73.43$\pm$0.16d. The amplitude is very small, $\sim 0.0046$ mag at most. When phased with these periods, the photometry only shows marginal variations, even after binning the phased data (Fig. \[phot\]). We therefore conclude that any astrophysical variability of the photometric signal is below the typical uncertainty of a few tens of mmag, and would require high-precision photometry to be securely detected.
{width="2.3in"} {width="2.3in"} {width="2.3in"}\
{width="2.3in"} {width="2.3in"} {width="2.3in"}\
{width="2.3in"} {width="2.3in"} {width="2.3in"}\
{width="2.3in"} {width="2.3in"} {width="2.3in"}
{width="2.3in"} {width="2.3in"} {width="2.3in"}\
{width="2.3in"} {width="2.3in"} {width="2.3in"}\
{width="2.3in"} {width="2.3in"} {width="2.3in"}
Line profile variations
-----------------------
### Line profiles of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} at high resolution
As discussed above, it is now established that [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} is the only Of?p star known so far that has double emission-line maxima, corresponding to a geometry that presents both magnetic poles during the rotational cycle. The magnetic O stars HD 47129 [@2013EAS....64...67G] and HD 57682 [@2012MNRAS.426.2208G] do likewise. In the former case, the complex spectrum of this SB2 system precludes any identification of Of?p characteristics. In the latter case, its wind density is too low to produce the defining He [ii]{}, C [iii]{}, and N [iii]{} emission lines, while it does display the characteristic, variable Balmer emission profiles (first noted in a single H$\alpha$ observation by @1980ApJS...44..535W. Thus, HD 57682 does provide points of comparison for [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}.
An early indication that the double-wave period of $\sim 73$ d is the correct one was provided by the strikingly opposite skews of the He [ii]{} $\lambda$4686 emission peaks at phases 0 and 0.5 (Fig. \[fig\_overview\]). In addition, there is a velocity offset between the two maximum phases. Both of these effects are also seen in the Balmer emission lines to a lesser degree. Significantly, both effects are likewise seen at H$\alpha$ in HD 57682. These fine morphological details undoubtedly code significant information about the complex circumstellar structures producing them.
The He [ii]{} $\lambda$4686 and Balmer profiles at the intermediate phases (i.e., at or near 0.25 and 0.75) are also noteworthy but display diversity between the two objects. In [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}, they all have weak emission near the blueward edges of absorption features at both intermediate phases. As already noted, HD 57682 has no $\lambda$4686 emission, but remarkably, the H$\alpha$ profiles have the weak emission components shifted in [*opposite*]{} directions at the two intermediate phases. Again, these subtle similarities and differences are important physical clues that need to be modeled and understood.
Turning to the systematic variations of He [ii]{} $\lambda 4686$ during the [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} cycle, some further interesting effects are evident. The weak emission toward the shortward sides of the intermediate-phase profiles gradually strengthens and shifts toward the line centre beginning about 0.3 cycle before each maximum (which again, have opposite skews and a small velocity difference). In contrast, however, the disappearance of the maximum emission lines is remarkably abrupt, occurring within about 0.1 cycle. This behavior may be suggestive of a sharp occultation of the line-emitting region.
The behaviour of the dilution-sensitive line He [i]{} $\lambda 5876$ is entirely distinct from those of the features just described, which are either similar or opposite between phases 0.5 apart. That of $\lambda$5876 is egregiously asymmetrical (Fig. \[fig\_overview\]): at phase 0.5 it displays a weak absorption flanked by equal emission wings, whereas at phase 0.0 it has a relatively weak but well marked P Cygni profile. At phases 0.25 and 0.75 it is a strong, symmetrical absorption line.
On the other hand, He [ii]{} $\lambda$5411 is a moderate absorption line with strong wings at all phases, which at first glance appears to present velocity shifts [opposite]{} to those of the $\lambda$4686 and Balmer emission lines at the two maxima. However, on closer inspection the effect is seen to be due to wing emissions in the same sense as those of the other lines, although possibly with a larger amplitude. In contrast, C [iv]{} $\lambda\lambda$5801, 5812 are weak absorption features with no velocity shifts, albeit with a weak P Cygni tendency at phase 0.0, i.e., in the sense of $\lambda$5876. No doubt this apparent chaos will be transformed into valuable diagnostics as our understanding of the intricate phenomenology advances.
Finally, the relative behaviours of He [i]{} $\lambda$4471 and He [ii]{} $\lambda$4542 (Fig. \[fig\_overview\]) are of considerable interest, since their ratio is the primary spectral-type criterion, although classification is a heuristic exercise here because of the effects of variable circumstellar emission on the line strengths; the minimum spectrum is expected to be more closely related to the actual stellar parameters. Indeed, both lines are seen to be affected by wing emission at both maxima, albeit the He [i]{} line much more strongly. In fact, the $\lambda 4542$ line has the unique characteristic that its profile at phase $\sim 0.5$ is very similar to that exhibited at the quadrature phases 0.25 and 0.75. Hence it appears that this line is only affected by one of the emission maxima.
It should be noted that the He [i]{} effect is weaker than in other Of?p spectra, whereas the He [ii]{} one is unprecedented, weaker than but analogous to that in $\lambda$5411 described above. In terms of the line depths, the maximum spectral type is O7, but the He [ii]{} line has a larger equivalent width so that measurements would yield O6-O6.5. On the other hand, the minimum spectral type is a well defined O8, which again may be presumed to correspond to the stellar photosphere.
### Dynamic spectra
The phased line profile variations are displayed as dynamic spectra in Fig. \[dyn\_fig\]. These images were constructed by subtracting the profile that presented the least overall emission in H$\alpha$ (corresponding to phase $\sim$0.75 - obtained on HJD 2454627.467). The colour scheme was chosen to maximise the dynamic range of the variability to highlight changes relative to the minimum profile.
The dynamic spectra of the most strongly variable lines (such as the Balmer lines (H$\alpha$, H$\beta$, H$\gamma$), He[i]{} $\lambda$5876 and He[ii]{} $\lambda$4686) exhibit very similar characteristics. In each case the profiles indicate the presence of structures that vary in intensity, from absorption to strong emission, twice per cycle. The two emission features reach similar peak intensities (as already inferred from their EW variations). The emission features of the Balmer lines are slightly asymmetric in velocity about their central peaks and are found to be broad relative to the width of the spectral line (the emission features in H$\alpha$ have a FWHM of $\sim$280kms$^{-1}$). The emission feature that reaches maximum emission at phase 0 appears to be offset from the mean velocity by about -30kms$^{-1}$; the emission feature at phase 0.5 is offset by +30kms$^{-1}$.
While the line profile variability in He[i]{} $\lambda$5876 and He[ii]{} $\lambda$4686 appears similar to the Balmer lines, there are some outstanding differences. The two emission features appear considerably more asymmetric. In fact, the emission feature occurring at phase 0.5 appears to be a blend of two distinct emission peaks in both lines. The higher intensity peak is centred around -60kms$^{-1}$ for the He[ii]{} line (or $-35$kms$^{-1}$ for the He[i]{} line), while the less intense peak is centred about 30kms$^{-1}$ for the He[ii]{} line (or 50kms$^{-1}$ for the He[i]{} line). While the central velocities of these features differ between these two lines, their separation is similar. The emission features that appear at phases 0 and 0.5 reach similar peak intensity for the Balmer lines, whereas the intensity of the emission peak at phase 0 is about 10% stronger than the peak occurring at phase 0.5 for the He [ii]{} line and 20% stronger for the He [i]{} line.
The lines that display weaker variability exhibit a character of variability that is similar to those described for the previous lines. The He[i]{} $\lambda$6678 line shows weaker emission than the previously discussed spectral lines, but there is still evidence for an emission feature occurring twice per cycle. This feature occurs at a velocity relative to the mean velocity that is similar to the other He lines. Furthermore, the relative intensity of the redward emission feature appears considerably stronger than the blueward feature in the He[i]{} lines that display less variability (the maximum emission intensity is about 60 percent stronger than the blueward emission feature of the $\lambda$6678 line). Some of the weakly-variable lines also show evidence of enhanced absorption (relative to the minimum profile) in a narrow region around the line core. The enhanced absorption reaches a maximum relative absorption in the core at about phase 0.5 (which corresponds to the phase of maximum emission at the blue edge of this line).
The He [ii]{} $\lambda 4542$ line exhibits only weak variability. However, it stands out from essentially all other lines in the spectrum of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} due to its apparent single-wave variation, a phenomenon reflected in the line profiles examined in Sect. 4.1.1. In contrast to the double-wave variation of the other lines illustrated in Figs. \[eqw\_fig\] and \[dyn\_fig\], which show EW maxima at phases 0.0 and 0.5, the $\lambda 4542$ line appears to exhibit an EW maximum at phase 0.0, but a minimum at phase 0.5.
Diagnosis of the magnetic field
===============================
Least-Squares Deconvolution [LSD, @1997MNRAS.291..658D] was applied to all CFHT observations using the LSD code of . In their detection of the magnetic field of HD 191612, @2006MNRAS.365L...6D developed and applied an LSD line mask containing 12 lines. Similar masks were successfully employed by @2011MNRAS.416.3160W [@2012MNRAS.419.2459W] in their analyses of HD 191612 and HD 148937. [ Given the similarity between the spectra of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} and HD 191612, we began with this line list and adjusted the predicted line depths to best match the depths observed in the spectrum of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} at phases $\sim 0.25$ and $0.75$, when the emission is lowest. This involved adjustment of the line depths by typically $\sim 20\%$ relative to their depths in the spectrum of HD 191612.]{} We then used this line list to extract mean circular polarization (LSD Stokes $V$), mean polarization check (LSD $N$) and mean unpolarized (LSD Stokes $I$) profiles from all collected spectra. All LSD profiles were produced on an 1800 kms$^{-1}$ spectral grid with a velocity bin of 20 kms$^{-1}$, using a regularization parameter of 0.2 (for more information regarding LSD regularisation, see .
Using the $\chi^2$ signal detection criteria described by @1997MNRAS.291..658D, we evaluated the significance of the signal in both the Stokes $V$ and $N$ LSD profiles in the velocity range \[-150, 250\] kms$^{-1}$, consistent with the observed span of the Stokes $I$ profile. No significant signal was detected in any of the individual $V$ (or $N$) profiles. We also computed the longitudinal magnetic field from each profile set using Eq. (1) of @2000MNRAS.313..851W. To improve our sensitivity, we coadded the LSD profiles of spectra acquired within $\pm 2$ nights (resulting in 9 averages of 2-8 spectra; see Table \[tab:specpol\]). Given the observed variability period (Sect. 5), $\pm 2$ nights corresponds to approximately 0.05 cycles - a timespan during which variability should be limited; indeed, this was verified empirically. From these profiles we obtain one marginal detection of signal (false alarm probability ${\rm FAP}<10^{-3}$) in the $V$ profiles (for the coadded profile corresponding to spectral IDs 1604363-1604387), and best longitudinal field error bars of $\sim 170$ G. The most significant measurement of the longitudinal field from the coadded profiles is $-362\pm 186$ G (2.0$\sigma$). The individual and coadded ESPaDOnS spectra and the corresponding longitudinal fields and detection probabilities are indicated in Table \[tab:specpol\]. [ The longitudinal field measured from the HARPSpol spectrum was $280\pm 460$ G.]{}
[ We conclude that we fail to detect a magnetic field in individual and co-added Stokes $V$ spectra of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}. To proceed further, we note the similarity of the spectrum of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} to HD 191612 (and in particular its Of?p classification), and its periodic variability, combined with the reported detection of a strong magnetic field by , strongly suggest that [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} is an oblique magnetic rotator. This has been convincingly demonstrated for HD 191612 [@2011MNRAS.416.3160W], and is consistent with the behaviour of other magnetic O-type stars [e.g. @2012MNRAS.425.1278W; @2012MNRAS.426.2208G; @2012MNRAS.419.2459W].]{}
[ We therefore]{} proceeded to bin the LSD profiles according to rotational phase as computed via Eq. (1) in order to increase the signal-to-noise ratio. We note that this phase binning implicitly assumes an oblique magnetic rotator, i.e. that the magnetic field variation proceeds according to the same period as the spectra (and other variations). We have binned the coadded LSD profiles from phases 0.307-0.619 and 0.981-0.042. From these profiles (illustrated in Fig. \[lsdprofs\]) we obtain a definite detection of signal in the Stokes $V$ profile (at phase $\sim 0.5$) and no detection (although with twice poorer SNR) at phase $\sim 0.0$, with no signal detected in the null profiles. Notwithstanding the lack of formal detection at phase 0, the Stokes $V$ LSD profile appears to exhibit a weak signature with polarity opposite to that at phase 0.5. The phase 0.0 and 0.5 LSD profiles yield longitudinal fields of ${\ensuremath{\langle B_z\rangle}}=+335\pm 200$ G and ${\ensuremath{\langle B_z\rangle}}=-290\pm 95$ G respectively, and corresponding null profile fields of ${\ensuremath{\langle N_z\rangle}}=-71\pm 199$ G and ${\ensuremath{\langle N_z\rangle}}=-2\pm 95$ G. We have also searched the average spectrum at phase $\sim 0.5$ for Zeeman signatures in individual line profiles. Weak signatures, compatible with the LSD Stokes $V$ profiles, are visible in the He [i]{} $\lambda 5876$ and C [iv]{} $\lambda 5801$ lines. [ We also note that coadding LSD profiles phased using one-half the adopted period (i.e. 36.7d) yields no detection of the magnetic field.]{}
From this analysis, [ which implicitly assumes that [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} is an oblique magnetic rotator]{}, we conclude that an organized magnetic field is detected in the photosphere of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}, with a longitudinal field with a characteristic strength of several hundred G, that likely changes sign.
{width="7cm"}{width="7cm"}
Stellar and magnetic geometry
=============================
With the inferred rotational period and derived radius (from Table 1), [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} should have an equatorial rotational velocity in the range $v_{\rm e}\simeq 7-11$ kms$^{-1}$. Since the upper limit on $v\sin i$ obtained in Sect. 3 (see Table 4) is much larger than this value due to the significant turbulent broadening of the line profile, we are not able to constrain the inclination of the stellar rotational axis via comparison of $v_{\rm e}$ and $v\sin i$.
Instead, we derive both the rotational and magnetic geometry of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} from considering the rotationally modulated H$\alpha$ line stemming from the star’s [ hypothetical]{} circumstellar “dynamical magnetosphere” [@2012MNRAS.tmpL.433S]. Below the Alfven radius $R_{\rm A}$ at which the magnetic and wind energy densities are equal, the magnetic field is strong enough to channel the radiatively driven wind outflow of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} along closed field lines (ud-Doula & Owocki 2002). The trapped wind plasma, channeled along field lines from opposite magnetic hemispheres then collides at the magnetic equator, and is pulled back to the star’s surface by gravity. This in turn leads to a statistically overdense region centered around the magnetic equator, which is also characterized by infalling material of quite low velocities (as compared to non-magnetic O star wind velocities). If the magnetic and rotational axes of the star are mutually inclined, an observer at earth will view this dynamical magnetosphere from different perspectives, which leads to rotationally modulated line profiles [@2012MNRAS.tmpL.433S; @2012MNRAS.426.2208G; @2013MNRAS.428.2723U; @2013MNRAS.429..398P]. Below we use this variability to derive constraints on the magnetic geometry of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}.
We follow the procedure developed by @2012MNRAS.tmpL.433S (see also @2012MNRAS.426.2208G and @2013MNRAS.428.2723U) and use 100 snapshots of a 2-D radiation magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) wind simulation of a magnetic O-star, that we patch together in azimuth to form a 3-D “orange slice” model. [ The MHD simulation employed here is that computed for HD 191612 [see @2012MNRAS.tmpL.433S] as a proxy for [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}.]{} This is a reasonable approach because both HD 191612 and [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} are slow rotators (in the sense that rotation is dynamically insignificant in determining the wind/magnetosphere properties), and their magnetic field strengths/confinement parameters are formally identical (see Sect. 7). Hence the geometry of the plasma confinement should be similar in both cases [@2002ApJ...576..413U].
The tests by @2013MNRAS.428.2723U show this patching technique results in a reasonably good representation of the full 3-D magnetosphere. To compute synthetic H$\alpha$ spectra, we then solve the formal solution of radiative transfer in a 3-D cylindrical system for an observer viewing from angle $\alpha$ with respect to the magnetic axis. For magnetic obliquity $\beta$ and observer inclination $i$ we then have $$\cos \alpha = \sin \beta \cos \Phi \sin i + \cos \beta \cos i,$$ which gives the observer’s viewing angle as function of rotational phase $\Phi$, thus mapping out the rotational phase variation for a given couple of $\beta$ and $i$[^6]. We solve the formal solution only in the wind, assuming H$\alpha$ occupation numbers and a temperature structure given by a 1-D NLTE model atmosphere calculation, and using an input photospheric H$\alpha$ line profile as lower boundary condition (see @2012MNRAS.tmpL.433S for more details). The infalling material in our selected 100 snapshots falls preferably toward one pole. This is most presumably due to a subtle numerical issue in the MHD simulations, where over a time this north-south asymmetry is canceled out [see @2002ApJ...576..413U]. To account for the fact that in these non-rotating stars there should be no preference between the north and south magnetic pole, we here average computed line profiles from the same angle $\alpha$ as counted from the north and south magnetic poles, respectively.
The absolute level of H$\alpha$ emission should further, in principle, provide constraints on the rate by which the magnetosphere is fed by radiatively driven wind material (in analogy with how H$\alpha$ emission from non-magnetic O-stars provides constraints on the stellar mass loss). However, as discussed in detail by @2012MNRAS.426.2208G, adjusting the underlying model so that the level of H$\alpha$ emission is reproduced in the high state results in variability between the high and low states that is too small to reproduce the observations. Since here we are mainly interested in obtaining constraints on the magnetic geometry from the variability itself, we thus compute synthetic H$\alpha$ equivalent width curves that have somewhat too strong absolute emission and then simply shift them down so that the absolute level of emission at the extrema are fit. This then results in equivalent width curves that reproduces well the variability, providing good constraints on the geometry. However, because of this shifting we are not able to simultaneously derive constraints on the mass feeding rate; this issue will be discussed in detail in a forthcoming paper.
The right panel of Fig. \[mhd2\] shows the $\chi^2$ landscape from fitting the observed rotational phase variation for given sets of $\beta$ and $i$. Because of the strong emission dependence on $\alpha$, the error bars of the best fit $i = 90$ deg and $\beta = 35$ deg are quite small. We note, however, that simply switching the obliquity and inclination angles gives equal results, i.e. there is a second “best-fit” model at $i = 35$ deg and $\beta = 90$ deg (that is not shown in the figure). The left panel then finally compares the best model with the observed variability as function of rotational phase.
Photometric and broadband polarization variability
--------------------------------------------------
A second constraint on the geometry is potentially derived from photometric and broadband (linear) polarimetric variability. We use the Monte-Carlo radiative transfer (RT) code developed by RHDT for simulating light scattering in circumstellar envelopes, first applied in this context to the Of?p star HD 191612 by @2011MNRAS.416.3160W. In this code, photon packets are launched from a central star and allowed to propagate through an arbitrary distribution of circumstellar matter (described by a Cartesian density grid), until they are scattered by free electrons. Upon scattering, a ray is peeled off from the packet toward a virtual observer, who records the packet’s Stokes parameters appropriately attenuated by any intervening material [see @1984ApJ...278..186Y for a discussion of this peel-off technique]. A new propagation direction is then chosen based on the dipole phase function [@1960ratr.book.....C], and the packet’s Stokes parameters are updated to reflect the linear polarization introduced by the scattering process. The propagation is then resumed until, after possible further scatterings, the packet eventually escapes from the system or is reabsorbed by the star.
We employ the circumstellar density model developed for HD 191612, and compute lightcurves for the two geometries derived from the orange-slice MHD modelling. In Fig. \[townsend\] we compare the observed ASAS $V$-band photometric variation with the predictions of the Monte Carlo RT code. Unfortunately, the available photometry is not sufficiently precise to allow us to obtain meaningful constraints on the geometry. Nevertheless, the predictions demonstrate that the existing photometry is at the threshold of being able to detect the predicted variation. High-precision photometry and broadband polarimetry would provide an additional constraint on the geometry, and in particular the polarimetric variation would enable the determination of the individual values of the angles $i$ and $\beta$.
Longitudinal magnetic field variation
-------------------------------------
To infer the strength of the magnetic field, and to test its compatibility the derived geometry, we model the longitudinal field variation of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} as a function of rotational phase. We used the coadded profiles discussed in Sect. 5 and reported in Table \[tab:specpol\], phased according to Eq. (1). This phase variation ${\ensuremath{\langle B_z\rangle}}(\phi)$ of the longitudinal field is illustrated in Fig. \[bz\] (upper frame). A fit by Least-Squares of a cosine curve of the form ${\ensuremath{\langle B_z\rangle}}(\phi)=B_{\rm 0}+B_{\rm 1}\cos(2\pi(\phi-\phi_{\rm 0}))$ to the data yields a reduced $\chi^2$ of 0.84, with parameters $B_{\rm 0}=+115\pm 55$ G, $B_{\rm 1}=450\pm 100$ G and $\phi_{\rm 0}=0.18\pm 0.15$.
Therefore, according to Least Squares, the variation of the field is detected at $4.5\sigma$ confidence. The reduced $\chi^2$ of the data relative to the straight line ${\ensuremath{\langle B_z\rangle}}(\phi)=0$ (the hypothesis of a null field) is 2.3. These results indicate that the variation is significant at about 97% confidence, and that the null hypothesis can be rejected as an acceptable representation of the data at similar confidence. The longitudinal field measured from the null profiles (lower frame of Fig. \[bz\]) yields similar reduced $\chi^2$ for both the cosine and straight-line fits, and indicates no significant variation.
Adopting $i=35\degr$ and $\beta=90\degr$ from the modelling of the H$\alpha$ EW, we have fit the phase-binned longitudinal field measurements with a synthetic longitudinal field variation with fixed phase of maximum (phase 0.5) and variable polar field strength $B_{\rm d}$. The best-fit model (according to the $\chi^2$ statistic) is characterised by $B_{\rm d}\simeq 2.6$ kG. The extrema of the best-fit dipole model are slightly offset from the best-fit sinusoid in mean longitudinal field strength (by about 100 G) and in phase (by about 0.07 cycles). These offsets are well within the uncertainties of the observed variation. Taking them into account, we estimate an uncertainty on the derived dipole strength of $\pm 900$ G.
If we fix only the inclination and allow both $\beta$ and $B_{\rm d}$ to vary, a direct fit to the longitudinal field variation yields best-fit values of $\beta=78^{+10}_{-8}\degr$ and $B_{\rm d}=2.7\pm 1.1$ kG. These values are in good agreement with those derived from the fit with fixed geometry derived above.
In Fig. \[bz\] we also show the longitudinal field measurements of Hubrig et al. (2011, 2013) obtained from ’all’ lines. Those measurements, which have formal errors that are substantially more precise than our own, are in good agreement with both the best-fit synthetic dipole and the best sinusoidal fit. It is notable that 3 of the measurements of Hubrig et al. were acquired at essentially the same phase, which corresponds to crossover (i.e. ${\ensuremath{\langle B_z\rangle}}\simeq 0$).
{width="18cm"}
![\[bz\][*Top panel:*]{} Longitudinal field versus phase. Dashed line - best-fit sinusoid. Solid line - Dipole model (fixed phase and geometry, polar strength $B_{\rm d}=2.6$ kG). Diamonds represent ESPaDOnS measurements from the current study. The cross is the HARPSpol measurement. The triangles are measurements from . [*Bottom panel:*]{} Null field versus phase. All measurements are phased according to Eq. (1).](cpd-282561_bz.ps "fig:"){width="8cm"} ![\[bz\][*Top panel:*]{} Longitudinal field versus phase. Dashed line - best-fit sinusoid. Solid line - Dipole model (fixed phase and geometry, polar strength $B_{\rm d}=2.6$ kG). Diamonds represent ESPaDOnS measurements from the current study. The cross is the HARPSpol measurement. The triangles are measurements from . [*Bottom panel:*]{} Null field versus phase. All measurements are phased according to Eq. (1).](cpd-282561_nz.ps "fig:"){width="8cm"}
Modeling the Stokes $V$ profiles
--------------------------------
We also modelled the magnetic field geometry using the LSD Stokes $V$ profiles. We compared the mean LSD profiles for phases 0.0, 0.5 and 0.75 to a grid of synthetic Stokes $V$ profiles using the method of Petit & Wade (2012). For this modelling we used LSD profiles extracted using a metallic line mask, as described by @2012MNRAS.419.2459W.
The emergent intensity at each point on the stellar surface is calculated using the weak-field approximation for a Milne-Eddington atmosphere model. In this model, the source function is linear in optical depth such that $S(\tau_c)=S_0[1+\beta\tau_c]$. We use $\beta=1.5$, Voigt-shaped line profiles with a damping constant $a=10^{-3}$ and a thermal speed $v_\mathrm{th}=5$kms$^{-1}$. The line-to-continuum opacity ratio $\kappa$ is chosen to fit the intensity LSD profile. The synthetic flux profiles are then obtained by numerically integrating the emergent intensities over the projected stellar disk. The projected rotational velocity is set to $v\sin i=9$kms$^{-1}$. We applied isotropic Gaussian macroturbulence[^7] compatible with that determined in Sect. 3.
We assume a simple centred dipolar field, parametrized by the dipole field strength $B_d$, the rotation axis inclination $i$ with respect to the line of sight, the positive magnetic axis obliquity $\beta$ and the rotational phase $\varphi$. Assuming that only $\varphi$ may change between different observations of the star, the goodness-of-fit of a given rotation-independent ($B_d$, $i$, $\beta$) magnetic configuration can be computed to determine configurations that provide good posterior probabilities for all the observed Stokes $V$ profiles in a Bayesian statistic framework. In order to stay general, we do not at this point constrain the rotational phases of the observations nor the inclination of the rotational axis.
The Bayesian prior for the inclination is described by a random orientation $[p(i) = \sin(i)\,di]$, the prior for the dipolar field strength has a modified Jeffreys shape to avoid a singularity at $B_d = 0$G, and the obliquity and the phases have flat priors.
To assess the presence of a dipole-like signal in our observations, we compute the odds ratio of the dipole model ($M_1$) with the null model ($M_0$; no magnetic field implying Stokes $V = 0$). We also perform the same analysis on the null profiles. The results are displayed in Table\[tab:raven\_odds\]. Taking into account all the observations simultaneously, the odds ratio is in favour of the magnetic model by 9 orders of magnitude. For the null profiles, the combined odds ratio is 2:1 in favour of the null model. Note that as the case $B_d = 0$G is included in the magnetic model, in the latter case the difference between the two models, which can equally well reproduce a signal consisting of only pure noise, is expected to be dominated by the ratio of priors in this case, i.e. the Occam factor that penalizes the magnetic model for its extra complexity.
Figure \[fig:raven\] shows the posterior probability density function for each model parameters. The 68.3, 95.4, 99.0, and 99.7 percent regions, tabulated in Table\[tab:raven\_reg\], are illustrated in dark to pale shades, respectively. At 95.4% confidence, the polar strength of the dipole magnetic field of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} is found to be in the range $1.9\leq B_{\rm d}\leq 4.5$ kG. This is in good agreement with the dipole strengths derived from the longitudinal field variation.
Phase $\log(M_0/M_1)$ $V$ $\log(M_0/M_1)$ $N$
---------- --------------------- ---------------------
0.00 -0.91 0.09
0.50 -7.43 0.24
0.75 -0.34 0.06
Combined -9.06 0.25
: \[tab:raven\_odds\]Odds ratios derived from the analysis of Stokes $V$ profiles.
[l c]{} Credible & Range in gauss\
region &\
\
99.7 & 1754 - 5000\
99.0 & 1841 - 4947\
94.5 & 1891 - 4509\
68.3 & 2137 - 3307\
\
99.7 & 0 - 3835\
99.0 & 0 - 2767\
95.4 & 0 - 1508\
68.3 & 0 - 425\
![\[fig:raven\]Magnetic field polar strength (upper frame) and geometry $(i,\beta)$ (lower frame) constraints derived from of modelling of Stokes $V$ profiles.](fig_pdf.ps "fig:"){width="40.00000%"} ![\[fig:raven\]Magnetic field polar strength (upper frame) and geometry $(i,\beta)$ (lower frame) constraints derived from of modelling of Stokes $V$ profiles.](fig_pdf2.ps "fig:"){width="40.00000%"}
Magnetosphere
=============
As presented by @2002ApJ...576..413U, the global competition between the magnetic field and stellar wind can be characterized by the so-called wind magnetic confinement parameter $\eta_\star \equiv B^2_\mathrm{eq}R^2_\star / \dot{M}_{\rm B=0}v_\infty$, which depends on the star’s equatorial field strength ($B_\mathrm{eq}$), stellar radius ($R_\star$), and wind momentum ($\dot{M}_{\rm B=0}v_\infty$) the star would have in absence of the magnetic field. For a dipolar field, one can identify an Alfvén radius $R_\mathrm{A}\simeq\eta_\star^{1/4}R_\star$, representing the extent of strong magnetic confinement. Above $R_\mathrm{A}$, the wind dominates and stretches open all field lines. But below $R_\mathrm{A}$, the wind material is trapped by closed field line loops, and in the absence of significant stellar rotation is pulled by gravity back onto the star within a dynamical (free-fall) time-scale.
To estimate the Alfvén radius of the magnetosphere of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}, we use the stellar parameters given in Table 4.
The stellar parameter with the largest uncertainty is the wind momentum. Fig.\[fig:magneto\] therefore illustrates the variation of $R_\mathrm{A}$ with one order of magnitude variation in mass-loss rate (corresponding to a generous estimate of the uncertainty). One can see how this uncertainty is mitigated by the 1/4 power dependence of the wind momentum in the definition of the Alfven radius. The grey shaded areas represent intervals of stellar radius uncertainty ($\pm3$R$_\odot$) and of dipole field strength (2.1, 2.6, 3.3 kG, reflecting the 68.3% Bayesian credible region) meant to minimize and maximize the Alfven radius.
We therefore expect the Alfven radius to be of the order of 3 stellar radii, and certainly no more than 5 stellar radii.
In the presence of significant stellar rotation, centrifugal forces can support any trapped material above the Kepler co-rotation radius $R_\mathrm{K}\equiv(GM/\omega^2)^{1/3}$. This requires that the magnetic confinement extend beyond this Kepler radius, in which case material can accumulate to form a [*centrifugal magnetosphere*]{} [e.g. @2005ApJ...630L..81T].
In the case of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}, the slow rotation puts the Kepler radius much farther out than the Alfven radius ($\sim18$R$_\star$) and no long-term accumulation of wind plasma is expected, as illustrated by the red curve in Figure\[fig:magneto\] (the red shaded area represents $\pm3$R$_\odot$ and a range of mass from 30 to 60M$_\odot$). In such a [*dynamical magnetosphere*]{} configuration, transient suspension of circumstellar material results in a statistical global over-density in the closed loops. For O-type stars with sufficient mass-loss rates, the resulting dynamical magnetosphere can therefore exhibit strong emission in Balmer recombination lines [@2012MNRAS.tmpL.433S; @2013MNRAS.429..398P]. This conclusion supports the MHD modelling employed to determine the stellar geometry in Sect. 6. We note that due to infalling wind material [ (which may be reflected in the P Cyg-like profile of He [ii]{} $\lambda 4686$ at some phases)]{}, the global mass-loss rate of a star exhibiting such a dynamical magnetosphere is significantly reduced. According to the scaling relations of @2008MNRAS.385...97U (their eqn. 10 and 23), for an estimated $r_{\rm A} \approx 3 R_{\rm star}$, $\dot{M}/\dot{M}_{B =0} \approx 0.2$, i.e. the global mass-loss rate is reduced by approximately a factor of 5 due to wind plasma falling back upon the star.
The characteristic magnetic braking time can be estimated using equation 25 of [@2009MNRAS.392.1022U]. Using the nominal wind parameters in Table \[params\] and $k\sim0.1$ , we obtain a spin-down timescale of 0.45Myr. However as noted by Petit et al. (2013), the square-root dependence of this quantity on the wind momentum renders spin-down estimates valid only to a factor of a few.
![\[fig:magneto\] Alfven (black, lower curve) and Kepler (red, upper curve) radii as a function of the mass-loss rate.](magneto.ps){width="45.00000%"}
Discussion and conclusions
==========================
In this paper we have performed a first thorough analysis of the variability, geometry, magnetic field and wind confinement of the Of?p star [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}. Using more than 75 new medium and high resolution spectra, we determined the equivalent width variations and examined the dynamic spectra of photospheric and wind-sensitive spectral lines, deriving a rotational period of $73.41$ d. We confirmed the detection of an organized magnetic field via Zeeman signatures in LSD Stokes $V$ profiles. The phased longitudinal field data exhibit a weak sinusoidal variation, with maximum of about 565 G and a minimum of about -335 G, with extrema approximately in phase with the H$\alpha$ equivalent width variation. Modeling of the H$\alpha$ equivalent width variation assuming a 3D ’orange-slice’ magnetospheric model yields a unique solution for the ambiguous couplet of inclination and magnetic obliquity angles: $(i, \beta)$ or $(\beta, i)=(35\degr,90\degr)$. Assuming this geometry, the surface magnetic field dipole strength is inferred to be $B_{\rm d}=2.6\pm 0.9$ kG. The magnetic strength and rotational period of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} are rather typical for magnetic O-type stars.
Using the magnetic field strength and inferred wind properties, we derive the wind magnetic confinement parameter $\eta_*\simeq 93$, yielding an Alfvén radius $R_{\rm A}\simeq 3.4~R_*$, and a Kepler radius $R_{\rm K}\simeq 18.7~R_*$. This supports a picture in which the H$\alpha$ emission and other line variability have their origin in an oblique, co-rotating ’dynamical magnetosphere’ structure resulting from a magnetically channeled wind. This framework is consistent with that inferred for the other Galactic Of?p stars HD 108 [@2010MNRAS.407.1423M], HD 148937 [@2012MNRAS.419.2459W], HD 191612 [@2006MNRAS.365L...6D; @2011MNRAS.416.3160W], and NGC 1624-2 [@2012MNRAS.425.1278W] as well as the cooler magnetic O-type star HD 57682 [@2012MNRAS.426.2208G]. The computed spindown time of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} (equal to 0.45 Myr) is similar to that of HD 191612 (0.33 Myr). On the other hand, it is significantly shorter than that of HD 148937 [@2012MNRAS.419.2459W]. At face value it is also significantly shorter than that of HD 108 [1-3 Myr @2010MNRAS.407.1423M], however the value for HD 108 is based on a highly uncertain estimate of the polar field strength. Considering the large range of rotational periods of these stars, and the general lack of accurate information concerning their ages, it is as yet difficult to derive any meaningful conclusions about the role of magnetic braking in the evolution of these stars.
Most lines in the spectrum of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} are detectably variable, including lines of H, He [i]{}/[ii]{}, and (more weakly) C [iv]{}. The equivalent width variation of most lines is “double-wave”, exhibiting two maxima (and minima) per rotational cycle. The EW variability and extrema of most lines are roughly symmetric in both phase and amplitude, although the maximum/minimum at phases 0.25/0.5 are somewhat (10-20%) less pronounced in some lines than those at phases 0.75/0.0. The He [ii]{} $\lambda 4542$ line is the only line investigated that exhibits apparently “single-wave” variability. The double-wave nature of the variations of most lines can be naturally explained as the consequence of the stellar and magnetic geometry of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}: the derived inclination and obliquity angles yield $i+\beta=135\degr$, implying that both magnetic poles are presented clearly to the observer during each stellar rotation. Only two other magnetic O-type star are known to exhibit analogous behaviour: HD 57682 [@2012MNRAS.426.2208G], for which $i+\beta=139\degr$, and Plaskett’s star [e.g. @2013EAS....64...67G and Grunhut et al. 2015, in prep.], for which $i+\beta\simeq 130\degr$.
The behaviour of the $\lambda 4542$ line can likely be understood as due to the depth of formation and the relative contribution of the magnetosphere to the line profile. @2014arXiv1409.5057M constrained the line formation region of various lines in spectra of non-magnetic O stars, and investigated the variability as a function of depth. They demonstrate that the Balmer lines are formed further out in the wind compared to some weak He [i]{} or high ionization He [ii]{} or C [iv]{} lines. [ Lines formed closer to the photosphere also exhibit some additional variability that likely arises in the photosphere (and this may qualitatively explain the different behaviour of lines such as He [ii]{} $\lambda 4542$). However, the variability of these photospheric lines is weak in comparison to the variability of wind-dominated lines, and cannot contribute appreciably to the variability of features such as H$\alpha$ or He [ii]{} $\lambda 4686$. We therefore propose that in the case of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} (and likely other magnetic O stars), lines clearly formed out in the magnetosphere (H$\alpha$, H$\beta$, He [ii]{} $\lambda 4686$) are overwhelmingly dominated by the rotational variation of the density of the confined wind plasma. ]{}
The dynamic spectra of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} reveal characteristic differences in the mean velocities and skewness of the two emission maxima per rotation cycle. This phenomenon - first discussed by @2012MNRAS.426.2208G in the context of HD 57682 - is not reproduced by the orange-slice MHD model. In the case of HD 57682, the shift between the two emission peaks is about 70 km/s; for [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}, it is comparable (about 60 km/s). This effect could potentially be explained by a difference in strength and/or geometry of the two magnetic poles at the stellar surface. Such differences are commonly inferred for cooler magnetic stars and are frequently parametrized using a dipole model offset from the stellar centre along its axis. Typically, dipole offsets measured for Ap/Bp stars are 0.0-0.3 $R_*$ . First 2D MHD simulations computed using reasonable dipole offsets provide promising results. However, their presentation and discussion is outside the scope of this paper. This potential ability of dipole offset to explain the observed [ emission line variations]{} will be the topic of a forthcoming paper.
The absolute level of H$\alpha$ emission from the magnetosphere of an O star should provide constraints on the rate by which it is fed by radiatively driven wind material through comparison with theoretical models such as those described in Sect. 6. However, as discussed in detail by @2012MNRAS.426.2208G, adjusting the underlying MHD model so that the level of H$\alpha$ emission is reproduced in the high state results in variability between the high and low states that is too small to reproduce the observations. This was interpreted by those authors as a consequence of a magnetosphere consisting of somewhat optically thicker plasma ’snakes’ (dense plasma clumps falling back toward the star) than predicted by 2D MHD models. Such thicker clumps would lead to higher variability at a given mass-loss feeding rate, and so to a better fit to the observations for the mass-loss feeding rate that reproduces the mean level of emission in the high state.
For [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}, we reproduced the EW variation of the H$\alpha$ line by computing synthetic H$\alpha$ equivalent width curves with somewhat too strong absolute emission and then artificially shifting them so that the absolute levels of emission at the extrema were fit. While this procedure resulted in equivalent width curves that reproduced well the variability, we were not able to simultaneously derive constraints on the mass feeding rate. Recent monitoring of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{} has been performed with HST/STIS (UV spectroscopy) and XMM (X-ray spectroscopy) [ \[PI: Nazé\]]{}. These data will likely help to mitigate the problem of the star’s uncertain wind properties, and will provide important insights into its wind confinement and magnetosphere.
In conclusion, we underscore that the weak longitudinal magnetic fields, complex spectra and faint apparent magnitudes of all Of?p stars challenge the capabilities of current polarimetric instrumentation. While their magnetic fields are securely detected, field topologies are only very roughly characterized. The subject of the present paper - [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}- along with HD 148937, represent the most challenging examples of the class. The development of spectropolarimetric capabilities such as those of ESPaDOnS, but on 8m-class telescopes, is an vital step required in order to investigate stars such as these at an acceptable level of detail, and more generally to extend our understanding of the magnetic properties of the most massive stars.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
GAW acknowledges support from the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC). RHB and JIA acknowledge financial support from FONDECYT, Regular 1140076 and Iniciación 11121550, respectively. JMA acknowledges support from \[a\] the Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación through grants AYA2010-15081 and AYA2010-17631; \[b\] the Junta de Andalucía grant P08-TIC-4075; and \[c\] the George P. and Cynthia Woods Mitchell Institute for Fundamental Physics and Astronomy. YN acknowledges support from the Fonds National de la Recherche Scientifique (Belgium), the Communauté Française de Belgique, the PRODEX XMM and Integral contracts, and the ’Action de Recherche Concertée’ (CFWB-Académie Wallonie Europe). STScI is operated by AURA, Inc., under NASA contract NAS5-26555. JIA, RB, RG, JMA, AS were Visiting Astronomers, LCO, Chile. JIA and RB were Visiting Astronomers, ESO La Silla, Chile. RG was a Visiting Astronomer, CASLEO, Chile. RHDT acknowledges support from NASA award NNX12AC72G. AuD acknowledges the support by NASA through Chandra Award number TM4-15001A. CFHT and TBL observations were acquired thanks for generous allocations of observing time within the context of the MiMeS Large Programs. The authors acknowledge the contribution by an anonymous referee, whose comments have helped to improve this paper.
[^1]: E-mail: [email protected]
[^2]: Currently at Dept. of Physics & Space Sciences, Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, FL, USA
[^3]: Based on observations obtained at the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope (CFHT) which is operated by the National Research Council of Canada, the Institut National des Sciences de l’Univers (INSU) of the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique of France, and the University of Hawaii.
[^4]: Jointly built by REOSC and Liège Observatory, and on long-term loan from the latter.
[^5]: IRAF is the Image Reduction and Analysis Facility, a general purpose software system for the reduction and analysis of astronomical data. IRAF is written and supported by the National Optical Astronomy Observatories (NOAO) in Tucson, Arizona. See [iraf.noao.edu]{}.
[^6]: Although the 2D MHD simulations of @2002ApJ...576..413U assumed field-aligned rotation, the slow rotation of [CPD $-$28$^{\circ}$ 2561]{}, and hence the lack of any significant dynamical influence of rotation, allows us to construct 3D non-aligned structures for synthesis of H$\alpha$.
[^7]: of the form $\mathrm{e}^{-v^2/v^2_\mathrm{mac}}/(\sqrt{\upi}v_\mathrm{mac})$
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
Social media content has grown exponentially in the recent years and the role of social media has evolved from just narrating life events to actually shaping them. In this paper we explore how many resources shared in social media are still available on the live web or in public web archives. By analyzing six different event-centric datasets of resources shared in social media in the period from June 2009 to March 2012, we found about 11% lost and 20% archived after just a year and an average of 27% lost and 41% archived after two and a half years. Furthermore, we found a nearly linear relationship between time of sharing of the resource and the percentage lost, with a slightly less linear relationship between time of sharing and archiving coverage of the resource. From this model we conclude that after the first year of publishing, nearly 11% of shared resources will be lost and after that we will continue to lose 0.02% per day.
Archiving, Social Media, Digital Preservation
author:
- 'Hany M. SalahEldeen'
- 'Michael L. Nelson'
subtitle: |
How Many Resources Shared on Social Media\
Have Been Lost?
title: Losing My Revolution
---
Introduction
============
With more than 845 million Facebook users at the end of 2011 [@facebook] and over 140 million tweets sent daily in 2011 [@Twitternums] users can take photos, videos, post their opinions, and report incidents as they happen. Many of the posts and tweets are about quotidian events and their preservation is debatable. However, some of the posts and events are about culturally important events whose preservation is less controversial. In this paper we shed light on the importance of archiving social media content about these events and estimate how much of this content is archived, still available, or lost with no possibility of recovery.\
To emphasize the culturally important commentary and sharing, we collected data about six events in the time period of June 2009 to March 2012: the H1N1 virus outbreak, Michael Jackson’s death, the Iranian elections and protests, Barack Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize, the Egyptian revolution, and the Syrian uprising.
Related Work
============
To our knowledge, no prior study has analyzed the amount of shared resources in social media lost through time. There have been many studies analyzing the behavior of users within a social network, how they interact, and what content they share [@Benevenut; @Wu; @Zhao; @Wilson]. As for Twitter, Kwak et al. [@Kwak] studied its nature and its topological characteristics and found a deviation from known characteristics of human social networks that were analyzed by Newman and Park [@human]. Lee analyzed the reasons behind sharing news in social media and found that informativeness was the strongest motivation in predicting news sharing intention, followed by socializing and status seeking [@Chei]. Also shared content in social media like Twitter move and diffuse relatively fast as stated by Yang et al. [@Yang].\
Further more, many concerns were raised about the persistence of shared resources and web content in general. Nelson and Allen studied the persistence of objects in a digital library and found that, with just over a year, 3% of the sample they collected have appeared to no longer be available [@nelson1]. Sanderson et al. analyzed the persistence and availability of web resources referenced from papers in scholarly repositories using Memento and found that 28% of these resources have been lost [@Sanderson]. Memento [@memento] is a collection of HTTP extensions that enables uniform, inter-archive access. Ainsworth et al. [@Ainsworth:2011:MWA:1998076.1998100] examined how much of the web is archived and found it ranges from 16% to 79%, depending on the starting seed URIs. McCown et al. examined the factors affecting reconstructing websites (using caches and archives) and found that PageRank, Age, and the number of hops from the top-level of the site were most influential [@1255182].
Data Gathering
==============
We compiled a list of URIs that were shared in social media and correspond to specific culturally important events. In this section we describe the data acquisition and sampling process we performed to extract six different datasets which will be tested and analyzed in the following sections.
Stanford SNAP Project Dataset
-----------------------------
The Stanford Large Network Dataset is a collection of about 50 large network datasets having millions of nodes, edges and tuples. It was collected as a part of the Stanford Network Analysis Platform (SNAP) project [@snap]. It includes social networks, web graphs, road networks, Internet networks, citation networks, collaboration networks, and communication networks. For the purpose of our investigation, we selected their Twitter posts dataset. This dataset was collected from June 1st, 2009 to December 31st, 2009 and contains nearly 476 million tweets posted by nearly 17 million users. The dataset is estimated to cover 20%-30% of all posts published on Twitter during that time frame[@Twitter]. To select which events will be covered in this study, we examined CNN’s 2009 events timeline[^1]. We wanted to select a small number of events that were diverse, with limited overlap, and relatively important to a large number of people. Given that, we selected four events: the H1N1 virus outbreak, the Iranian protests and elections, Michael Jackson’s death, and Barrack Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize award.
### Preparation:
A tweet is typically composed of text, hashtags, embedded resources or URIs and usertags all spanning a maximum of 140 characters. Here is an example of a tweet record in the SNAP dataset:
**T** 2009-07-31 23:57:18\
**U** http://Twitter.com/nickgotch\
**W** RT @rockingjude: December 21, 2009 Depopulation by Food Will Begin\
http://is.gd/1WMZb WHOA..BETTER WATCH RT plz \#pwa \#tcot\
-5pt
The line starting with the letter **T** indicates the date and time of the tweet creation. While the line starting with **U** shows a link to the user who authored this particular tweet. Finally, the line starting with **W** shows the entire tweet including all the user-references “@rockingjude”, the embedded URIs “http://is.gd/1WMZb”, and hashtags “\#pwa \#tcot”.
### Tag Expansion:
We wanted to select tweets that we can say with high confidence are about a selected event. In this case, precision is more important than recall as collecting every single tweet published about a certain event is less important than making sure that the selected tweets are definitely about that event. Several studies focused on estimating the aboutness of a certain web page or a resource in general [@lexical; @lexical2]. Fortunately in Twitter, hashtags incorporated within a tweet can help us estimate their “*aboutness*”. Users normally add certain hashtags to their tweets to ease the search and discoverability in following a certain topic. These hashtags will be utilized in the event-centric filtration process.\
For each event, we selected initial tags that describe it (Table \[tab:tags\]). Those initial tags were derived empirically after examining some event-related tweets. Next we extracted all the hashtags that co-occurred with our initial set of hashtags. For example, in class H1N1 we extracted all the other hashtags that appeared along with *\#h1n1* within the same tweet and kept count of their frequency. Those extracted hashtags were sorted in descending order of the frequency of their appearance in tweets. We removed all the general scope tags like *\#cnn*, *\#health*, *\#death*, *\#war* and others. In regards to aboutness, removing general tags will indeed decrease recall but will increase precision. Finally we picked the top 8-10 hashtags to represent this event-class and be utilized in the filtration process. Table \[tab:tags\] shows the final set of tags selected for each class.
-21pt
**Event** **Initial Hashtags** **Top Co-occurring Hashtags**
------------------ ----------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
**H1N1** ‘h1n1’ ‘swine’=61,829 ‘swineflu’=56,419 ‘flu’=8,436
**Outbreak** =61,351 ‘pandemic’=6,839 ‘influenza’=1,725 ‘grippe’=1,559 ‘tamiflu’=331
**M. Jackson’s** ‘michaeljackson’ ‘michael’=27,075 ‘mj’=18,584 ‘thisisit’8,770 ‘rip’=3,559 ‘jacko’=3,325
**Death** =22,934 ‘kingofpop’=2,888 ‘jackson’=2,559 ‘thriller’=1,357 ‘thankyoumichael’=1,050
**Iranian** ‘iranelection’ ‘iran’949,641 ‘gr88’=197,113‘tehran’=109,006 ‘freeiran’=13,378
**Elections** =911,808 ‘neda’=191,067 ‘mousavi’=16,587 ‘united4iran’=9,198 ‘iranrevolution’=7,295
**Obama’s** ‘obama’=48,161 & ‘nobel’=2,261 ‘obamanobel’=14 ‘nobelprize’ ‘nobelpeace’=113
**Nobel Prize** ‘peace‘=3,721 &‘barack’=1292 ‘nobelpeaceprize’=107\
: Twitter hashtags generated for filtering and their frequency of occurring[]{data-label="tab:tags"}
\
-25pt
### Tweet Filtration:
In the previous step we extracted the tags that will help us classify and filter tweets in the dataset according to each event. This filtration process aims to extract a reasonable sized dataset of tweets for each event and to minimize the inter-event overlap. Since the life and persistence of the tweet itself is not the focus of this study but rather the associated resource that appears in the tweet (image, video, shortened URI or other embedded resource), we will extract only the tweets that contain an embedded resource. This step resulted in 181 million tweets with embedded resources (http://is.gd/1WMZb in the prior example). These tweets were further filtered to keep only the tweets that have at least one of the expanded tags obtained from Table \[tab:tags\]. The number of tweets after this phase reached 1.1 million tweets.\
Filtering the tweets based on the occurrence of at least one of the hashtags only is undesirable as it will cause two problems: First, it will introduce possible event overlap due to general tweets talking about two or more topics. Second, is that using only the single occurrence of these tags will yield a huge amount of tweets and we need to reduce this size to reach a more manageable size. Intuitively speaking, strongly related hashtags will co-occur often. For example, a tweet that has *\#h1n1* along with *\#swineflu* and *\#pandemic* is most likely about the H1N1 outbreak rather than a tweet having just the tag *\#flu* or just *\#sick*. Filtering with this co-occurrence will in turn solve both problems as by increasing relevance to a particular event, general tweets that talk about several events will be filtered out thus diminishing the overlap, and in turn it will reduce the size of the dataset.\
Next, we increase the precision of the tweets associated with each event from the set of 1.1 million tweets. In the first iteration we selected the tag that had the highest frequency of co-occurrence in the dataset with the initial tag and added it to a set we will call the selection set. After that we check the co-occurrence of all the remaining extracted tags with the tag in the selection set and record the frequencies of co-occurrence. After sorting the frequencies of co-occurrence with the tag from the selection set, we pick the highest one to keep add it to the selection set. We repeat this step of counting co-occurrences but with all the previously extracted hashtags in the selection set from previous iterations.\
To elaborate, for H1N1 assume that the hastag ‘\#h1n1’ had the highest frequency of appearance in the dataset so we add it to the selection set. In the next iteration we record the how many times each tag in the list appeared along with ‘\#h1n1’ in a same tweet. If we selected ‘\#swine’ as the one with the highest frequency of occurrence with the initial tag ‘\#h1n1’ we add it to the selection list and in the next iteration we record the frequency of occurrence of the remaining hashtags with both of the extracted tags ‘\#h1n1’ and ‘\#swine’. We repeat this step, for each event, to the point where we have a manageable size dataset which we are confident in its ‘aboutness’ in relation to the event.
-20pt
**Event** **Hashtags selected for filteration** **Tweets Extracted** **Operation Performed** **Final Tweets**
----------- -------------------------------------------- ---------------------- ------------------------- ------------------
**MJ** michael 27,075
michael & michaeljackson **22,934** Sample 10% **2,293**
**Iran** iran 949,641
iran & iranelection 911,808
iran & iranelection & gr88 189,757
iran & iranelection & gr88 & neda 91,815
iran & iranelection & gr88 & neda & tehran **34,294** Sample 10% **3,429**
**H1N1** h1n1 61,351
h1n1 & swine 44,972
h1n1 & swine & swineflu 42,574
h1n1 & swine & swineflu & pandemic **5,517** Take All **5,517**
**Obama** obama 48,161
obama & nobel **1,118** Take All **1,118**
: Tweet Filtration iterations and final tweet collections
\
-45pt \[tab:tagoccurrence\]
Two problems appeared from this approach with the Iran and Michael Jackson datasets. In the Iran dataset the number of tweets was in hundreds of thousands and even with 5 tags co-occurrence it was still about 34K+ tweets. To solve this we performed a random sampling from those resulting tweets to take only 10% of them resulting in a smaller manageable dataset. The second problem with the Michael Jackson dataset upon using 5 tags to decrease it to a manageable size we realized there were few unique domains for the embedded resources. A closer look revealed this combination of tags was mostly border-line tweet spam (MJ ringtones). To solve this we used only the two top tags “\#michael” and “\#michaeljackson”, and then we randomly sampled 10% of the resulting tweets to reach the desired dataset size (Table \[tab:tagoccurrence\]).
Egyptian Revolution Dataset
---------------------------
The one year anniversary of this event was the original motivation for this study [@losingrevolution]. In this case, we started with an event and then tried to get social media content describing it. Despite its ubiquity, gathering social media for a past event is surprisingly hard. We picked the Egyptian revolution due to the role of the social media in curating and driving the incidents that led to the resignation of the president. Several initiatives were commenced to collect and curate the social media content during the revolution like R-sheif.org[^2] which specializes in social content analysis of the issues in the Arab world by using aggregate data from Twitter and the Web. We are currently in the process of obtaining the millions of records related to the Arab Spring of 2011. Meanwhile, we decided to build our own dataset manually.\
There are several sites that curate resources about the Egyptian Revolution and we want to investigate as many of them as possible. At the same time, we need to diversify our resources and the types of digital artifacts that are embedded in them. Tweets, videos, images, embedded links, entire web pages and books were included in our investigation. For the sake of consistency, we limited our analysis to resources created within the period from the 20th of January 2011 to the 1st of March 2011. In the next subsections we explain each of the resources we utilized in our data acquisition in detail.
### Storify:
Storify is a website that enables users to create stories by creating collections of URIs (e.g., Tweets, images, videos, links) and arrange them temporally. These entries are posted by reference to their host websites. Thus, adding content to Storify does not necessarily mean it is archived. If a user added a video from YouTube and after a while the publisher of that video decided to remove it from YouTube the user is left with a gap in their Storify entry. For this purpose we gathered all the Storify entries that were created between 20th of January 2011 and the 1st of March 2011, resulting in 219 unique resources.
### IAmJan25:
Some entire websites were dedicated as a collection hub of media to curate the revolution. Based on public contributions, those websites collect different types of media, classify them, order them chronologically and publish them to the public. We picked a website named IAmJan25.com, as an example of these websites, to analyze and investigate. The administrators of the website received selected videos and images for notable events and actions that happened during the revolution. Those images and videos were selected by users as they vouched for them to be of some importance and they send the resource’s URI to the web site administrators. The website itself is divided into two collections: a video collection and an image collection. The video collection had 2387 unique URIs while the image collection had 3525 unique URIs.
### Tweets From Tahrir:
Several books were published in 2011 documenting the revolution and the Arab Spring. To bridge the gap between books and digital media we analyzed a book entitled ***Tweets from Tahrir*** [@tweetsfromtahrir] which was published on April 21st, 2011. As the name states, this book tells a story formed by tweets of people during the revolution and the clashes with the past regime. We analyzed this book as a collection of tweets that had the luxury of a paperback preservation and focused on the tweeted media, in this case images. The book had a total of 1118 tweets having 23 unique images.
Syria Dataset
-------------
This dataset has been selected to represent a current (March 2012) event. Using the Twitter search API, we followed the same pattern of data acquisition as in section 3.1. We started with one hashtag, \#Syria, and expanded it. Table \[tab:syriatags\] show the tags produced from the tag expansion step. After that each of those tags were input into a process utilizing the Twitter streaming API and produced the first 1000 results matching each tag. From this set, we randomly sampled 10%. As a result, 1955 tweets were extracted each having one or more embedded resources and tags from the expanded tags in Table \[tab:syriatags\].
-28pt
**Initial Hashtags** **Extracted Hashtags**
---------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
‘Syria’ ‘Bashar’ ‘RiseDamascus’ ‘GenocideInSyria’ ‘STOPASSAD2012’ ‘AssadCrimes’ ‘Assad’
: Twitter \#Tags generated for filtering the Syrian uprising[]{data-label="tab:syriatags"}
\
-50pt
Table \[tab:domains\] shows the resources collected along with the top level domains that those resources belong to for each event.
-30pt
**Event** **Top Domains (number of resources found)**
----------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MJ youtube (110), twitpic (45), latimes (43), cnn (30), amazon (30)
Iran youtube (385), twitpic (36), blogspot (30), roozonline (29)
H1N1 rhizalabs (676), reuters (17), google (16), flutrackers (16), calgaryherald (11)
Obama blogspot (16), nytimes (15), wordpress (12), youtube (11), cnn (10)
Egypt youtube (2414), cloudfront (2303), yfrog (1255), twitpic (114), imageshack.us (20)
Syria youtube (130), twitter (61), hostpic.biz (9), telegraph.co.uk (5)
: The top level domains found for each event ordered descendingly by the number of resources.[]{data-label="tab:domains"}
\
-30pt
-25pt
Uniqueness and Existence
========================
From the previous data gathering step we obtained six different datasets related to six different historic events. For each event we extracted a list of URIs that were shared in tweets or uploaded to sites like Storify or IAmJan25. To answer the question of how much of the social media content is missing we test those URIs for each dataset to eliminate URI aliases in which several URIs identify to the same resource. Upon obtaining those unique URIs we examine how many of which are still available on the live web and how many are available in public web archives.
Uniqueness
----------
Some URIs, especially those that appear in Twitter, may be aliases for the same resource. For example “http://bit.ly/2EEjBl” and “http://goo.gl/2ViC” both resolve to “http://www.cnn.com”. To solve this, we resolved all the URIs following redirects to the final URI. The HTTP response of the last redirect has a field called *location* that contains the original long URI of the resource. This step reduced the total number of URIs in the six datasets from 21,625 to 11,051. Table \[tab:all\] shows the number of unique resources in every dataset.
-15pt
[r|c|c c]{} & & &\
& 2,293 & &\
& & &\
Available & 316=26.62% & &\
Missing & 90=7.58% & &\
& 406=**34.20%** & each/1,187 &\
[r|c|c c]{} & & &\
& 3,429 & &\
& & &\
Available & 415=30.97% & &\
Missing & 101=7.54% & &\
& 516=**38.51%** & each/1,340 &\
\
[r|c|c c]{} & & &\
& 5,517 & &\
& & &\
Available & 595=36.17% & &\
Missing & 98=5.96% & &\
& 693=**42.12%** & each/1,645 &\
[r|c|c c]{} & & &\
& 1,118 & &\
& & &\
Available & 143=38.65% & &\
Missing & 33=8.92% & &\
& 176=**47.57%** & each/370 &\
\
[r|c|c c]{} & & &\
& 7,313 & &\
& & &\
Available & 1,069=17.37% & &\
Missing & 173=2.81% & &\
& 1242=**20.18%** & each/6,154 &\
[r|c|c c]{} & & &\
& 1,955 & &\
& & &\
Available & 19=5.35% & &\
Missing & 0=0% & &\
& 19=**5.35%** & each/355 &\
-15pt
Existence on the Live-Web
-------------------------
After obtaining the unique URIs from the previous step we resolve all of them and classify them as Success or Failure. The *Success* class includes all the resources that ultimately return a “200 OK” HTTP response. The *Failure* class includes all the resources that return a “4XX” family response like: “404 Not Found”, “403 Forbidden” and “410 Gone”, the “30X” redirect family while having infinite loop redirects, and server errors with response “50X”. To avoid transient errors we repeated the requests, on all datasets, several times for a week to resolve those errors.\
We also test for “Soft 404s”, which are pages that return “200 OK” response code but are not a representation of the resource, using a technique based on a heuristic for automatically discovering soft 404s from Bar-Yossef et al. [@Bar-yossef]. We also include no response from the server, as well as DNS timeouts, as failures. Note that failure means that this resource is ***missing*** on the live web. Table \[tab:all\] summarizes, for each dataset, the total percentages of the resources missing from the live web and the number of missing resources divided by the total number of unique resources.\
Existence in the Archives
-------------------------
In the previous step we tested the existence of the unique list of URIs for each event on the live web. Next, we evaluate how many URIs have been archived in public web archives. To check those archives we utilize the Memento framework. If there is a memento for the URI, we download its memento timemap and analyze it. The timemap is a datestamp ordered list of all known archived versions (called “mementos”) of a URI. Next, we parse this timemap and extract the number of mementos that point to versions of the resource in the public archives. We declare the resource to be archived if it has at least one memento. This step was also repeated several times to avoid the transient states of the archives before deeming a resource as unarchived. The results of this experiment along with the archive coverage percentage are presented in Table \[tab:all\].
Existence as a Function of Time
===============================
Inspecting the results from the previous steps suggests that the number of missing shared resources in social media corresponding to an event is directly proportional with its age. To determine dates for each of the events this we extracted all the creation dates from all the tweet-based datasets and sorted them. For each event, we plotted a graph illustrating the number of tweets per day related to that event as shown in figure \[fig:allevents\]. Since the dataset is separated temporally into 3 partitions, and in order to display all the events on one graph we reduced the size of the x-axis by removing the time periods not covered in our study.
-23pt ![URIs shared per day corresponding to each event and showing the two peaks in the non-Syrian and non-Egyptian events[]{data-label="fig:allevents"}](tweets.png "fig:"){width="100.00000%"} -17pt
-15pt
Upon examining the graph we found an interesting phenomena in the non-Syrian and non-Egyptian events: each event has two peaks. Upon investigating history timelines we came to conclusion that those peaks reflect a second wave of social media interaction as a result of new incident within the same event after a period of time. For example, in the H1N1 dataset, the first peak illustrates the world-wide outbreak announcement while the second peak denotes the release of the vaccine. In the Iran dataset, the first peak shows the peak of the elections while the second peak pinpoints the Iranian trials. As for the MJ dataset the first peak corresponds to his death and the second peak describes the rumors that Michael Jackson died of unnatural causes and a possible homicide. For the Obama dataset, the first peak reveals the announcement of his winning the prize while the second peak presents the award-giving ceremony in Oslo. For the Egyptian evolution, the resources are all within a small time slot of 2 weeks around the date 11th of February. As for the Syrian event, since the collection was very recent there was no obvious peaks. Those peaks we examined will become temporal centroids of the social content collections (the datasets). MJ (June 25th & July 10th 2009), Iran (June 13th & 1st August 2009), H1N1 (September 11th & 5th October 2009), and Obama (October 9th & December 10th 2009). Egypt was (February 11th 2011) and the Syria dataset also had one centroid on March 27th 2012. We split each event according to the two centroids in each event accordingly. Figure \[fig:allevents\] shows those peaks and Table \[tab:split\] shows the missing content and the archived content percentages corresponding to each centroid.
-23pt
**Egypt** **Syria**
------------ -------- -------- -------- -------- ----------- ----------- -------- -------- -------- -------
% Missing 36.24% 31.62% 26.98% 24.47% 23.49% 25.64% 24.59% 26.15% 10.48% 7.04%
% Archived 39.45% 30.78% 43.08% 36.26% 41.65% 43.87% 47.87% 46.15% 20.18% 5.35%
: The Split Dataset[]{data-label="tab:split"}
\
-50pt
-15pt {width="100.00000%"} -15pt
-20pt \[fig:thebigfigure\]
Figure \[fig:thebigfigure\] shows the missing and archived values from Table \[tab:split\] as a function of time since shared. Equation \[missing\] shows the modeled estimate for the percentage of shared resources lost, where *Age* is in days. While there is a less linear relationship between time and being archived, equation \[archived\] shows the modeled estimate for the percentage of shared resources archived in a public archive. $$\label{missing}
Content\hspace{0.8 mm}Lost\hspace{0.8 mm}Percentage = 0.02 (Age\hspace{0.8 mm}in\hspace{0.8 mm}days) + 4.20$$ $$\label{archived}
Content\hspace{0.8 mm}Archived\hspace{0.8 mm}Percentage= 0.04 (Age\hspace{0.8 mm}in\hspace{0.8 mm}days) + 6.74$$ Given these observations and our curve fitting we estimate that after a year from publishing about 11% of content shared in social media will be gone. After this point, we are losing roughly 0.02% of this content per day.
Conclusions and Future work
===========================
We can conclude that there is a nearly linear relationship between time of sharing in the social media and the percentage lost. Although not as linear, there is a similar relationship between the time of sharing and the expected percentage of coverage in the archives. To reach this conclusion, we extracted collections of tweets and other social media content that was posted and shared in relation to six different events that occurred in the time period from June 2009 to March 2012. Next we extracted the embedded resources within this social media content and tested their existence on the live web and in the archives. After analyzing the percentages lost and archived in relation to time and plotting them we used a linear regression model to fit those points. Finally we presented two linear models that can estimate the existence of a resource, that was posted or shared at one point of time in the social media, on the live web and in the archives as a function of age in the social media.\
In the next stage of our research we need to expand the datasets and import other similar datasets especially in the uncovered temporal areas (e.g., the year of 2010 and before 2009). Examining more datasets across extended points in time could enable us to better model these two functions of time. Also several other factors beside time would be analyzed to understand their effect on persistence on the live web and archiving coverage like: publishing venue, rate of sharing, popularity of authors and the nature of the related event. -25pt
Acknowledgments
===============
This work was supported in part by the Library of Congress and NSF IIS-1009392. -25pt
[4]{}
Ainsworth, Scott G. and Alsum, Ahmed and SalahEldeen, Hany and Weigle, Michele C. and Nelson, Michael L.: How Much of the Web Is Archived? In *Proceedings of the 11th annual international ACM/IEEE joint conference on Digital libraries, JCDL ’11*, pages 133-136, (2011).
Bar-Yossef, Ziv and Broder, Andrei Z. and Kumar, Ravi and Tomkins, Andrew.: Sic Transit Gloria Telae: Towards an Understanding of the Web’s Decay. In *Proceedings of the 13th international conference on World Wide Web, WWW ’04*, pages 328-337, (2004).
F. Benevenut, T. Rodrigues, M. Cha, and V. Almeida.: Characterizing User Behavior in Online Social Networks. In *In Proc. of ACM SIGCOMM Internet Measurement Conference, SIGCOMM ’09*, pages 49-62, (2009).
Lee, Chei and Ma, Long and Goh, Dion.: Why Do People Share News in Social Media? *Active Media Technology*, Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, pages 129-140, Volume:6890, (2011).
Facebook official fact sheet, <http://newsroom.fb.com/content/default.aspx?NewsAreaId=22>
Kwak, Haewoon and Lee, Changhyun and Park, Hosung and Moon, Sue.: What is Twitter, a Social Network or a News Media? In *Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World wide web, WWW ’10*, pages 591-600, (2010).
Gordon Mohr, Michele Kimpton, Micheal Stack and Igor Ranitovic.: Introduction to Heritrix, an Archival Quality Web Crawler. In *4th International Web Archiving Workshop, IWAW ’04*,(2004).
Frank McCown and Norou Diawara and Michael L. Nelson.: Factors Affecting Website Reconstruction from the Web Infrastructure. In *Proceedings of the 7th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, JCDL ’07*, pages 39-48, (2007).
Michael L. Nelson, B. Danette Allen.: Object Persistence and Availability in Digital Libraries. *D-Lib Magazine*, Volume 8, Number 1, January (2002)
M. E. J. Newman and J. Park.: Why social networks are different from other types of networks. Phys. Rev. E, 68(3):036122, September, (2003).
Alex Nunns and Nadia Idle.: Tweets From Tahrir. ISBN-10: 1935928457.
T. A. Phelps and R. Wilensky.: Robust Hyperlinks Cost Just Five Words Each. *Technical Report*, UCB/CSD-00-1091, EECS Department, University of California, Berkeley, (2000).
Hany M. SalahEldeen, Michael L. Nelson.: Losing My Revolution: A year after the Egyptian Revolution, 10% of the social media documentation is gone. <http://ws-dl.blogspot.com/2012/02/2012-02-11-losing-my-revolution-year.html>
Robert Sanderson, Mark Phillips and Herbert Van de Sompel.: Analyzing the Persistence of Referenced Web Resources with Memento. *CoRR*, arXiv:1105.3459, (2011)
Stanford SNAP Project Dataset, <http://snap.stanford.edu/>
Twitter numbers, <http://blog.Twitter.com/2011/03/numbers.html>
H. Van de Sompel, M. L. Nelson, R. Sanderson, L. L. Balakireva, S. Ainsworth, H. Shankar.: Memento: Time Travel for the Web, Technical Report, arXiv:0911.1112, November, (2009).
Wan, X., Yang, J.: Wordrank-based Lexical Signatures for Finding Lost or Related Web Pages. In *Proceedings of the 8th Asia-Pacific Web conference on Frontiers of WWW Research and Development, APWeb’06*, pages 843-849, (2006).
C. Wilson, B. Boe, A. Sala, K. P. Puttaswamy, and B. Y. Zhao.: User Interactions in Social Networks and their Implications. In *Proceedings of the 4th ACM European conference on Computer systems, EuroSys ’09*, pages 205-218, (2009).
Wu, Shaomei and Hofman, Jake M. and Mason, Winter A. and Watts, Duncan J.: Who Says What to Whom on Twitter. In *Proceedings of the 20th international conference on World wide web, WWW ’11*, pages 705-714, (2011).
Jaewon Yang and Jure Leskovec.: Patterns of Temporal Variation in Online Media. In *ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Minig, WSDM ’11*, pages 177-186, (2011).
J. Yang and S. Counts.: Predicting the Speed, Scale, and Range of Information Diffusion in Twitter. In *4th International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, ICWSM ’10*, May, (2010).
D. Zhao and M. B. Rosson.: How and Why People Twitter: The Role that Micro-blogging Plays in Informal Communication at Work. In *Proceedings of the ACM 2009 international conference on Supporting group work. GROUP ’09*, pages 243-252, (2009).
[^1]: http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/12/16/year.timeline/index.html
[^2]: http://www.r-shief.org/
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'For a narrow band of values of the top quark and Higgs boson masses, the Standard Model Higgs potential develops a shallow local minimum at energies of about $10^{16}$ GeV, where primordial inflation could have started in a cold metastable state. For each point of that band, the highness of the Higgs potential at the false minimum is calculable, and there is an associated prediction for the inflationary gravitational wave background, namely for the tensor to scalar ratio $r$. We show that the recent measurement of $r$ by the BICEP2 collaboration, $r=0.16 _{-0.05}^{+0.06}$ at $1\sigma$, combined with the most up-to-date measurements of the top quark and Higgs boson masses, reveals that the hypothesis that a Standard Model shallow false minimum was the source of inflation in the early Universe is viable.'
author:
- 'Isabella Masina$^{1,2,3}$'
title: The Gravitational Wave Background and Higgs False Vacuum Inflation
---
The fact that, for a narrow band of values of the top quark and Higgs boson masses, the Standard Model (SM) Higgs potential develops a local minimum [@CERN-TH-2683; @hep-ph/0104016; @strumia2] is very interesting, as this happens at energy scales of about $10^{16}$ GeV which are suitable for inflation in the early Universe.
Inflation from a local minimum [@Coleman; @Guth] is a viable scenario, provided a graceful exit to a radiation-dominated era can be obtained via some mechanism beyond the SM. Developing a model with graceful exit in the framework of a scalar-tensor theory of gravity [@hep-ph/0511207; @astro-ph/0511396], in ref. [@Masina:2011aa] we pointed out that the hypothesis that inflation took place in a SM shallow false vacuum was consistent only with a narrow range of values of the Higgs boson mass, which subsequently turned out to be compatible with the experimental range indicated by ATLAS and CMS [@LHC]. These very suggestive results provide a strong motivation to further investigate the scenario of SM false vacuum inflation, by looking for complementary experimental tests. Inflation can generate tensor (gravity wave) modes as well as scalar (density perturbation) modes. It is common to define the tensor contribution through $r$, the ratio of tensor to scalar perturbation spectra at large scales. If inflation happened at a very high scale, as is the case for the SM false vacuum scenario, quantum fluctuations during inflation produced a background of gravitational waves with a relatively large amplitude.
As argued in [@Masina:2011un], the tensor to scalar ratio, combined with the top quark and Higgs boson mass measurements, does represent a test of the hypothesis that inflation started from the SM false vacuum. The upper bounds on $r$ provided by the WMAP [@Komatsu:2010fb] and Planck experiments [@Ade:2013uln] were too weak for the sake of such test. It was anyway possible to conclude [@Masina:2012tz] that, for the SM false vacuum to be a realistic inflationary scenario, an experimental detection of $r$ would have been possible in the case that the top quark mass turned out to be close to its lower allowed value at $2\sigma$.
The recent measurement of $r$ by the BICEP2 collaboration [@Ade:2014xna], $r=0.16\ ^{+0.6}_{-0.5}$ at $1\sigma$, on the one hand represents a hint in favor of the hypothesis that inflation took place in the SM shallow false vacuum and, on the other hand, allows to perform a sensible test of the allowed parameter space for such scenario. That is the goal of the present Letter.
Let us consider the Higgs potential in the SM of particle physics. For very large values of the Higgs field $\chi$, the quadratic term $m^2 \chi^2$ can be neglected and we are left with the quartic term, whose dimensionless coupling $\lambda$ depends on the energy scale, which can be identified with the field $\chi$ itself: $$V(\chi) \simeq \lambda(\chi) \, \chi^4\,\,.$$ It is well known that, for some narrow band of the Higgs and top masses, the Higgs potential develops a new local minimum [@CERN-TH-2683; @hep-ph/0104016; @strumia2].
If the Higgs field is trapped in a cold coherent state in the false minimum $\chi_0$ and dominates the energy density of the Universe, the standard Friedmann equation leads to a stage of inflationary expansion H\^2 H\_I\^2 , a(t)e\^[H\_I t]{} , \[eq-M\] where $a(t)$ is the scale factor, $H \equiv \dot a /a$ is the Hubble rate and $M=1.22 \times 10^{19}/\sqrt{8 \pi}$ GeV is the reduced Planck mass.
A nontrivial model-dependent ingredient is how to achieve a graceful exit from inflation. In order to end inflation the Higgs field has to tunnel to the other side of the potential barrier by nucleating bubbles [@Coleman] that eventually collide and percolate. Subsequently the Higgs field could roll down the potential, reheat the Universe and relax in the electroweak vacuum. A graceful exit can be generically realized only if at the end of inflation there is a very shallow false minimum, otherwise the tunneling rate becomes negligibly small, the probability being exponentially sensitive to the barrier [@Coleman]. The shape of the potential is thus very close to an inflection point configuration. This leads to a powerful generic prediction for the scale of inflation, and therefore for $r$ [@Masina:2011un]. So, if the false vacuum is very shallow, the specific model only affects the prediction for the spectral index of cosmological density perturbations $n_S$, see e.g. the models of refs. [@Masina:2011aa; @Masina:2012yd].
Using the Renormalization Group Equations (RGE) at Next-to-Next-to-Leading Order (NNLO), [*i.e.*]{} 3-loops for beta functions [@Mihaila:2012fm; @Chetyrkin:2012rz] and the 2-loops for matching conditions [@Bezrukov:2012sa; @Degrassi:2012ry], we investigated [@Masina:2012tz] the values of the top quark and Higgs masses allowing for the presence of a second degenerate minimum or a shallow local minimum at high scale. For the technical details on the RGE procedure at NNLO we refer the interested reader to ref. [@Masina:2012tz], while here we summarize only the issues relevant for the present work.
The are two main sources of uncertainty in the RGE calculation at NNLO. The first is of experimental nature and is associated to the uncertainty in the determination of the value of $\alpha_3(m_Z)$, for which the PDG [@PDG] gives the range $\alpha_3(m_Z)= 0.1196 \pm 0.0017$ at $1\sigma$. The second is of theoretical nature and is associated to the matching conditions. As suggested in ref. [@Alekhin:2012py], using the value of the top mass in the $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme, ${\overline{ m}}_t(m_t)$, one has to consider only the theoretical uncertainty associated to the matching of $\lambda$; this kind of top mass is experimentally known with a quite large $1\sigma$ error, ${\overline{ m}}_t(m_t)=163.3 \pm 2.7 $ GeV according to [@Alekhin:2012py], and ${\overline{ m}}_t(m_t)=160 ^{+5}_{-4} $ GeV according to the PDG [@PDG]. Using instead the top pole mass, the theoretical error becomes bigger because one has to include also the uncertainty associated to the matching of the top yukawa coupling (see e.g. [@Bezrukov:2012sa; @Degrassi:2012ry]); the top pole mass $m_t$ is however known quite accurately, $m_t=173.0\pm1.2$ GeV at $1\sigma$ according to the PDG [@PDG], and $m_t =173.34 \pm 0.76$ GeV according to the recent combination of the ATLAS, CDF, CMS, D0 measurements [@ATLAS:2014wva]. In the present analysis, as a crosscheck, we adopt both procedures, finding that the two methods essentially provide similar results (as they should), even though the second method is somewhat more stringent.
We first start with the analysis based on the $\overline{\rm MS}$ top mass. In fig.\[fig-1\], the (red and orange) lines spanning the $2\sigma$ range of $\alpha_3(m_Z)$, show the points in the ${\overline{ m}}_t(m_t)-m_H$ plane where the shallow SM false minima exists. The thickness of the lines is associated to the theoretical uncertainty of the NNLO procedure, due to the matching of $\lambda$. The latter are extremely close to the line marking the transition from stability to metastability (two degenerate vacua), so that it is not possible to distinguish them by eye, the difference being a few MeV for the top mass [@Masina:2012tz]. The (green) shaded horizontal region corresponds to the $1 \sigma$ range ${\overline{ m}}_t(m_t)=163.3 \pm 2.7 $ GeV, as calculated in ref. [@Alekhin:2012py]. The (pink) shaded vertical regions are the 1 and 2 $\sigma$ ranges of $m_H$ according to the PDG [@PDG]. The shallow false minimum configuration (and, more generally, any configuration close to it, like e.g. two degenerate minima) is thus compatible with the Higgs and top quark mass values, provided the latter is quite light.
![The (red and orange) lines show the points where the SM shallow minimum configuration is realized, their thickness being the theoretical error in the NNLO RGE procedure. Each line corresponds to a value of $\alpha_3(m_z)$, taken to vary in its $2\sigma$ range. The (green) shaded horizontal region corresponds to the $1 \sigma$ range ${\overline{ m}}_t(m_t)=163.3 \pm 2.7 $ GeV [@Alekhin:2012py]. The (pink) shaded vertical regions are the 1 and 2 $\sigma$ ranges of $m_H$ [@PDG]. The (blue) shaded bands are the $1$ and $2$ $\sigma$ ranges of BICEP2, $r=0.16\ ^{+0.06}_{-0.05}$ [@Ade:2014xna]; for reference, also the value $r=0.01$ is displayed. []{data-label="fig-1"}](fig-1-msbar){width="7.5cm"}
.2 cm
For each shallow false minimum configuration the highness of the Higgs potential at the false minimum, $V(\chi_0)$, can be calculated and, thanks to eq. (\[eq-M\]), the same is true for $H_I$. Let now consider the tensor to scalar ratio of cosmological perturbations. The amplitude of density fluctuations in the observed Universe as seen by the CMB and Large-Scale structure data is parametrized by the power spectrum in $k$-space P\_s(k)=\_R\^2 ( )\^[n\_S-1]{} , where $\Delta_R^2$ is the amplitude at some pivot point $k_0$. We consider the best-fit value from [@Ade:2013zuv], $\Delta_R^2= (2.20 \pm 0.05) \times 10^{-9}$ at $k_0=0.002 \,{\rm Mpc}^{-1}$.
In any inflationary model that can be analyzed through the slow-roll approximation, there is a relationship between the scale of inflation, the amplitude of density perturbations, and the amount of gravity waves that can be produced: \_R\^2 = . \[eq-r\] If inflation actually started from a SM shallow false minimum, then each point in the ${\overline{ m}}_t(m_t)-m_H$ plane has to be associated with a specific value of $r$. This is done in fig.\[fig-1\] , where the (blue) shaded bands represents the $1$ and $2$ $\sigma$ ranges of BICEP2 measurement $r=0.16\ ^{+0.06}_{-0.05}$ [@Ade:2014xna]; for reference, also the value $r=0.01$ is displayed. Taking into account the theoretical error in the determination of the position of the false minimum (the thickness of the red and orange lines), the position of the (blue) $r$ bands is also uncertain by about $\pm 0.1$ GeV along the vertical axis.
One can see that, given the results from BICEP2, the shallow false minimum is a viable framework for models of Higgs inflation provided that: i) the Higgs mass is close to its upper 1-2 $\sigma$ range, more precisely between $126$ and $126.7$ GeV, or ii) both $\alpha_3(m_Z)$ and the top mass ${\overline{ m}}_t(m_t)$ are quite small, say respectively close to the lower 1-2 $\sigma$ range (between $0.1162$ and $0.1179$) and between $160.5$ and $161.5$ GeV. Clearly, the smaller is $r$, the more the three previous parameters can go in the direction of their central values. It will thus be important to further improve the $r$ measurement in the future.
![The (red and orange) lines corresponding to the quoted value of $\alpha_3(m_z)$ show the points where the SM false vacuum configuration is realized, their thickness being the theoretical error in the NNLO RGE procedure. The (green) shaded horizontal region corresponds to the $1$ and $1$ $\sigma$ ranges of the combined measurement by the ATLAS, CDF, CMS, D0 collaborations, $m_t =173.34 \pm 0.76$ GeV [@ATLAS:2014wva]. The (pink) shaded vertical regions are the 1 and 2 $\sigma$ ranges of $m_H$ [@PDG]. The (blue) shaded bands are the $1$ and $2$ $\sigma$ ranges of BICEP2, $r=0.16\ ^{+0.06}_{-0.05}$ [@Ade:2014xna]; for reference, also the value $r=0.01$ is displayed. []{data-label="fig-2"}](fig-2-pole){width="7.5cm"}
.2 cm
The same conclusions can be drawn by making the analysis using the top pole mass, see fig. \[fig-2\]. As the theoretical error has to include also the uncertainty due to the matching of the top yukawa coupling, the thickness of the lines is bigger than with the previous method, and turns out to be about $\pm 0.5$ GeV in the vertical axis (see e.g. [@Degrassi:2012ry]). For the sake of clearness, we thus display only three lines, corresponding the the central and $2\sigma$ values of $\alpha_3(m_Z)$. Taking into account the theoretical error in the determination of the position of the false minimum (the thickness of the red and orange lines), the position of the (blue) bands representing the BICEP2 result is also uncertain by a shift along the vertical axis of about $\pm 0.5$ GeV. The (green) shaded horizontal regions show the 1 and 2 $\sigma$ ranges of the combined measurement by the ATLAS, CDF, CMS, D0 collaborations, $m_t =173.34 \pm 0.76$ GeV [@ATLAS:2014wva]. The (pink) shaded vertical regions are the 1 and 2 $\sigma$ ranges of $m_H$ according to the PDG [@PDG].
Also from fig. \[fig-2\] one can see again that, for the shallow false minimum configuration, the BICEP2 results are compatible with the present ranges for $\alpha_3(m_Z)$, $m_H$, $m_t$. In particular the overlapping requires: $m_t$ close to its lower $2\sigma$ value, $m_H$ close to its upper $2\sigma$ value, $\alpha_3(m_Z)$ close to its central one.
Notice that the BICEP2 result at $1\sigma$, $r=0.16\ ^{+0.06}_{-0.05}$ [@Ade:2014xna], corresponds to the range $V(\chi_0)=(1.8-2.2) \times 10^{16}$ GeV, and to $ H_I= (0.8-1.2) \times 10^{14}$ GeV.
Summarizing, we have argued that the present status of the measurements of $r$, $m_t$, $m_H$, $\alpha_3(m_Z)$, is consistent with of the hypothesis [@Masina:2011aa] that inflation occurred in a SM shallow false vacuum at about $2\times 10^{16}$ GeV. To account for the BICEP2 result at $1\sigma$, $r=0.16\ ^{+0.06}_{-0.05}$ [@Ade:2014xna], in particular, the top quark mass should be close to its lower $2\sigma$ range, while the Higgs mass should be close to its $2 \sigma$ upper one, see figs. \[fig-1\] and \[fig-2\].
It is intriguing that for such values of the top and Higgs masses, the quadratic divergences of the Higgs mass (corresponding to the running Veltman condition) cancel at the Planck scale, see fig. 2 of ref. [@Masina:2013wja].
Future precision measurements of the top quark and Higgs masses will thus be crucial to further test the SM shallow false minimum inflationary scenario.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
We thank A. Notari and A. Strumia for useful discussions.
[15]{}
N. Cabibbo, L. Maiani, G. Parisi and R. Petronzio, Nucl. Phys. B [**158**]{} (1979) 295. P. Q. Hung, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**42**]{} (1979) 873. M. Lindner, Z. Phys. C [**31**]{} (1986) 295. M. Lindner, M. Sher and H. W. Zaglauer, Phys. Lett. B [**228**]{} (1989) 139. M. Sher, Phys. Rept. [**179**]{} (1989) 273. B. Schrempp and M. Wimmer, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. [**37**]{} (1996) 1 \[hep-ph/9606386\]. J. A. Casas, J. R. Espinosa and M. Quiros, Phys. Lett. B [**382**]{} (1996) 374 \[hep-ph/9603227\]. G. Isidori, G. Ridolfi and A. Strumia, Nucl. Phys. B [**609**]{} (2001) 387 \[hep-ph/0104016\]. J. R. Espinosa, G. F. Giudice and A. Riotto, JCAP [**0805**]{} (2008) 002 \[arXiv:0710.2484 \[hep-ph\]\]. N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dubovsky, L. Senatore and G. Villadoro, JHEP [**0803**]{} (2008) 075 \[arXiv:0801.2399 \[hep-ph\]\]. G. Isidori, V. S. Rychkov, A. Strumia and N. Tetradis, Phys. Rev. D [**77**]{} (2008) 025034 \[arXiv:0712.0242 \[hep-ph\]\]. J. Elias-Miro, J. R. Espinosa, G. F. Giudice, G. Isidori, A. Riotto and A. Strumia, arXiv:1112.3022 S. R. Coleman, Phys. Rev. D [**15**]{}, 2929 (1977) \[Erratum-ibid. D [**16**]{}, 1248 (1977)\].
A. H. Guth, Phys. Rev. D [**23**]{}, 347 (1981).
T. Biswas and A. Notari, Phys. Rev. D [**74**]{} (2006) 043508 \[hep-ph/0511207\]. F. Di Marco and A. Notari, Phys. Rev. D [**73**]{} (2006) 063514 \[astro-ph/0511396\]. I. Masina and A. Notari, Phys. Rev. D [**85**]{} (2012) 123506 \[arXiv:1112.2659 \[hep-ph\]\].
G. Aad [*et al.*]{} \[ATLAS Collaboration\], Phys. Lett. B \[arXiv:1207.7214 \[hep-ex\]\]. S. Chatrchyan [*et al.*]{} \[CMS Collaboration\], Phys. Lett. B \[arXiv:1207.7235 \[hep-ex\]\]. I. Masina and A. Notari, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**108**]{} (2012) 191302 \[arXiv:1112.5430 \[hep-ph\]\].
E. Komatsu [*et al.*]{} \[WMAP Collaboration\], Astrophys. J. Suppl. [**192**]{} (2011) 18 \[arXiv:1001.4538 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. P. A. R. Ade [*et al.*]{} \[Planck Collaboration\], arXiv:1303.5082 \[astro-ph.CO\]. I. Masina, Phys. Rev. D [**87**]{} (2013) 053001
P. A. R. Ade [*et al.*]{} \[BICEP2 Collaboration\], arXiv:1403.3985 \[astro-ph.CO\].
I. Masina and A. Notari, JCAP [**1211**]{} (2012) 031. L. N. Mihaila, J. Salomon and M. Steinhauser, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**108**]{} (2012) 151602. K. G. Chetyrkin and M. F. Zoller, JHEP [**1206**]{} (2012) 033.
F. Bezrukov, M. Y. .Kalmykov, B. A. Kniehl and M. Shaposhnikov, JHEP [**1210**]{} (2012) 140. G. Degrassi, S. Di Vita, J. Elias-Miro, J. R. Espinosa, G. F. Giudice, G. Isidori and A. Strumia, JHEP [**1208**]{} (2012) 098. See also: D. Buttazzo, G. Degrassi, P. P. Giardino, G. F. Giudice, F. Sala, A. Salvio and A. Strumia, JHEP [**1312**]{} (2013) 089 \[arXiv:1307.3536\].
The Review of Particle Physics, J. Beringer et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D86, 010001 (2012) and 2013 partial update for the 2014 edition.
S. Alekhin, A. Djouadi and S. Moch, Phys. Lett. B [**716**]{} (2012) 214.
T. ATLAS [*et al.*]{} \[D0 Collaboration\], arXiv:1403.4427 \[hep-ex\].
P. A. R. Ade [*et al.*]{} \[Planck Collaboration\], arXiv:1303.5076 \[astro-ph.CO\].
I. Masina and M. Quiros, Phys. Rev. D [**88**]{} (2013) 093003 \[arXiv:1308.1242 \[hep-ph\]\].
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Highly privileged software, such as firmware, is an attractive target for attackers. Thus, BIOS vendors use cryptographic signatures to ensure firmware integrity at boot time. Nevertheless, such protection does not prevent an attacker from exploiting vulnerabilities at runtime. To detect such attacks, we propose an event-based behavior monitoring approach that relies on an isolated co-processor. We instrument the code executed on the main CPU to send information about its behavior to the monitor. This information helps to resolve the semantic gap issue. Our approach does not depend on a specific model of the behavior nor on a specific target. We apply this approach to detect attacks targeting the , a highly privileged x86 execution mode executing firmware code at runtime. We model the behavior of SMM using invariants of its control-flow and relevant CPU registers (CR3 and SMBASE). We instrument two open-source firmware implementations: EDK II and coreboot. We evaluate the ability of our approach to detect state-of-the-art attacks and its runtime execution overhead by simulating an x86 system coupled with an ARM Cortex A5 co-processor. The results show that our solution detects intrusions from the state of the art, without any false positives, while remaining acceptable in terms of performance overhead in the context of the (less than the threshold defined by Intel).'
author:
- Ronny Chevalier
- Maugan Villatel
- David Plaquin
- Guillaume Hiet
bibliography:
- 'paper.bib'
title: 'Co-processor-based Behavior Monitoring: Application to the Detection of Attacks Against the System Management Mode'
---
<ccs2012> <concept> <concept\_id>10002978.10002997.10002999</concept\_id> <concept\_desc>Security and privacy Intrusion detection systems</concept\_desc> <concept\_significance>500</concept\_significance> </concept> <concept> <concept\_id>10002978.10003006</concept\_id> <concept\_desc>Security and privacy Systems security</concept\_desc> <concept\_significance>500</concept\_significance> </concept> <concept> <concept\_id>10002978.10003001</concept\_id> <concept\_desc>Security and privacy Security in hardware</concept\_desc> <concept\_significance>300</concept\_significance> </concept> </ccs2012>
Introduction {#sec:introduction}
============
Approach Overview & Requirements {#sec:approach}
================================
Background {#sec:background}
==========
Threat model and assumptions {#sec:threat_model}
============================
SMM Behavior Monitoring {#sec:implementation}
=======================
Evaluation {#sec:evaluation}
==========
Related work {#sec:related_work}
============
Conclusion and future work {#sec:conclusion}
==========================
gem5 {#appendix:gem5}
====
The authors would like to thank and acknowledge the contribution of the following people (in alphabetical order) for their helpful comments, technical discussions, feedback and proofing of earlier versions of this paper: Vali Ali, Boris Balacheff, Pierre Belgarric, Rick Bramley, Chris Dalton, Carey Huscroft and Jeff Jeansonne. In addition, we would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their feedback.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'For a compact space $K$ we denote by $C_w(K)$ ($C_p(K)$) the space of continuous real-valued functions on $K$ endowed with the weak (pointwise) topology. In this paper we address the following basic question which seems to be open: *Suppose that $K$ is an infinite (metrizable) compact space. Is it true that $C_w(K)$ and $C_p(K)$ are homeomorphic?* We show that the answer is “no", provided $K$ is an infinite compact metrizable $C$-space. In particular our proof works for any infinite compact metrizable finite-dimensional space $K$.'
address: |
Institute of Mathematics\
University of Warsaw\
Ul. Banacha 2\
02–097 Warszawa\
Poland
author:
- Mikołaj Krupski
title: On the weak and pointwise topologies in function spaces
---
For a compact space $K$ we can consider three natural topologies on the set $C(K)$ of all continuous real-valued functions on $K$: the norm topology, the weak topology and the pointwise topology. Let us denote $C(K)$ endowed with the latter two topologies by $C_w(K)$ and $C_p(K)$ respectively. Suppose that $K$ is an uncountable compact space. Clearly, the space $C(K)$ equipped with the norm topology is homeomorphic neither to $C_w(K)$ nor to $C_p(K)$: indeed, both $C_w(K)$ and $C_p(K)$ are not metrizable whereas the norm defines a metric on $C(K)$. For a similar reason, if $K$ is a *countable* compact metrizable space, then $C_w(K)$ is not homeomorphic to $C_p(K)$. In that case $C_p(K)$ is metrizable and $C_w(K)$ is not. If we try to compare topologically $C_w(K)$ and $C_p(K)$, for an uncountable compact space $K$, the answer is not obvious at all. There is a vast literature studying the weak and the pointwise topology in function spaces, but surprisingly it seems to be unknown whether these two topologies are homeomorphic. More precisely, we can address the following question: *Let $K$ be an uncountable compact (metrizable) space. Is it true that $C_w(K)$ and $C_p(K)$ are homeomorphic?* This question seems to be open even for standard uncountable metrizable compacta such as the Cantor space $2^\omega$ or the unit interval $[0,1]$. It was proved in [@C] (cf. [@K]) that if $K$ is a finite-dimensional compact metrizable space then $C_p(K)$ and $C_p([0,1]^\omega)$ are not homeomorphic. On the other hand the celebrated Miljutin’s theorem [@Mi] asserts that for any two uncountable compact metrizable spaces $K$ and $L$ the spaces $C_w(K)$ and $C_w(L)$ are linearly homeomorphic. The combination of these two results implies immediately that either $C_p(2^\omega)$ is not homeomorphic to $C_w(2^\omega)$ or $C_p([0,1]^\omega)$ is not homeomorphic to $C_w([0,1]^\omega)$. Similarly, either $C_p([0,1])$ is not homeomorphic to $C_w([0,1])$ or $C_p([0,1]^\omega)$ is not homeomorphic to $C_w([0,1]^\omega)$, and so on. It is however unclear how to determine precisely which pairs of spaces are indeed not homeomorphic.
In this short note we show that $C_w(K)$ and $C_p(K)$ are not homeomorphic for any infinite compact metrizable $C$-space $K$ (see Definition \[def\] below), in particular, for any infinite finite-dimensional compact metrizable space $K$.
Our approach is based on some ideas from [@M] (cf. [@O] and [@K]); however, to deal with the weak topology on $C(K)$ we consider measures on the compact space $K$ rather than points of that space, as it was done in [@M], [@O], [@K]. One of the key ingredients of the proof is Lemma \[lemma\] below.
Let $K$ be a compact space. As usual, we identify the set $C(K)^*$, of all linear functionals on $C(K)$, with $M(K)$ – the set of all signed Radon measures on $K$ of finite variation. Using this identification we can equip $M(K)$ with the weak\* topology. For $y\in K$ we denote by $\delta_y\in M(K)$ the corresponding Dirac measure. It is well-known that $K$ can be identified as the subspace $\{\delta_y:y\in K\}\subseteq M(K)$. If $A\subseteq M(K)$ then $\operatorname{Lin}(A)$ is the linear space spanned by $A$, i.e. the minimal linear subspace of $M(K)$ containing $A$.
We denote by $\omega$ the set of all non-negative integers, and ${\mathbb{N}}=\omega\setminus\{0\}$. For a natural number $k$ we denote by $[K]^{\leq k}$ ($[K]^{<\omega}$) the hyperspace of all at most $k$-element subsets of $K$ (all finite subsets of $K$) equipped with the Vietoris topology.
Recall that sets of the form $$O_K(F;\tfrac{1}{m})=\{f\in C_p(K):\forall x\in F\;\;\lvert f(x) \rvert<\tfrac{1}{m}\},$$ where $F\in[K]^{<\omega}$ and $m\in {\mathbb{N}}$, are basic open neighborhoods of the function equal to zero on $K$ in $C_p(K)$.
Similarly, if $F$ is a finite subset of $M(L)$ and $n\in {\mathbb{N}}$, then $$W_L(F;\tfrac{1}{n})=\{f\in C_w(L):\forall \mu\in F\;\;\lvert \mu(f) \rvert<\tfrac{1}{n}\}$$ is a basic open neighborhood of the function equal to zero on $L$ in $C_w(L)$. If $F=\{x\}$ or $F=\{\mu\}$ we will write $O_K(x;\tfrac{1}{m})$, $W_L(\mu;\tfrac{1}{m})$ rather than $O_K(\{x\};\tfrac{1}{m})$, $W_L(\{\mu\};\tfrac{1}{m})$.
For $\mu\in M(L)$ and $n\in {\mathbb{N}}$ we put $$\overline{W}_L(\mu;\tfrac{1}{n})=\{f\in C_w(L): \lvert \mu(f) \rvert\leq \tfrac{1}{n}\}.$$ The mappings $$\begin{aligned}
&\pi_L:[K]^{\leq k}\times L\to L\\
&\pi_K:[K]^{\leq k}\times L\to [K]^{\leq k}\end{aligned}$$ are projections on $L$ and $[K]^{\leq k}$, respectively.
Similarly as in [@K], for a fixed homeomorphism $\Phi:C_p(K)\to C_w(L)$ taking the zero function on $K$ to the zero function on $L$ and for $k,m,n\in {\mathbb{N}}$, we define the following sets: $$\begin{aligned}
Z_{k,m,n}&=\{(E,y)\in [K]^{\leq k}\times L\;:\;\Phi(O_K(E;\tfrac{1}{m}))\subseteq \overline{W}_L(\delta_y;\tfrac{1}{n})\},\\
C(k,m,n)&=\pi_{L}(Z_{k,m,n}).\end{aligned}$$ The following proposition is easy to verify.
The set $Z_{k,m,n}$ is a closed in $[K]^{\leq k}\times L$, for any $k,m,n\in{\mathbb{N}}$.
If $(E,y)\in ([K]^{\leq k}\times L) \setminus Z_{k,m,n}$, then there is $f\in C_p(K)$ such that $\{f(x):x\in E\}\subseteq (-\tfrac{1}{m}, \tfrac{1}{m})$ and $|\delta_{y}(\Phi(f))|=|\Phi(f)(y)|>\tfrac{1}{n}$. Obviously, the set $$\{F\in [K]^{\leq k}:F\subseteq f^{-1}(-\tfrac{1}{m}, \tfrac{1}{m})\} \times \{z\in Y: |\Phi(f)(z)|>\tfrac{1}{n}\}$$ is an open neighborhood of $(E,y)$ in $[K]^{\leq k}\times L$, disjoint from $Z_{k,m,n}$.
It follows that $C(k,m,n)$ is closed in $L$ (being a continuous image of a compact set). Note that by the continuity of $\Phi$ we have $L=\bigcup_{k,m}C(k,m,n)$. Now, for $m,n,k\in {\mathbb{N}}$, we put $$E(1,m,n)=C(1,m,n)\text { and } E(k,m,n)=C(k,m,n)\setminus C(k-1,m,n), \text { for } k>1.$$ Clearly, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{e1}
L=\bigcup_{k,m}E(k,m,n).\end{aligned}$$ For $y\in E(k,m,n)$, let us put $${\mathcal{E}}(y,m,n)=\pi_K(\pi_L^{-1}(y)\cap Z_{k,m,n}),$$ i.e. ${\mathcal{E}}(y,m,n)$ is the family of all exactly $k$-element subsets $E\subseteq K$ satisfying $\Phi(O_K(E;\tfrac{1}{m}))\subseteq \overline{W}_L(\delta_y;\tfrac{1}{n})$ (this follows from the assumption $y\in E(k,m,n)$). It is known that for any $y\in E(k,m,n)$ the family ${\mathcal{E}}(y,m,n)$ is finite, cf. [@vM Lemma 6.11.9]. Finally, let $\alpha_{m,n}(y)=\bigcup {\mathcal{E}}(y,m,n)$, for $y\in E(k,m,n)$.
The following theorem was proved in [@M] (cf. [@vM Lemmas 6.11.10, 6.11.1])
\[partition\] For any $k,m,n\in{\mathbb{N}}$ the set $E(k,m,n)$ can be covered by countably many $G_\delta$ (in $L$) sets $G_r$ such that for each $r\in\mathbb{N}$, there are continuous mappings $f^r_i:G_r\rightarrow K$, $i=1,\ldots,p_r$, such that $\alpha_{m,1}(y)=\{f^r_1(y),\ldots,f^r_{p_r}(y)\}$ for $y\in G_r$.
By sets $G_r$ cover the whole space $L$. Since $\Phi^{-1}:C_w(L)\to C_p(K)$ is continuous, for each $x\in K$ and $m\in {\mathbb{N}}$, there is $F_x^m\in [M(L)]^{<\omega}$ and $n\in{\mathbb{N}}$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{e2}
\Phi^{-1}(W_L(F_x^m;\tfrac{1}{n}))\subseteq O_K(x;\tfrac{1}{m}).\end{aligned}$$
We will need the following lemma.
\[lemma\] If $y\in E(k,m,1)$ for some $k,m\in {\mathbb{N}}$ then $\delta_y\in \operatorname{Lin}(\bigcup\{F_x^m: x\in \alpha_{m,1}(y)\}).$
Suppose that $\delta_y\notin N=\operatorname{Lin}(\bigcup\{F_x^m: x\in \alpha_{m,1}(y)\})$. By the definition of $\alpha_{m,1}(y)$ there is $A\subseteq\alpha_{m,1}$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{e3}
\Phi(O_K(A;\tfrac{1}{m}))\subseteq \overline{W}_L(\delta_y;1).\end{aligned}$$ By our assumption $\delta_y\notin N$ and the separation theorem [@S Ch. II, 9.2], there is a linear functional $g:M(L)\to\mathbb{R}$ continuous with respect to the weak\* topology in $M(K)$ such that $$\sup\{g(\mu):\mu\in N\}< g(\delta_y).$$ The weak\* continuity of $g$ implies that $g\in C(L)$ (cf. [@F Theorem 3.16]), i.e. $g(\mu)=\mu(g)$. Since $N$ is a linear space, scaling $g$ if necessary, we have $g(\delta_y)=\delta_y(g)=g(y)=2$ and $g(\mu)=\mu(g)=0$, for any $\mu \in \bigcup\{F_x^m : x\in A\}$. By , for every $x\in A$, we have $|\Phi^{-1}(g)(x)|<\tfrac{1}{m}$, so $\Phi^{-1}(g)\in O_K(A;\tfrac{1}{m})$. Therefore, by $$g=\Phi(\Phi^{-1}(g))\in \overline{W}_L(\delta_y;1).$$ This means that $|g(y)|=|\delta_y(g)|\leq 1$, a contradiction.
\[def\] A normal space $K$ is called a *$C$-space* if for any sequence of its open covers $(\mathcal{U}_i)_{i\in\omega}$, there exists a sequence $(\mathcal{V}_i)_{i\in\omega}$ of families of pairwise disjoint open sets such that $\mathcal{V}_i$ is a refinement of $\mathcal{U}_i$ and $\bigcup_{i\in\omega}\mathcal{V}_i$ is a cover of $K$.
\[def-SID\] A family $\{(A_i, B_i): i\in \omega \}$ of pairs of disjoint closed subsets of a topological space $X$ is called *essential* if for every family $\{L_i: i \in\omega\}$, where $L_i$ is an arbitrary partition between $A_i$ and $B_i$ for every $i$, we have $\bigcap_{i\in\omega}L_i\neq\emptyset$. A normal space $X$ is *strongly infinite-dimensional* if it has an infinite essential family of pairs of disjoint closed sets.
It is well known that any finite-dimensional space, and more generally, any countable-dimensional space (i.e. a space which is a countable union of finite-dimensional subspaces) is a $C$-space. On the other hand, a strongly infinite-dimensional space is not a $C$-space. One of the most natural examples of a strongly infinite-dimensional space is the Hilbert cube $[0,1]^\omega$.
Before we will proceed to the main result of this note, we need to make some preparatory work concerning strongly infinite-dimensional spaces. Proposition \[SID\] and Lemma \[lemmaSID\] given below are perhaps a part of folklore in the theory of infinite-dimension. Since we could not find a proper reference in the literature, we shall enclose a proof here. The reasoning presented below was communicated to the author by R. Pol.
\[lemmaSID\] Suppose that $Z$ is a strongly infinite-dimensional compact metrizable space and $Y\subseteq Z$ is $G_\delta$ in $Z$. Then at least one of the following assertions holds true:
- $Y$ contains a strongly infinite-dimensional compactum or
- $Z\setminus Y$ contains a strongly infinite-dimensional compactum.
Since $Y\subseteq Z$ is $G_\delta$, we have $Z\setminus Y=\bigcup_{k=1}^{\infty} F_k$ and each $F_k$ is closed in $Z$ (hence compact). Fix an infinite essential family $\{(A_i,B_i): i\in\omega\}$ of pairs of disjoint closed subsets of $Z$ (witnessing the fact that $Z$ is strongly infinite-dimensional). Let $\omega=\bigcup_{k=0}^{\infty} N_k$ be a partition of $\omega$ into infinite, pairwise disjoint sets.
Assume that (b) does not hold true. In particular, for each $k\geq 1$ the set $F_k$ is not strongly infinite-dimensional and hence, by [@vM Corollary 3.1.5] there is a sequence $(L_i)_{i\in N_k}$ of partitions in $Z$ between $(A_i,B_i)_{i\in N_k}$ with $(\bigcap_{i\in N_k}L_i)\cap F_k=\emptyset$.
We claim that $\bigcap_{k=1}^{\infty}\bigcap_{i\in N_k}L_i\subseteq Y$ is strongly infinite-dimensional (and hence (a) holds).
Indeed, otherwise there is a sequence $(L_i)_{i\in N_0}$ of partitions in $Z$ between $(A_i, B_i)_{i\in N_0}$ with $$(\bigcap_{i\in N_0}L_i)\cap\bigcap_{k=1}^{\infty}\bigcap_{i\in N_k} L_i=\emptyset,$$ which is a contradiction with our assumption that the family $\{(A_i,B_i): i\in \omega\}$ is essential.
\[SID\] Suppose that $X$ is a strongly infinite-dimensional compact metrizable space. Let $X=\bigcup_{n\in \omega}X_n$, where each $X_n$ is a $G_\delta$ subset of $X$. Then, there is $n\in \omega$ such that $X_n$ contains a strongly infinite-dimensional compactum.
Striving for a contradiction assume that none of $X_n$’s contains a strongly infinite-dimensional compactum. By induction, we construct a decreasing sequence $F_0\supseteq F_1 \supseteq \ldots \supseteq F_n \supseteq \ldots$ of strongly infinite-dimensional compacta such that, for each $i\in \omega$, $F_i\subseteq X\setminus X_i$.
For $n=0$ we apply Lemma \[lemmaSID\] with $Z=X$ and $Y=X_0$. By our assumption (a) does not hold and hence there is a strongly infinite dimensional compactum $F_0\subseteq X\setminus X_0$.
Assume that, for $n\in \omega$, we already constructed a sequence $F_0\supseteq \ldots \supseteq F_n$ of strongly infinite-dimensional compacta such that $F_i\subseteq X\setminus X_i$. We apply Lemma \[lemmaSID\] with $Z=F_n$ and $Y=X_{n+1}\cap F_n$. Again, by our assumption (a) does not hold and consequently there exists a strongly infinite dimensional compact set $F_{n+1}\subseteq F_n\setminus(X_{n+1}\cap F_n)$. This ends the inductive construction.
Since $(F_n)_{n\in \omega}$ is a decreasing sequence of non-empty compact sets, it has a non-empty intersection $\bigcap_{n\in \omega}F_n$. On the other hand $\bigcap_{n\in \omega}F_n\subseteq X\setminus \bigcup_{n\in\omega} X_n=\emptyset$, a contradiction.
Finally, we can prove the following.
If $K$ is a compact metrizable $C$-space, then $C_p(K)$ and $C_w([0,1]^\omega)$ are not homeomorphic.
Otherwise, there is a homeomorphism $\Phi:C_p(K)\to C_w([0,1]^\omega)$. Since function spaces are homogeneous, we can without loss of generality assume that $\Phi$ takes the zero function on $K$ to the zero function on $[0,1]^\omega$. By Theorem \[partition\] we have $[0,1]^\omega=\bigcup_{i\in{\mathbb{N}}}G_r$, where each $G_r$ is a $G_\delta$ subset of $[0,1]^\omega$ and for every $r\in {\mathbb{N}}$, there are continuous mappings $f^r_i:G_r\rightarrow K$, $i=1,\ldots,p_r$, such that $\alpha_{m,1}(y)=\{f^r_1(y),\ldots,f^r_{p_r}(y)\}$ for $y\in G_r$.
By Proposition \[SID\] there is $r\in {\mathbb{N}}$ such that $G_r$ contains a strongly infinite-dimensional compactum $Q\subseteq G_r$.
Let $f=\bigtriangleup_{i\leq p_r} (f^r_i\upharpoonright Q): Q\to K^{p_r}$ be the restriction to $Q$ of the diagonal mapping, i.e. $f(y)=(f^r_1(y),\ldots , f^r_{p_r}(y)),$ for $y\in Q\subseteq G_r$.
Since $K^{p_r}$ is a $C$-space (cf. [@R]) and $Q$ is not, not all fibers of $f$ are zero-dimensional (in fact not all of them are $C$-spaces), cf. [@Fe 5.4]. Hence, there is $x=(x_1,\ldots,x_{p_r})\in K^{p_r}$ such that $f^{-1}(x)$ is uncountable. Note that for any $y\in f^{-1}(x)$ we have $\alpha_{m,1}(y)=\{x_1,\ldots, x_{p_r}\}$. Consider $$F_x=\bigcup_{i=1}^{p_r} F_{x_i}^m.$$ Obviously this set is finite. For $\mu\in M(L)$ let us put $A_\mu=\{y\in L: \mu(\{y\})\neq 0\}$. For each $\mu\in M(L)$ the set $A_\mu$ is countable being the set of atoms of a measure. From Lemma \[lemma\] it follows that for each $y\in f^{-1}(x)$ there is $\mu\in F_x$ such that $y\in A_\mu$. This means that $$f^{-1}(x)\subseteq \bigcup_{\mu\in F_x} A_\mu.$$ However, the latter set is countable and thus cannot cover the uncountable fiber $f^{-1}(x)$, a contradiction.
Combining the above theorem with the Miljutin’s theorem [@Mi] we get the following.
\[col\] If $K$ is an uncountable compact metrizable $C$-space then $C_w(K)$ and $C_p(K)$ are not homeomorphic.
In particular, the above corollary covers the important case of all uncountable finite-dimensional compacta.
Open questions {#open-questions .unnumbered}
==============
Though Corollary \[col\] is quite general, our method does not work for all uncountable metrizable compacta. Thus we do not know the answer to the following basic question mentioned in the Introduction.
Suppose that $K$ is an uncountable compact metrizable space (which is not a $C$-space). Is it true that $C_p(K)$ and $C_w(K)$ are not homeomorphic?
It seems that the most interesting particular case of the above question is the following:
Is it true that $C_p([0,1]^\omega)$ and $C_w([0,1]^\omega)$ are not homeomorphic?
Although we have the proof that, for example, $C_w(2^\omega)$ and $C_p(2^\omega)$ are not homeomorphic our method seems to be fairly complicated. Moreover it does not provide any topological property distinguishing $C_p(2^\omega)$ and $C_w(2^\omega)$. Thus the following problem seems to be interesting.
Find a topological property distinguishing $C_p(2^\omega)$ and $C_w(2^\omega)$. Find a topological property distinguishing $C_p([0,1])$ and $C_w([0,1])$.
It is reasonable to ask also what happens outside the metrizable case:
Is it true that $C_p(K)$ and $C_w(K)$ are not homeomorphic for any infinite compact space $K$?
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
---------------
The author is indebted to Witold Marciszewski for valuable comments and remarks. This research was partially supported by the Polish National Science Center research grant UMO-2012/07/N/ST1/03525
[99]{}
R. Cauty, [*Sur l’invariance de la dimension infinie forte par t-équivalence*]{} (French), Fund. Math. 160 (1999), no. 1, 95–100.
M. Fabian, P. Habala, P. Hájek, V. Montesinos Santalucía, J. Pelant, V. Zizler, [*Functional analysis and infinite-dimensional geometry*]{} CMS Books in Mathematics/Ouvrages de Mathématiques de la SMC, 8. Springer-Verlag, New York, 2001.
V.V. Fedorchuk, [*Some classes of weakly infinite-dimensional spaces*]{}, J. Math. Sci. (N. Y.) 155 (4) (2008) 523–570.
M. Krupski, [*On the $t$-equivalence relation*]{}, Topology Appl. 160 (2013), no. 2, 368–373.
W. Marciszewski, [*On properties of metrizable spaces $X$ preserved by t-equivalence*]{}, Mathematika 47 (2000), 273–279.
A.A. Miljutin, [*Isomorphism of the spaces of continuous functions over compact sets of the cardinality of the continuum*]{} (Russian) Teor. Funkcii Funkcional. Anal. i Priložen. Vyp. 2 (1966) 150–156.
O. Okunev, [*A relation between spaces implied by their t-equivalence*]{}, Topology Appl. 158 (2011), 2158–2164.
D. Rohm, [*Products of infinite-dimensional spaces*]{}, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 108 (4) (1990) 1019–1023.
H.H. Schaefer, [*Topological vector spaces*]{}, Graduate Texts in Mathematics 3, Springer-Verlag, New York, Heidelberg, Berlin, 1971.
J. van Mill, [*The Infinite-Dimensional Topology of Function Spaces*]{}, North-Holland Mathematical Library 64, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 2001.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Recently, we gave a complete axiomatisation of the ZX-calculus for the overall pure qubit quantum mechanics. Based on this result, here we also obtain a complete axiomatisation of the ZX-calculus for the Clifford+T quantum mechanics by restricting the ring of complex numbers to its subring corresponding to the Clifford+T fragment resting on the completeness theorem of the ZW-calculus for arbitrary commutative ring. In contrast to the first complete axiomatisation of the ZX-calculus for the Clifford+T fragment, we have two new generators as features rather than novelties: the triangle can be employed as an essential component to construct a Toffoli gate in a very simple form, while the $\lambda$ box can be slightly extended to a generalised phase so that the generalised supplementarity (cyclotomic supplementarity ) is naturally seen as a special case of the generalised spider rule.'
author:
- |
Kang Feng Ng Quanlong Wang\
Department of Computer Science, University of Oxford
title: ' Completeness of the ZX-calculus for Pure Qubit Clifford+T Quantum Mechanics'
---
Introduction
============
Clifford+T qubit quantum mechanics (QM) is an approximatively universal fragment of QM, which has been widely used in quantum computing. In contrast to the traditional way of matrix calculation, the ZX-calculus introduced by Coecke and Duncan [@CoeckeDuncan] is a diagrammatical axiomatisation of quantum computing. One of the main open problems of the ZX-calculus is to give a complete axiomatisation for the Clifford+T QM [@cqmwiki]. After the first completeness result on this fragment –the completeness of the ZX-calculus for single qubit Clifford+T QM [@Miriam1ct], there finally comes an completion of the ZX-Calculus for the whole Clifford+T QM [@Emmanuel], which contributes a solution to the above mentioned open problem.
Further to the complete axiomatisation of the ZX-Calculus for the Clifford+T fragment QM, we have given a complete axiomatisation of the ZX-calculus for the overall pure qubit QM [@ngwang]. In this paper, we first simplify the rule of addition (AD) and show that some rules can be derived from other rules in [@ngwang]. Then we obtain a complete axiomatisation of the ZX-calculus for the Clifford+T quantum mechanics by restricting the ring of complex numbers to its subring $\mathbb{Z}[i, \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}]$ based on the completeness theorem of the ZW-calculus for arbitrary commutative ring [@amar]. In comparison to the completeness proof in [@ngwang], a modification of the interpretation from the ZW-calculus to the ZX-calculus is made here.
The main difference between the two complete axiomatisations of the ZX-Calculus for the Clifford+T fragment QM shown in this paper and that presented in [@Emmanuel] is as follows:
1. Although the number of rules (which is 30) listed here is much more than that of [@Emmanuel] (which is 13), the number of nodes in each non-scalar diagram of the extended part of rules (non-stablizer part) is at most 8 in this paper, in contrast to a maximum of 17 in [@Emmanuel].
2. Following [@ngwang], we have still introduced two more generators– the triangle and the $\lambda$ box– in this paper, while there are only green nodes and red nodes as generators in [@Emmanuel]. Our new generators are features rather than novelties: the triangle can be employed as an essential component to construct a Toffoli gate in a very simple form, while the $\lambda$ box can be slightly extended to a generalised phase so that the generalised supplementarity (also called cyclotomic supplementarity, with supplementarity as a special case) [@jpvw] is naturally seen as a special case of the generalised spider rule. These features are explained in detail in section \[zxforct\].
3. The translation from the ZX-calculus to the ZW-calculus in our paper is more direct .
Universal completion of the ZX-calculus
=======================================
In the following we list the rules of the ZX-calculus for the overall pure qubit QM as shown in [@ngwang]:
$$\quad \qquad\begin{array}{|cccc|}
\hline
\tikzfig{diagrams//spiderlt}=\tikzfig{diagrams//spiderrt} &(S1) &\tikzfig{diagrams//s2new} &(S2)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//induced_compact_structure-2wirelt}=\tikzfig{diagrams//induced_compact_structure-2wirert}&(S3) & \tikzfig{diagrams//hsquare} &(H2)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//hslidecap} &(H3) &\tikzfig{diagrams//h2newlt}=\tikzfig{diagrams//h2newrt}&(H)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//b1slt}=\tikzfig{diagrams//b1srt}&(B1) & \tikzfig{diagrams//b2slt}=\tikzfig{diagrams//b2srt}&(B2)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//HadaDecomSingleslt}= \tikzfig{diagrams//HadaDecomSinglesrt}&(EU) & \tikzfig{diagrams//k2slt}=\tikzfig{diagrams//k2srt}&(K2)\\
&&&\\
\hline
\end{array}$$
$$\quad \qquad\begin{array}{|cccc|}
\hline
\tikzfig{diagrams//trianglepicommute} &(TR1) &\tikzfig{diagrams//triangleocopy} &(TR2)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//trianglepicopy}&(TR3) & \tikzfig{diagrams//trianglegdpicopy} &(TR4)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//trianglehhopf} &(TR5) &\tikzfig{diagrams//gpiintriangles}&(TR6)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//trianglehopf}&(TR7) & \tikzfig{diagrams//2triangleup}&(TR8)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//2triangledown}&(TR9) & \tikzfig{diagrams//2trianglehopf}&(TR10)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//2triangledeloop} &(TR11) &\tikzfig{diagrams//2triangledeloopnopi} &(TR12)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//alphacopyw}&(TR13) &\tikzfig{diagrams//lambdacopyw} &(TR14)\\
\hline
\end{array}$$
$$\quad \qquad\begin{array}{|cccc|}
\hline
\tikzfig{diagrams//emptyrule} &(IV) &\tikzfig{diagrams//lambbranch} &(L1)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//plus}&(AD) &\tikzfig{diagrams//lambdadelete} &(L2)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//sqr1is1}&(L3) &\tikzfig{diagrams//lambdatimes}&(L4)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//lambdaalpha}&(L5) &&\\
\hline
\end{array}$$
Note that the upside-down versions of all the above listed rules still hold, thus will be used without being clearly stated. Now we show that the addition rule (AD) in Figure \[figure0\] can be simplified. First, by the symmetry of and the rule (TR10), we have $$\tikzfig{diagrams//sumsimplify}$$ Therefore, $$\tikzfig{diagrams//sumsimplify2}$$
As a consequence, we have the following commutativity of addition: $$\tikzfig{diagrams//sumcommutativity2}$$
Next we prove that some rules in Figure \[figure2\] are derivable.
\[redundantrules\] The rules (TR4), (TR10), and (TR11) can be derived from other rules.
For the derivation of (TR4), we have
$$\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/TR4derive.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{197}{32}$$
where we used (TR3) for the second equality, (TR6) for the third equality, and (TR2) for the last equality.
For the derivation of (TR10), we have $$\tikzfig{diagrams//TR10derive}$$ where we used (TR12) for the second equality, (TR3) for the third equality.
For the derivation of (TR11), we have
where we used (TR12) for the fourth equality and (TR1) several times.
If we add a new rule (TR$10^{\prime}$) as shown in Figure \[figure2t\], then the rule TR (5) is also derivable. In fact,
where for the third equality we used the following diagrammatic reasoning via rules (TR1), (K2), (TR9) and (TR$10^{\prime}$) :
ZX-calculus for Clifford+T quantum mechanics
============================================
The ZX-calculus for Clifford+T quantum mechanics is a compact closed category $\mathfrak{C}$. The objects of $\mathfrak{C}$ are natural numbers: $0, 1, 2, \cdots$; the tensor of objects is just addition of numbers: $m \otimes n = m+n$. The morphisms of $\mathfrak{C}$ are diagrams of the ZX-calculus. A general diagram $D:k\to l$ with $k$ inputs and $l$ outputs is generated by:
$R_Z^{(n,m)}$ $:$ $n\to m$ $A$ $:$ $ 1\to 1$
--------------- ----- ----------- -- ---------- ----- ----------- --
$H$ $:$ $1\to 1$ $\sigma$ $:$ $ 2\to 2$
$\mathbb I$ $:$ $1\to 1$ $e $ $:$ $0 \to 0$
$C_a$ $:$ $ 0\to 2$ $ C_u$ $:$ $ 2\to 0$
where $m,n\in \mathbb N$, $\alpha \in \{\frac{k\pi}{4}| k=0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 \}$, and $e$ represents an empty diagram.
The composition of morphisms is the same as that of the ZX-calculus for overall qubit QM. Due to the angles in the diagrams being multiples of $\frac{\pi}{4}$, we call the ZX-calculus generated by the above generators $\frac{\pi}{4}$-fragment ZX-calculus.
\[rings\] The $\frac{\pi}{4}$-fragment of the ZX-calculus exactly corresponds to the matrices over the ring $\mathbb{Z}[i, \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}]$.
First note that $\mathbb{Z}[i, \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}]=\mathbb{Z}[\frac{1}{2}, e^{i\frac{\pi}{4}}]$. It is also clear that each generator of the $\frac{\pi}{4}$-fragment ZX-calculus corresponds to a matrix over the ring $\mathbb{Z}[i, \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}]$, thus each diagram of the $\frac{\pi}{4}$-fragment ZX-calculus must correspond to a matrix over the ring $\mathbb{Z}[i, \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}]$. Conversely, each matrix over the ring $\mathbb{Z}[i, \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}]$ can be represented by a normal form in the ZW-calculus with phases belong to the same ring $\mathbb{Z}[\frac{1}{2}, e^{i\frac{\pi}{4}}]$ [@amar], hence can be represented by a diagram of the $\frac{\pi}{4}$-fragment ZX-calculus via the translation from ZW to ZX as described in [@ngwang].
As was done for the universal ZX-calculus, we extend the language with two new generators– the triangle and the $\lambda$ box, which will be shown to be representable in the $\frac{\pi}{4}$-fragment ZX-calculus (see lemma \[lem:lamb\_tri\_decomposition2\]):
$L$ $:$ $1\to 1$ $T$ $:$ $1\to 1$
----- ----- ---------- -- ----- ----- ---------- --
where $0\leqslant \lambda \in \mathbb Z[\frac{1}{2}]$.
There are two kinds of rules for the morphisms of $\mathfrak{C}$: the structure rules for $\mathfrak{C}$ as an compact closed category, as well as standard rewriting rules listed in Figure \[figure1t\] and our extended rules listed in Figure \[figure2t\] and Figure \[figure0t\].
Note that all the diagrams should be read from top to bottom.
$$\quad \qquad\begin{array}{|cccc|}
\hline
\tikzfig{diagrams//spiderlt}=\tikzfig{diagrams//spiderrt} &(S1) &\tikzfig{diagrams//s2new} &(S2)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//induced_compact_structure-2wirelt}=\tikzfig{diagrams//induced_compact_structure-2wirert}&(S3) & \tikzfig{diagrams//hsquare} &(H2)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//hslidecap} &(H3) &\tikzfig{diagrams//h2newlt}=\tikzfig{diagrams//h2newrt}&(H)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//b1slt}=\tikzfig{diagrams//b1srt}&(B1) & \tikzfig{diagrams//b2slt}=\tikzfig{diagrams//b2srt}&(B2)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//HadaDecomSingleslt}= \tikzfig{diagrams//HadaDecomSinglesrt}&(EU) & \tikzfig{diagrams//k2slt}=\tikzfig{diagrams//k2srt}&(K2)\\
&&&\\
\hline
\end{array}$$
$$\quad \qquad\begin{array}{|cccc|}
\hline
\tikzfig{diagrams//trianglepicommute} &(TR1) &\tikzfig{diagrams//triangleocopy} &(TR2)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//trianglepicopy}&(TR3) & \tikzfig{diagrams//tr4prime} &(TR4')\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//tr5prime} &(TR5') &\tikzfig{diagrams//gpiintriangles}&(TR6)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//trianglehopf}&(TR7) & \tikzfig{diagrams//2triangleup}&(TR8)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//2triangledown}&(TR9) & \tikzfig{diagrams//tr10prime}&(TR10')\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//2triangledeloopnopi} &(TR12) &\tikzfig{diagrams//alphacopyw} &(TR13)\\
\hline
\end{array}$$
$$\quad \qquad\begin{array}{|cccc|}
\hline
\tikzfig{diagrams//newemptyrl} &(IV') &\tikzfig{diagrams//lambbranch} &(L1)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//plusnew}&(AD) &\tikzfig{diagrams//lambdadelete} &(L2)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//sqr1is1}&(L3) &\tikzfig{diagrams//lambdatimes}&(L4)\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//lambdaalpha}&(L5) &\tikzfig{diagrams//lambdacopyw} &(TR14)\\
\hline
\end{array}$$
Note that the upside-down versions of all the above listed rules still hold.
Since now we focus on the $\frac{\pi}{4}$-fragment ZX-calculus, the empty rule (IV) in Figure \[figure0\] is changed to the form of rule (IV$^{\prime}$) in Figure \[figure0t\]. However, we still have the following useful property.
The frequently used empty rule can be derived from the $\frac{\pi}{4}$-fragment ZX-calculus: $$\tikzfig{diagrams//emptyoften}$$
$$\tikzfig{diagrams//newemptytoold}$$
\[lem:lamb\_tri\_decomposition2\] The triangle and the lambda box are expressible in the $\frac{\pi}{4}$-fragment ZX-calculus.
The triangle has been represented in the $\frac{\pi}{4}$-fragment ZX-calculus in [@Coeckebk; @Emmanuel], we give the decomposition form according to [@Coeckebk] as follows: $$\label{triangleslash}
\tikzfig{diagrams//triangledecompose}$$
Now we deal with the lambda box. First we can write $\lambda$ as a sum of its integer part and remainder part: $\lambda= [\lambda] +\{\lambda\}$, where $ [\lambda]$ is a non-negative integer and $0\leq\{\lambda\}<1$. Since $\lambda \in \mathbb Z[\frac{1}{2}]$, $\{\lambda\}$ can be uniquely written as a binary expansion of the form $a_1\frac{1}{2}+\cdots+a_s\frac{1}{2^s}$, where $a_i\in \{ 0, 1\} , i=1, \cdots, s.$ For the integer part $[\lambda]$, the corresponding $\lambda$ box has been represented in the $\frac{\pi}{4}$-fragment ZX-calculus during the universal completion of the ZX-calculus. For the remainder part $\{\lambda\}$, it is sufficient to express the $\lambda$ box for $\lambda=\frac{1}{2}$ in terms of triangle and $Z, X$ phases, since one can apply the addition rule (AD) by recursion. Actually, we have
$$\tikzfig{diagrams//lambda1by2}, \hspace{0.5cm}
\tikzfig{diagrams//lambda1by2k}$$
Therefore, $$\tikzfig{diagrams//lexpress4new}.$$
The diagrams in the ZX-calculus for Clifford+T QM have the same standard interpretation $\llbracket \cdot \rrbracket$ as that for the whole qubit QM.
The ZW-calculus for Clifford+T QM almost remain the same as for the whole qubit QM, except that now $r$ in the generator lies in the ring $\mathbb{Z}[i, \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}]$.
Features of the new generators {#zxforct}
===============================
In this section, we show the features of the two generators–the triangle and the $\lambda$ box.
The triangle notation was first introduced in [@Emmanuel] as a shortcut for the proof of completeness of the ZX-calculus for Clifford+T QM. Afterwards, it is employed as a a generator for a complete axiomatisation of the ZX-calculus for the whole pure qubit QM in [@ngwang] and for the Clifford+T fragment in this paper. The purpose to use it as a generator is to make the rewriting rules simple and the translation between the ZX-calculus and the ZW-calculus direct.
Moreover, very recently we find that the triangle can be an essential component for the construction of a Toffoli gate as shown in the following form: $$\label{toffoligate}
\tikzfig{diagrams//toffoligtscalar}$$ where the triangle with $-1$ on the top-left corner is the inverse of the normal triangle.
In contrast to the standard circuit form which realises the Toffoli gate in elementary gates [@Nielsen], the form of (\[toffoligate\]) is much more simpler, thus promising for simplifying Clifford + T quantum circuits with the aid of a bunch of ZX-calculus rules involving triangles.
Unexpectedly, we also realise that the denotation of a slash box used in [@Coeckebk] to construct a Toffoli gate is just a triangle (up to a scalar) as shown in (\[triangleslash\]).
Next we illustrate the feature of the $\lambda$ box. In [@ngwang] and the previous parts of this paper, the $\lambda$ box is restricted to be parameterised by a non-negative real number. While in [@coeckewang], it has been generalised to a general green phase of form with arbitrary complex number as a parameter. Similarly, we have the general red phase [@coeckewang]. Below we give the spider form of general phase which are interpreted in Hilbert spaces: $$\label{gphaseinter}
\begin{array}{c}
\left\llbracket \tikzfig{diagrams//generalgreenspider} \right\rrbracket=\ket{0}^{\otimes m}\bra{0}^{\otimes n}+a\ket{1}^{\otimes m}\bra{1}^{\otimes n}, \\
\left\llbracket \tikzfig{diagrams//generalredspider} \right\rrbracket=\ket{+}^{\otimes m}\bra{+}^{\otimes n}+a\ket{-}^{\otimes m}\bra{-}^{\otimes n},
\end{array}$$ where $a$ is an arbitrary complex number. The generalised spider rules and colour change rule are depicted in the following: $$\label{generalspider}
\begin{array}{c}
\tikzfig{diagrams//generalgreenspiderfuse}, \quad \tikzfig{diagrams//generalredspiderfuse},\\
\tikzfig{diagrams//generalcolorchange}.
\end{array}$$ where $a, b$ are arbitrary complex numbers.
Now we consider the generalised supplementarity– also called cyclotomic supplementarity, with supplementarity as a special case–which is interpreted as merging $n$ subdiagrams if the $n$ phase angles divide the circle uniformly [@jpvw]. We give the diagrammatic form of the generalised supplementarity as follows: $$\label{generalpsgt0}
\tikzfig{diagrams//generalsupp}$$ where there are $n$ parallel wires in the diagram at the right-hand side.
Next we show that the generalised supplementarity can be seen as a special form of the generalised spider rule as shown in (\[generalspider\]). For simplicity, we ignore scalars in the rest of this section.
First note that by comparing the normal form translated from the ZW-calculus [@amar], we have $$\label{generalpsgt}
\tikzfig{diagrams//generalpsgte}$$ where $a\in \mathbb{C}, a\neq 1$.
Especially, $$\label{generalpsgt2}
\tikzfig{diagrams//generalpsgte2}$$ where $\alpha \in [0, 2\pi), \alpha\neq \pi$. For $\alpha= \pi$, we can use the $\pi$ copy rule directly.
Then $$\label{generalpsgt3}
\tikzfig{diagrams//generalpsgte3}$$ Note that if $n$ is odd, then $$\label{generalpsgt4}
\tikzfig{diagrams//generalpsgte4}$$
If $n$ is even, then $$\label{generalpsgt5}
\tikzfig{diagrams//generalpsgte5}$$
It is not hard to see that if we consider the parity of $n$ in the right diagram of (\[generalpsgt0\]) with no consideration of scalars, then by Hopf law we get the same result as shown in (\[generalpsgt4\]) and (\[generalpsgt5\]).
Interpretations from ZX-calculus to ZW-calculus and back forth {#zwtozx2}
==============================================================
As for the Clifford+T QM, the interpretation $\llbracket \cdot \rrbracket_{XW}$ from ZX-calculus to ZW-calculus remains the same: $$\left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//emptysquare}\right\rrbracket_{XW}= \tikzfig{diagrams//emptysquare}, \quad
\left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//Id}\right\rrbracket_{XW}= \tikzfig{diagrams//Id}, \quad
\left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//cap}\right\rrbracket_{XW}= \tikzfig{diagrams//cap}, \quad
\left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//cup}\right\rrbracket_{XW}= \tikzfig{diagrams//cup},$$
$$\left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//swap}\right\rrbracket_{XW}= \tikzfig{diagrams//swap}, \quad
\left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//generator_spider-nonum}\right\rrbracket_{XW}= \tikzfig{diagrams//spiderwhite}, \quad
\left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//alphagate}\right\rrbracket_{XW}= \tikzfig{diagrams//alphagatewhite}, \quad
\left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//lambdabox}\right\rrbracket_{XW}= \tikzfig{diagrams//lambdagatewhiteld},$$
$$\left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//HadaDecomSingleslt}\right\rrbracket_{XW}= \tikzfig{diagrams//Hadamardwhite}, \quad
\left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//triangle}\right\rrbracket_{XW}= \tikzfig{diagrams//trianglewhite},$$
$$\llbracket D_1\otimes D_2 \rrbracket_{XW} = \llbracket D_1 \rrbracket_{XW} \otimes \llbracket D_2 \rrbracket_{XW}, \quad
\llbracket D_1\circ D_2 \rrbracket_{XW} = \llbracket D_1 \rrbracket_{XW} \circ \llbracket D_2 \rrbracket_{XW},$$ where $0\leqslant \lambda \in \mathbb Z[\frac{1}{2}], \alpha \in \{\frac{k\pi}{4}| k=0, 1, \cdots, 7\}$.
\[xtowpreservesemantics2\] Suppose $D$ is an arbitrary diagram in ZX-calculus. Then $\llbracket \llbracket D \rrbracket_{XW}\rrbracket = \llbracket D \rrbracket$.
The proof is easy. On the other hand, the interpretation $\llbracket \cdot \rrbracket_{WX}$ from ZW-calculus to ZX-calculus for Clifford+T QM is almost the same as the case of the overall qubit QM except for the $r$-phase part:
$$\left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//emptysquare}\right\rrbracket_{WX}= \tikzfig{diagrams//emptysquare}, \quad
\left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//Id}\right\rrbracket_{WX}= \tikzfig{diagrams//Id}, \quad
\left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//cap}\right\rrbracket_{WX}= \tikzfig{diagrams//cap}, \quad
\left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//cup}\right\rrbracket_{WX}= \tikzfig{diagrams//cup},$$
$$\left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//swap}\right\rrbracket_{WX}= \tikzfig{diagrams//swap}, \quad
\left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//spiderwhite}\right\rrbracket_{WX}= \tikzfig{diagrams//generator_spider-nonum}, \quad
\left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//piblack}\right\rrbracket_{WX}= \tikzfig{diagrams//pired},$$
$$\left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//corsszw}\right\rrbracket_{WX}= \tikzfig{diagrams//crossxz}, \quad \quad
\left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//wblack}\right\rrbracket_{WX}= \tikzfig{diagrams//winzx},$$
$$\left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//rgatewhite}\right\rrbracket_{WX}=\tikzfig{diagrams//rwphasenew},
$$
$$\llbracket D_1\otimes D_2 \rrbracket_{WX} = \llbracket D_1 \rrbracket_{WX} \otimes \llbracket D_2 \rrbracket_{WX}, \quad
\llbracket D_1\circ D_2 \rrbracket_{WX} = \llbracket D_1 \rrbracket_{WX} \circ \llbracket D_2 \rrbracket_{WX},$$ where $r=a_0+a_1e^{i\frac{\pi}{4}}+a_2e^{i\frac{2\pi}{4}}+a_3e^{i\frac{3\pi}{4}},~ a_j \in \mathbb Z[\frac{1}{2}], ~ j=0, 1, 2, 3$. Note that the representation of $a_j$ box is described in Lemma \[lem:lamb\_tri\_decomposition2\].
\[wtoxpreservesemantics2\] Suppose $D$ is an arbitrary diagram in ZW-calculus. Then $\llbracket \llbracket D \rrbracket_{WX}\rrbracket = \llbracket D \rrbracket$.
The proof is easy.
\[interpretationreversible2\] Suppose $D$ is an arbitrary diagram in ZX-calculus. Then $ZX\vdash \llbracket \llbracket D \rrbracket_{XW}\rrbracket_{WX} =D$.
By the construction of $\llbracket \cdot \rrbracket_{XW}$ and $\llbracket \cdot \rrbracket_{WX}$, we only need to prove for $D$ as a generator of ZX-calculus. The first six generators in ZX-calculus are the same as the first six generators in ZW-calculus, so we just need to check for the last four generators in ZX-calculus, i.e., the green phase gate, the Hadamard gate, the $\lambda$ box and the triangle.
For the phase gate, we have $$\left\llbracket \left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//alphagate}\right\rrbracket_{XW}\right\rrbracket_{WX}= \left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//alphagatewhite}\right\rrbracket_{WX}$$ $$\tikzfig{diagrams//alphadrvctnew}
$$ For the Hadamard gate, we have
$$\left\llbracket \left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//HadaDecomSingleslt}\right\rrbracket_{XW}\right\rrbracket_{WX}=
\left\llbracket \tikzfig{diagrams//Hadamardwhite} \right\rrbracket_{WX} = \tikzfig{diagrams//Hadascalar} \left\llbracket \tikzfig{diagrams//Hadamardwhitescalar} \right\rrbracket_{WX}$$ $$\tikzfig{diagrams//Hadamardxwx}$$
Here we used $\frac{\sqrt{2}-2}{2}=-1+\frac{1}{2}e^{i\frac{\pi}{4}}+0e^{i\frac{2\pi}{4}}-\frac{1}{2}e^{i\frac{3\pi}{4}}=-1+\frac{1}{2}e^{i\frac{\pi}{4}}+0e^{i\frac{2\pi}{4}}+\frac{1}{2}e^{i\frac{-\pi}{4}}.$
Finally, it is easy to check that $$\left\llbracket \left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//lambdabox}\right\rrbracket_{XW}\right\rrbracket_{WX}=\tikzfig{diagrams//lambdabox},\quad
\left\llbracket \left\llbracket\tikzfig{diagrams//triangle}\right\rrbracket_{XW}\right\rrbracket_{WX}=\tikzfig{diagrams//triangle}.$$
Completeness
============
\[zwrulesholdinzx2\] If $ZW\vdash D_1=D_2$, then $ZX\vdash \llbracket D_1 \rrbracket_{WX} =\llbracket D_2 \rrbracket_{WX}$.
Since the derivation of equalities in ZW and ZX is made by rewriting rules, we need only to prove that $ZX \vdash \left\llbracket D_1\right\rrbracket_{WX} = \left\llbracket D_2\right\rrbracket_{WX}$ where $D_1=D_2$ is a rewriting rule of ZW-calculus. Most proofs of this proposition have been done in the case of universal completion of the ZX-calculus [@ngwang], we only need to check for the last 5 rules $rng^{r,s}_{\times}$, $rng^{r,s}_{+}$, $nat^{r}_{c}$, $nat^{r}_{\varepsilon c}$, $ph^{r}$, which involve white phases in the ZW-calculus for Clifford+T QM. The rules $nat^{r}_{\varepsilon c}$ and $ph^{r}$ are easy to check, we just deal with the rules $rng^{r,s}_{\times}$, $rng^{r,s}_{+}$ and $nat^{r}_{c}$ in the appendix.
\[maintheorem2\] The ZX-calculus is complete for Clifford+T QM: if $\llbracket D_1 \rrbracket =\llbracket D_2 \rrbracket$, then $ZX\vdash D_1=D_2$.
Suppose $D_1, D_2 \in ZX$ and $\llbracket D_1 \rrbracket =\llbracket D_2 \rrbracket$. Then by lemma \[xtowpreservesemantics2\], $\llbracket \llbracket D_1 \rrbracket_{XW}\rrbracket = \llbracket D_1 \rrbracket= \llbracket D_2 \rrbracket=\llbracket \llbracket D_2 \rrbracket_{XW}\rrbracket $. Thus by the completeness of ZW-calculus in any commutative ring [@amar], $ZW\vdash \llbracket D_2 \rrbracket_{XW}= \llbracket D_2 \rrbracket_{XW}$. Now by proposition \[zwrulesholdinzx2\], $ZX\vdash \llbracket \llbracket D_1 \rrbracket_{XW}\rrbracket_{WX} =\llbracket \llbracket D_2 \rrbracket_{XW}\rrbracket_{WX}$. Finally, by lemma \[interpretationreversible2\], $ZX\vdash D_1=D_2$.
Conclusion and further work
===========================
In this paper, we give a complete axiomatisation of the ZX-calculus for the Clifford+T QM based on our complete axiomatisation for the overall pure qubit QM [@ngwang] and the completeness theorem of the ZW-calculus [@amar]. We also show the features of our new generators in contrast to the complete axiomatisation for the Clifford+T QM shown in [@Emmanuel].
A natural thing to do next would be applying the rules of this paper to the simplification of Clifford+T quantum circuits.
It is also interesting to incorporate the rules obtained here in the automated graph rewriting system Quantomatic [@Quanto].
Acknowledgement {#acknowledgement .unnumbered}
===============
The authors would like to thank Bob Coecke for the fruitful discussions and invaluable comments.
[99]{} B. Coecke, R. Duncan (2011), Interacting quantum observables: Categorical algebra and diagrammatics. New Journal of Physics 13, p. 043016.
Coecke, B., Kissinger, A., Picturing Quantum Processes: A First Course in Quantum Theory and Diagrammatic Reasoning, Cambridge University Press (2017).
Miriam Backens, The ZX-calculus is complete for the single-qubit Clifford+T group, Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science, 2014.
Emmanuel Jeandel, Simon Perdrix, Renaud Vilmart, A Complete Axiomatisation of the ZX-Calculus for Clifford+T Quantum Mechanics, arXiv:1705.11151
Emmanuel Jeandel, Simon Perdrix, Renaud Vilmart, Quanlong Wang, ZX-Calculus: Cyclotomic Supplementarity and Incompleteness for Clifford+T Quantum Mechanics. MFCS 2017: 11:1-11:13
Kang Feng Ng and Quanlong Wang, A universal completion of the ZX-calculus. 2017. arXiv:1706.09877.
Amar Hadzihasanovic, The algebra of entanglement and the geometry of composition, PhD thesis, arXiv:1709.08086 http://cqm.wikidot.com/zx-completeness
Bob Coecke, Quanlong Wang, On Completeness of the ZX-calculus for 2-qubit Clifford+T Quantum Circuits, in preparation.
M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information, Cambridge University Press (2000).
Quantomatic. https://sites.google.com/site/quantomatic/
Appendix {#appendix .unnumbered}
========
(ZW rule $nat^{r}_{c}$) \
$$\label{wpscopy}
ZX\vdash
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/natrc_LHS.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{708}{36}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
=
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/natrc_RHS.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{712}{36}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX},$$ where $r=a_0+a_1e^{i\frac{\pi}{4}}+a_2e^{i\frac{2\pi}{4}}+a_3e^{i\frac{3\pi}{4}}, a_j \in \mathbb Z[\frac{1}{2}], ~ j=0, 1, 2, 3$.
Let $c_k=a_ke^{i\frac{k\pi}{4}}, k=0, 1, 2, 3$. Then $$\label{wphaseint}
\begin{array}{ll}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/sinzwphase.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{723}{37}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
=\tikzfig{diagrams//rwphasenew}
\stackrel{nat_w^w}{=}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/zwphasefuse.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{728}{34}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}&\vspace{0.5cm}\\
\stackrel{cut_z}{=}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/zwphasecopy22.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{732}{36}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
\stackrel{ba_{zw}}{=}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/zwphasecopy33.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{736}{36}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
\stackrel{cut_z}{=}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/zwphasecopy44.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{740}{36}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
\end{array}$$
Thus $$\begin{array}{ll}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/natrc_RHS.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{764}{36}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
\stackrel{(\ref{wphaseint})}{=}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/zwphasecopy4.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{768}{35}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
\stackrel{ba_{w}}{=}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/zwphasecopy5.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{772}{35}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
&\vspace{0.5cm}\\
\stackrel{cut_w,sym_w^x, TR13, TR14}{=}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/zwphasecopy6.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{777}{35}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
\stackrel{(\ref{wphaseint})}{=}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/natrc_LHS.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{781}{36}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}&
\end{array}$$ Note that all the ZW rules we applied here have been proved to be true as well under the interpretation $\llbracket \cdot \rrbracket_{WX}$. On the other hand, $$\begin{array}{ll}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/natrc_LHS.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{791}{36}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
=\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/zwphasecopy2l.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{794}{40}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
=\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/zwphasecopy3l.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{797}{40}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}&\vspace{0.5cm}\\
=\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/zwphasecopy4l.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{800}{40}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
=\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/zwphasecopy5l.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{803}{40}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}&
\end{array}$$ Therefore (\[wpscopy\]) is proved.
(ZW rule $rng^{r,s}_{+}$) \
$$\label{zwplus}
ZX\vdash
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/rngrsp_LHS.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{816}{37}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
=
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/rngrsp_RHS.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{820}{37}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX},$$ where $r=a_0+a_1e^{i\frac{\pi}{4}}+a_2e^{i\frac{2\pi}{4}}+a_3e^{i\frac{3\pi}{4}},~s=b_0+b_1e^{i\frac{\pi}{4}}+b_2e^{i\frac{2\pi}{4}}+b_3e^{i\frac{3\pi}{4}}, a_j, b_j \in \mathbb Z[\frac{1}{2}], ~ j=0, 1, 2, 3$.
Let $c_k=a_ke^{i\frac{k\pi}{4}}, d_k=b_ke^{i\frac{k\pi}{4}}, k=0, 1, 2, 3$. Then we have $$\begin{array}{ll}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/rngrsp_LHS.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{831}{37}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
\stackrel{(\ref{wphaseint})}{=}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/zwadd.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{835}{32}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
\stackrel{nat_w^w}{=}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/zwadd1.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{839}{33}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}&\vspace{0.5cm}\\
\stackrel{nat_w^w}{=}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/zwadd2.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{843}{33}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
\stackrel{(AD)}{=}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/zwadd3.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{847}{33}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
\stackrel{(\ref{wphaseint})}{=}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/rngrsp_RHS.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{851}{37}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}&
\end{array}$$ Note that all the ZW rules we applied here have been proved to be true as well under the interpretation $\llbracket \cdot \rrbracket_{WX}$.
\[zwphasefusionclt\](ZW rule $rng^{r,s}_{\times}$) \
$$ZX\vdash
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/rngrsx_LHS.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{871}{37}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
=
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/rngrsx_RHS.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{875}{37}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX},$$ where $r=a_0+a_1e^{i\frac{\pi}{4}}+a_2e^{i\frac{2\pi}{4}}+a_3e^{i\frac{3\pi}{4}},~s=b_0+b_1e^{i\frac{\pi}{4}}+b_2e^{i\frac{2\pi}{4}}+b_3e^{i\frac{3\pi}{4}}, a_j, b_j \in \mathbb Z[\frac{1}{2}], ~ j=0, 1, 2, 3$.
Let $c_k=a_ke^{i\frac{k\pi}{4}}, d_k=b_ke^{i\frac{k\pi}{4}}, k=0, 1, 2, 3$. Then by (\[wphaseint\]) we have $$\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/sinzwphase.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{885}{37}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
=
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/zwphasecopy44.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{890}{36}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX},~~
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/sinzwphase2.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{893}{38}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
=
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/zwphasefuse22.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{897}{36}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}$$ Therefore, $$\begin{array}{ll}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/rngrsx_LHS.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{904}{37}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
\stackrel{(\ref{wphaseint})}{=}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/zwphasefuse33.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{908}{40}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}
\stackrel{ba_w}{=}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/zwphasefuse44.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{924}{40}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}&\vspace{0.5cm}\\
\stackrel{TR13,TR14,nat_w^w}{=}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/zwphasefuse55.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{929}{40}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}&\vspace{0.5cm}\\
\stackrel{TR13,TR14,nat_w^w}{=}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/zwphasefuse66.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{934}{40}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}&\vspace{0.5cm}\\
\stackrel{(\ref{zwplus})}{=}
\left\llbracket~
\PandocStartInclude{diagrams/rngrsx_RHS.tikz}\PandocEndInclude{input}{938}{37}
~\right\rrbracket_{WX}&
\end{array}$$ Note that all the ZW rules we applied here have been proved to be true as well under the interpretation $\llbracket \cdot \rrbracket_{WX}$.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Ensembles of climate models are commonly used to improve climate predictions and assess the uncertainties associated with them. Weighting the models according to their performances holds the promise of further improving their predictions. Here, we use an ensemble of decadal climate predictions to demonstrate the ability of sequential learning algorithms (SLAs) to reduce the forecast errors and reduce the uncertainties. Three different SLAs are considered, and their performances are compared with those of an equally weighted ensemble, a linear regression and the climatology. Predictions of four different variables–the surface temperature, the zonal and meridional wind, and pressure–are considered. The spatial distributions of the performances are presented, and the statistical significance of the improvements achieved by the SLAs is tested. Based on the performances of the SLAs, we propose one to be highly suitable for the improvement of decadal climate predictions.'
author:
- Ehud Strobach
- Golan Bel
bibliography:
- 'article.bib'
title: Decadal climate predictions using sequential learning algorithms
---
Introduction
============
Global circulation models are the main tools used to simulate future climate conditions. There are two main practices by which to initialize these models that represent predictions for two different time scales. The first practice corresponds to long-term climate projections. In this type of simulation, the climate models are initialized in the pre-industrial era (aka uninitialized runs) and integrated forward in time (usually until 2100). In these simulations, the atmospheric composition in the past is set according to observations, while for the future, several representative concentration pathways [@Moss_2008], corresponding to different scenarios of atmospheric composition changes, are used. These climate simulations are expected to provide information about the response of the climate system to different emission scenarios by predicting the changes in the long-term averages (10 years and more) and the statistics of climate variables, under different atmospheric composition scenarios [@Collins2013].
The second practice, which is considered in this work, is near-term (decadal) climate predictions intended to provide information on the dynamics of the climate system in time scales shorter than those of significant changes in the atmospheric concentration and the response time of the climate system to such changes. In this practice, the climate models are initialized with observed conditions close to the prediction period. The expected information from these simulations is the dynamics of the monthly to decadal averages of climate variables [@Collins15082007; @meehl_decadal_2009; @Meehl_2013; @numerical], which is of great importance for climate services [@Cane_2010]. Recent studies have demonstrated a potential decadal prediction skill in different regions and for different physical processes [@Smith_2007; @Keenlyside_2008; @meehl_decadal_2009; @Meehl_2013; @pohlmann_2009].
Despite their relatively short term, decadal climate predictions are still accompanied by large uncertainties, and new methods to improve the predictions and reduce the associated uncertainties are of great interest. One of the main approaches to improving climate predictions is to combine the output from an ensemble of climate models. This approach has two known advantages compared with single model predictions. First, it was shown that the ensemble average generates improved predictions [@doblas-reyes_2000; @doblas-reyes_skill_2003; @hagedorn_rationale_2005; @palmer_development_2004; @Palmer_2000; @Kim_2012]; second, the distribution of the ensemble member predictions can provide an estimate of the uncertainties. However, the simple average of climate simulations does not account for the quality differences between the ensemble members; therefore, it is expected that weighting the ensemble members based on their past performances will increase the forecast skill.
Uncertainties in climate predictions can be attributed to three main sources. The first is internal variability, that is, uncertainties due to different initial conditions (either different initialization times or different initialization methods) that were used to run a specific model. The second source is model uncertainties due to different predictions of different models. The third source is forcing scenario uncertainties due to different scenarios assumed for the future atmospheric composition [@hawkins_potential_2009]. The contribution of these sources to the total uncertainty of the climate system varies with the prediction lead time and is also spatially, seasonally and averaging-period dependent [@Strobach2015Un]. It was shown that for global and regional decadal climate predictions, scenario uncertainties are negligible compared to the first two sources [@hawkins_potential_2009; @Cox13072007].
There are two contributions to the internal variability–variability due to different starting conditions and variability due to different initialization methods. Uncertainties due to different starting conditions stem from the chaotic nature of the simulated climate dynamics and cannot be reduced using the ensemble approach. However, uncertainties due to different initialization methods and the model variability can be reduced by weighting the members of the ensemble. The total reduction of the uncertainty depends on the relative contribution of these sources to the total uncertainty.
Bayesian inference is one of the methods that have been used in the past to weight an ensemble of climate models. The main part of this method is the calculation of the posterior density, which is proportional to the product of the prior and the likelihood. The Bayesian method optimizes the probability density function (PDF) of the climate variable to the PDF of the data during a learning period and uses it for future predictions. It does not assign weights to the climate models; instead, it gives an estimation for the PDF of the predicted climate variable. Bayesian inference has been used extensively for projections of future climate [@buser_bayesian_2009; @buser_bayesian_2010; @smith_bayesian_2009; @tebaldi_quantifying_2005; @tebaldi_use_2007; @Furrer_2007; @greene_probabilistic_2006; @murphy_quantification_2004; @Raisanen_2010] and also for near-term climate predictions [@Rajagopalan_2002; @Robertson_2004]. The use of Bayesian inference has reduced the uncertainties of the climate projections and improved their near-term predictions. However, this method relies on many assumptions regarding the distribution of the climate variables that are not always valid, making the Bayesian inference subjective and variable-dependent.
A second, and more common, method that has been used to improve climate predictions is linear regression [@Feng_2011; @CHAKRABORTY_2009; @doblas-reyes_rationale_2005; @fraedrich_combining_1989; @kharin_climate_2002; @krishnamurti_improved_1999; @krishnamurti_multimodel_2000; @pavan_multi-model_2000; @pena_consolidation_2008; @Peng_2002; @Yun_2005; @yun_improvement_2003]. The linear regression method does not assign weights to the ensemble members but rather attempts to find a set of coefficients such that the scalar product of the vector of coefficients and the vector of the model predictions yields the minimal sum of squared errors relative to past observations. The same set of coefficients is then used to produce future predictions. As a consequence, the regression can be used only for deterministic predictions, that is, the linear combination of the models is calculated to produce better predictions, but there is no straightforward method to estimate the associated uncertainties. Similarly to the Bayesian method, the regression method also relies on a few inherent assumptions, such as the normal distribution of the prediction errors (therefore, defining the optimal coefficients as those minimizing the sum of squared errors) and the independence of the ensemble member predictions.
Sequential learning algorithms (SLAs, also known as online learning) [@cesa2006prediction] weight ensemble members based on their past performances. These algorithms were shown to improve long-term climate predictions [@Monteleoni2010; @Monteleoni2011] and seasonal to annual ozone concentration forecasts [@Mallet2009; @Mallet2010]. More recently, it was shown that decadal climate predictions of the 2m-temperature can be improved using SLAs and can even become skillful when the climatology is added as a member of the ensemble [@Strobach2015]. The SLAs have several advantages over the other ensemble methods described above. First, they do not rely on any assumption regarding the models and the distribution of the climate variables. In addition, the weights assigned to the models can be used for model evaluation and the comparison of different parameterization schemes or initialization methods. Third, the weighted ensemble provides not only predictions but also the associated uncertainties. All these characteristics suggest that the SLAs are suitable for the improvement of various climate variable predictions.
Here, we test the performances of SLAs in predicting the, previously investigated, 2m-temperature and three additional climate variables–namely, the zonal and meridional components of the surface wind and the surface pressure. The results of the CMIP5 [@CMIP5] decadal experiments constitute the ensemble, and the NCEP reanalysis data [@kalnay_ncep] are considered as the observations. The performances of the SLAs are compared with those of the regression method. The comparison with the Bayesian method is not straightforward and is not included here. We also study the effects of different learning periods and different bias correction methods on the SLA performances. This paper is organized as follows. In Section \[sec:Models\], we present the data that we used in this study, including the models and the reanalysis data. In addition, we discuss the different bias correction methods that we used. In Section \[sec:Methods\], we describe the SLAs and the regression forecasting methods as we implemented them. We also provide the details of the climatology that we derived from the reanalysis data. In Section \[sec:Predictions\], we present the predictions of the different forecasting methods. We also evaluate their global and regional performances based on their root mean square errors (${\mathit{RMSE}}$s). The global and regional uncertainties of the predictions of the different forecasting methods are presented in Section \[sec:Uncertainties\]. The weights assigned by the SLAs to the different models and to the climatology (all the members of the ensemble) are presented in Section \[sec:Weights\]. The results are discussed and summarized in Section \[sec:Summary\].
Models and Data\[sec:Models\]
=============================
The decadal experiments were introduced to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project’s (CMIP) multi-model ensemble in its fifth phase (CMIP5). The objective of these experiments is to investigate the ability of climate models to produce skillful future climate predictions for a decadal time scale. The climate models in these experiments were initialized with interpolated observation data of the ocean, sea ice and atmospheric conditions, together with the atmospheric composition [@CMIP5]. The ability of these simulations to produce skillful predictions was not investigated widely, but it was shown that they can generate skillful predictions in specific regions around the world [@Kim_2012; @Kirtman_2013; @Doblas-Reyes2013; @meehl_decadal_2009; @pohlmann_2009; @Mueller_2012; @Meehl_2013; @Mueller_2014; @Kruschke_2014].
The CMIP5 decadal experiments were initialized every five years between 1961 and 2011 for 10-year simulations, with three exceptional experiments that were extended to 30-year simulations. One of these 30-year experiments was initialized in 1981 and simulated the climate dynamics till 2011. The output of four variables from this experiment is tested here–surface temperature, zonal and meridional surface wind components, and surface pressure. In what follows, we analyze the monthly means of these variables.
Table \[Models\_table\] shows the eight climate models included in our ensemble. The decadal experiments of the CMIP5 project include a set of runs for each of the models, differing by the starting date and the initialization scheme used. We chose, arbitrarily, the first run of each model. As long as the model variability is the main source of uncertainty, the choice of the realization should not be significant for our analysis. Indeed, it was found that, in the CMIP5 decadal experiments, the model variability is the main source of uncertainty, independent of the prediction lead time, as long as the predictions are not bias corrected. Bias correction reduces mainly the model variability; however, the contribution of the model variability remains important [@Strobach2015Un].
[ p[3cm]{} p[3cm]{} p[6cm]{} p[2.5cm]{}]{} Institute ID & Model Name & Modeling Center (or Group) & Grid (lat X lon)\
BCC & BCC-CSM1.1 & Beijing Climate Center, China Meteorological Administration & 64 X 128\
CCCma & CanCM4 & Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling and Analysis & 64 X 128\
CNRM-CERFACS & CNRM-CM5 & Centre National de Recherches Meteorologiques / Centre Europeen de Recherche et Formation Avancees en Calcul Scientifique & 128 X 256\
LASG-IAP & FGOALS-s2 & LASG, Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences & 108 X 128\
IPSL\* & IPSL-CM5A-LR & Institute Pierre-Simon Laplace & 96 X 96\
MIROC & MIROC5 MIROC4h & Atmosphere and Ocean Research Institute (The University of Tokyo), National Institute for Environmental Studies, and Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology & 128 X 256
320 X 640\
MRI & MRI-CGCM3 & Meteorological Research Institute & 160 X 320\
[ not available for U and V components of wind]{}
The NCEP/NCAR reanalysis data [@kalnay_ncep] were used as the observation data for the learning and for the evaluation of the forecasting methods’ performances. We are aware of other reanalysis projects [@ERA_2005; @JRA_2007]; however, we selected the NCEP based on its wide use (note that the assessment of the quality of the different reanalysis projects is subjective and is beyond the scope of this paper). The effects of using different reanalysis data are left for future research.
Bias correction {#sec:bias}
---------------
The predictions made by the climate models often suffer from inherent systemic errors [@Goddard_2013], and it is common to apply bias correction methods to the model outputs before analyzing them. For long-term climate projections, this procedure is more straightforward because of the available reference period. Bias correction in decadal climate predictions is not trivial not only because there is no clear reference period but also because some of these experiments are known to have a drift from the initial condition to the model’s climatology during the first years of the simulation [@meehl_decadal_2009].
Here, two bias correction methods and the original data were considered. The original data without any bias correction is noted as *no correction*. The first bias correction method corresponds to subtracting from each model results their average during the learning period and adding the climatological average (the average of the NCEP/NCAR reanalysis data for the same period). This method is noted as *average correction*. The second bias correction method corresponds to subtracting from each model and for each calendar month the corresponding average during the learning period and adding the NCEP/NCAR reanalysis average for that calendar month during the same learning period. This method is noted as *climatology correction*. The two bias correction methods described above do not account for the explicit time dependence of the bias. However, it is reasonable to assume that for decadal climate predictions, the bias does not change considerably with time.
Forecasting methods\[sec:Methods\]
==================================
In this work, we consider three sequential learning algorithms (SLAs), introduced below. More thorough descriptions of the SLAs can be found in Ref. [@cesa2006prediction] and in Ref. [@Monteleoni2003]. We also consider the linear regression (REG) [@krishnamurti_multimodel_2000] method in order to compare the performances of the SLAs to the well-known regression method. The climatology (CLM) is considered here as the threshold for skillful predictions. For clarity, the equations that describe the forecasting methods omit the spatial indices. However, the forecasting schemes were applied to each of the grid cells independently, thereby allowing the spatial distribution of the weights (or the coefficients in the case of the REG) and the reference climatology.
The EWA and the EGA
-------------------
The SLAs use an ensemble of *experts* (climate models), each of which provides a prediction for a future value of a climate variable, to provide a forecast of the climate variable in terms of the weighted average of the ensemble. The process is sequentially repeated with the weights of the models being updated, after each measurement, according to their prediction skill. We divide the period of the model simulations into two parts. The first part is the learning (or training) period whose data is used to update the model weights in the manner described above, and the second part is used for validating and evaluating the *forecaster* performance. At the end of the learning period, the learning ends and the weights generated by the SLA in the last learning step are used to weight the predictions of the climate models during the validation period.
The deviation of the prediction of model $E$, $f_{E,t}$, from the observed value, $y_t$, determines the *loss function*, $l(f_{E,t},y_t)$, at time $t$. Similarly, the loss function of the *forecaster* (the SLA) is determined by the deviation of its prediction, $p_t$, from the observed value at time $t$. The *loss function* is the metric used to evaluate the models’ performances. In our study, we define the *loss function* as the square of the deviation, namely, $ l(f_{E,t},y_t) \equiv (f_{E,t}-y_t)^2 $ for model $E$ and $ l(p_t,y_t) \equiv (p_t-y_t)^2 $ for the *forecaster*.
The output of the Exponentiated Weighted Average (EWA), the first SLA described here, at time $t$ is the set of the weights of the models in the ensemble: $$w_{E,t}^{EWA}\equiv \frac{1}{Z_t} \cdot w_{E,t-1}^{EWA} \cdot e^{-\eta \cdot l_{E,t}}$$ where $\eta$ is a positive number representing the learning rate of the *forecaster* and $Z_t$ is a normalization factor. The EWA prediction at time $t$ is defined below: $$p_{t}^{EWA} \equiv \sum_{E=1}^{N_e} w_{E,t-1}^{EWA}\cdot f_{E,t},$$ where $N_e$ is the number of models in the ensemble.
The second SLA considered here is the Exponentiated Gradient Average (EGA). The EGA assigns the weights according to the following rules: $$w_{E,t}^{EGA} \equiv \frac{1}{Z_t} \cdot w_{E,t-1}^{EGA} \cdot e^{-\eta \cdot l'_{E,t}},$$ where $ l'_{E,t}$ is the gradient of the *forecaster loss function* with respect to the weight of model $E$ at time $t-1$. The mathematical definition of $ l'_{E,t}$ is provided below: $$l'(f_{E,t},p_{t}^{EGA},y_t) \equiv \frac{\partial l(p_{t}^{EGA},y_t)}{\partial w_{E,t-1}^{EGA}} = 2 \cdot (p_t^{EGA}-y_t) \cdot f_{E,t},$$ where the prediction of the EGA, $p_{t}^{EGA}$, is defined similarly to the prediction of the EWA: $$p_{t}^{EGA} \equiv \sum_{E=1}^{N_e} w_{E,t-1}^{EGA}\cdot f_{E,t}.$$ An important difference between the EWA and the EGA is the fact that under ideal conditions and stationary time series, the EWA converges to the best model in the ensemble, while the EGA converges to the observations [@Strobach2015].
Note that for the first learning step, one has to assign initial weights to the models. Without any a priori knowledge of the models’ performances, the natural choice is to assign equal weights to all the models. If the hierarchy of the models is known, it is possible to assign their initial weights accordingly.
The learning rate, $\eta$, was optimized by scanning a wide range of values and using the value that resulted in the minimal ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ during the learning period. However, we added a restriction that the maximal change in the weight of each of the models, between two learning steps, will be smaller than the weight of each model in an equally weighted ensemble–namely, $1/N_e$. This restriction was added to ensure the stability of the weights. The metric that we used for this optimization is defined below: $$M \equiv {\mathit{RMSE}}\cdot \left( 1+\Theta \left( {\max_{E=1,..,N_e,t=1,..,n}} \frac{\Delta w_{E,t}}{(1/N_e)}-1 \right) \right),$$ where $\Theta$ represents the Heaviside theta function, and ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ is the root mean squared error of the *forecaster* during the $n$ time steps of the learning period. The ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ for a grid cell $(i,j)$ is conventionally defined. $${\mathit{RMSE}}(i,j)\equiv\sqrt{\left(1/n\right)\sum\limits_{t=1}^{n}(p_t(i,j)-y_t(i,j))^2}.$$ The value of $\eta$ that minimizes $M$ was found using a recursive search within a very wide range of values restricted only by the machine precision. The optimization was done for each grid cell separately.
The Learn-$\alpha$ algorithm
----------------------------
The basic form of the EWA was modified to explicitly allow switching between *experts*. This switching improves the performance of the SLA when dealing with nonstationary time series. The fixed-shared algorithm introduced in Ref. [@Herbster_1998] is defined by the following rules: $$w_{E,t+1}^{FSA}= \frac{1}{Z_t} \cdot \sum_{E^{*}=1}^{N_e} w_{E,t}^{FSA} \cdot e^{-\eta \cdot l_{E^{*},n}} \cdot K(E,E^{*}),$$ where $$K(E,E^{*};\alpha) \equiv (1-\alpha) \cdot \delta(E,E^{*}) + \frac{\alpha}{N_e-1} \cdot (1-\delta({E,E^{*}})).$$ Here, $\alpha \in [0,1]$ is the switching rate parameter, and $\delta (\cdot,\cdot)$ is the Kronecker delta.
The fixed-share algorithm was extended in Ref. [@Monteleoni2003] by also learning the optimal switching rate parameter, $\alpha$. This modified SLA is known as the Learn-$\alpha$ algorithm (LAA). In the LAA, the algorithm scans a range of switching rates, $\alpha_j$, $j\in 1,...,N_{\alpha}$, and assigns weights to each value of $\alpha_j$ based on a loss per alpha function, $l_{t}\left(\alpha_j\right) \equiv -\log\left( \sum_{E=1}^{N_e} w_{E,t} \left(\alpha_j\right) e^{-l_{E,t}}\right)$. The weights are updated sequentially for both the switching rate and the *experts*. The updating rule for the weight of a specific value, $\alpha_j$, is provided below: $$W_{t}\left(\alpha_j\right)=\frac{1}{Z_t}W_{t-1}\left(\alpha_j\right)e^{-l_{t}\left(\alpha_j\right)}.$$ The updating rule for the weight of *expert* $E$, given $\alpha_j$, is provided below: $$w_{E,t}^{LAA}\left(\alpha_j\right)=\frac{1}{Z_{t}\left(\alpha_j\right)}\sum_{E^*=1}^{N_e} w_{E^{*},t-1}^{LAA}\left(\alpha_j\right)e^{-l_{E^*,t}}K\left(E,E^*;\alpha_j\right).$$ The prediction at time $t$, is the weighted average of the *experts* and the different values of $\alpha$. $$p_{t}^{LAA} = \sum_{E=1}^{N_e} \sum_{j=1}^{N_\alpha} W_{t-1}\left(\alpha_j\right) \cdot w_{E,t-1}^{LAA}\left(\alpha_j\right) \cdot f_{E,t}.$$ Here, we adopted a discretization of $\alpha$ to optimize the LAA performance [@Monteleoni2003].
Regression
----------
The linear regression algorithm considered here is described in Ref. [@krishnamurti_multimodel_2000]. In this algorithm, the forecast is a linear combination of the climate model predictions as described below: $$p_t^{REG} = \overline{y} + \sum_{E=1}^N a_E (f_{E,t} - \overline{f}_{E}).$$ Here, $\overline{y}\equiv\left(1/n\right)\sum_{t=1}^ny_t$ is the temporal mean of the observed values during the learning period (similarly, $\overline{f}_{E}$ is the temporal mean value of the predicted values by *expert* $E$ during the learning period), and $a_E$ are the regression coefficients minimizing the sum of squared errors during the learning period, $G$, which is defined below: $$G \equiv \sum_{t=1}^{n} (p_t-y_t)^2,$$ where $n$ is the number of time steps in the learning period. The algorithm that we used to minimize $G$ involved the elimination of models that were linearly dependent on the other models in the ensemble.
Climatology
-----------
The climatology is defined here as the monthly averages of the observed conditions during the learning period. Namely, $$C_{m}= \sum_{t=1}^{n_1} y_{t,m}$$ where $y_{t,m}$ is the observed value in month $m\in[1,12]$ of year $t$ ($t$ is measured in years from the beginning of the simulations), and $n_1$ is the duration of the learning period in years (for simplicity, we assume here that both the learning and the validation periods span an integer number of years). The twelve months of the climatology were replicated to match the duration of the validation period; that is, $$CLM_{t,m}=C_m,$$ for $t\in[n_1+1,n_1+n_2]$ ($n_2$ is the duration of the validation period in years). The climatology is often considered as the threshold for a skillful prediction, i.e., a *forecaster* that outperforms the climatology is considered skillful.
Evaluation metrics\[sec:Metrics\]
=================================
Two main evaluation metrics are used here: the average error, quantified by the ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ of each of the *forecasters*, and the variability of the ensemble predictions, characterized by their standard deviation, the ${\mathit{STD}}$. The global averages of the ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ and the ${\mathit{STD}}$ are calculated by weighting each grid cell by the fraction of the earth’s surface it spans. The precise details are provided here for clarity. During the validation period, the ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ of each *forecaster* was calculated for each grid cell (because all the climate variables studied here are two-dimensional, each grid cell has two indices, $(i,j)$) from the time series of the forecast and the observations. Then, the global area-weighted average of the $RMSE$ (${\mathit{RMSE}}_{GAW}$) was calculated as detailed below: $${\mathit{RMSE}}_{GAW}\equiv\left(1/A_{Earth}\right)\sum\limits_{i,j}A_{i,j}{\mathit{RMSE}}(i,j),$$ where $A_{Earth}$ is the total earth’s surface area, and $A(i,j)$ is the area spanned by the $(i,j)$ grid cell. In what follows, we will present both the spatial distribution of the ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ and its global average.
Similarly to the ${\mathit{RMSE}}$, the variance of the ensemble predictions was calculated for each of the grid cells at each time point and then averaged over time during the validation period. The square root of this temporally averaged variance is what we define here as the ${\mathit{STD}}$ of each grid cell. The mathematical definition of the ${\mathit{STD}}$ is provided below: $${\mathit{STD}}(i,j)\equiv\sqrt{(1/n)\sum\limits_{t=1}^{n}\sum\limits_{E=1}^{N} w_E(i,j)(f_{E,t}(i,j)-p_t(i,j))^2 }.$$ The global area-weighted average was then calculated: $${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}\equiv\left(1/A_{Earth}\right)\sum\limits_{i,j}A_{i,j}{\mathit{STD}}(i,j).$$
The skill of the *forecasters* was measured by comparing their ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ and ${\mathit{STD}}$ to those of some other reference *forecaster*. For convenience, we define below the ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ skill score, $R_{ref,fct}$: $$R_{ref,fct} \equiv \frac{{\mathit{RMSE}}_{ref}-{\mathit{RMSE}}_{fct}}{\frac{1}{2}\left({\mathit{RMSE}}_{ref}+{\mathit{RMSE}}_{fct}\right)}.$$ The indices $ref$ and $fct$ are used to identify the *forecasters* whose skills are compared. Similarly, we define below the ${\mathit{STD}}$ skill score, $S_{ref,fct}$: $$S_{ref,fct} \equiv \frac{{\mathit{STD}}_{ref}-{\mathit{STD}}_{fct}}{\frac{1}{2}\left({\mathit{STD}}_{ref}+{\mathit{STD}}_{fct}\right)}.$$ Unless otherwise specified, we used the climatology as the reference *forecaster* for $R_{ref,fct}$ and the equally weighted ensemble as the reference *forecaster* for $S_{ref,fct}$. Note that the skill scores are defined such that a *forecaster* with a smaller ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ than the reference *forecaster* has a positive $R_{ref,fct}$ score, and similarly, a *forecaster* with a smaller ${\mathit{STD}}$ (i.e., smaller uncertainty) than the reference *forecaster* has a positive $S_{ref,fct}$ score.
Predictions\[sec:Predictions\]
==============================
Global
------
![\[fig:RMS\_bias\_nclm\] Globally averaged ${\mathit{RMSE}}$. ${\mathit{RMSE}}_{GAW}$ for the five forecasting methods (EWA, EGA, REG, LAA and CLM), learning periods of $5$, $10$, $15$, $20$ and $25$ years and the four climate variables (surface temperature, two wind components and pressure). The ensemble used by the *forecasters* does not include the climatology. The left panels correspond to no bias correction, the middle panels correspond to average bias correction, and the right panels correspond to climatology bias correction (see Section \[sec:bias\] for the details of the different bias correction methods).](RMS_nclm.pdf){width="\linewidth"}
The simplest measure of the performance of the *forecasters* is the global average of the root mean squared error, ${\mathit{RMSE}}_{GAW}$. Figure \[fig:RMS\_bias\_nclm\] shows the ${\mathit{RMSE}}_{GAW}$ of the validation period for the five different *forecasters*, EWA, EGA, REG, LAA and CLM, and the different learning periods. The rows (from top to bottom) correspond to the surface temperature, zonal wind, meridional wind, and pressure, respectively. The columns (from left to right) correspond to no bias correction, average bias correction, and climatology bias correction, respectively. The data is provided in Tables 1-4 of the Supplementary Information. The decadal climate simulations considered here span a 30-year period that is split such that the first part is used for learning and the second part is used for the evaluation of the performances; that is, for the five-year learning period, the validation period is the next 25 years, and for the 10-year learning period, the validation period is the next 20 years, etc. The ${\mathit{RMSE}}_{GAW}$s of the individual models are not presented because they are much higher than those of the *forecasters*. The ${\mathit{RMSE}}_{GAW}$ of the equally weighted ensemble is much lower than those of the models, but it is also too high to be included within the scale shown in Fig. \[fig:RMS\_bias\_nclm\]. The bias correction that resulted in the smallest ${\mathit{RMSE}}_{GAW}$s is the *climatology correction*, which is described in Section \[sec:bias\].
Figure \[fig:RMS\_bias\_nclm\] shows that the climatology outperforms all the other *forecasters*, for all the learning periods and bias correction methods studied here. Therefore, we added the climatology as an *expert* to the ensemble. Unless otherwise specified, the following results were derived from an ensemble including the climatology as an additional *expert* [@Strobach2015].
![\[fig:RMS\_bias\] Globally averaged ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ with climatology. ${\mathit{RMSE}}_{GAW}$ for the five forecasting methods (EWA, EGA, REG, LAA and CLM), learning periods of $5$, $10$, $15$, $20$ and $25$ years and the four climate variables (surface temperature, two wind components and pressure). The ensemble used by the *forecasters* includes the climatology. The left panels correspond to no bias correction, the middle panels correspond to average bias correction, and the right panels correspond to climatology bias correction.](RMS_clm.pdf){width="\linewidth"}
Figure \[fig:RMS\_bias\] shows the same results as Figure \[fig:RMS\_bias\_nclm\] for an ensemble that includes the climatology. In addition, the initial weight assigned to the climatology was $0.5$, whereas the initial weight of all the other models was $0.5/(N_e-1)$ ($N_e-1$ is the number of the models excluding the climatology). This higher initial weight of the climatology was motivated by its superior performance (as shown in Fig. \[fig:RMS\_bias\_nclm\] and [@Strobach2015]). The data that was used to generate Fig. \[fig:RMS\_bias\] is provided in Tables 5-8 of the Supplementary Information.
The results of Fig. \[fig:RMS\_bias\] show that the best predictions are obtained using $20$ years of learning and different bias correction methods for different variables and different *forecasters*. The fact that the ${\mathit{RMSE}}_{GAW}$ is minimized after $20$ years of learning can be related to two factors: i) for short learning periods, there is a longer prediction period and, therefore, a larger ${\mathit{RMSE}}_{GAW}$; ii) for the $25$-year learning period, the time lead from the initialization to the prediction period is long, and in addition, the short five-year prediction period does not represent the climate variability over a time scale of $25$ years (the duration of the learning period). The $20$ years of learning also ensures that the learning period extends well beyond the drift of the models. In Table \[table:bias\], we detail the bias correction that resulted in the smallest ${\mathit{RMSE}}_{GAW}$ for each *forecaster* and for each climate variable. In what follows, we will present only the results of these bias corrections and $20$ years of learning. We find that all the SLAs have a lower or equal ${\mathit{RMSE}}_{GAW}$ than the climatology for the surface temperature and wind components. For the surface pressure, only the LAA outperforms the climatology. We also see that, for most climate variables, the ${\mathit{RMSE}}_{GAW}$s of the EWA and the climatology are almost equal. This is not a coincidence; it reflects the fact that the EWA tracks the best model, which in most grid cells, is the climatology. The two other SLAs reduce the ${\mathit{RMSE}}_{GAW}$ below that of the climatology by extracting information from the other models in the ensemble. The LAA outperforms the EGA for short learning periods ($<15$ years) and for all learning periods in the predictions of the surface pressure. This better performance can be attributed to the design of the LAA for the learning of nonstationary data. The poorer performance, relative to the climatology, of most of the *forecasters* (except for the LAA) in the prediction of the surface pressure is not fully understood. However, we found that for the surface pressure, the variability between the models is often larger than its seasonal variability, while all the other climate variables considered here show seasonal variabilities that are larger than the variabilities between the models. It is also possible that the model predictions of the monthly mean surface pressure are worse than the predictions of the other climate variables.
[|c|c|c|c|c|c]{} Forecaster & &\
& T & U & V & P &\
EGA &*nbias* & *nbias*& *nbias*& *bias*&\
EWA &*mbias* & *nbias*& *nbias*& *nbias*&\
LAA &*bias* & *bias*& *nbias*& *bias*&\
REG &*nbias* & *nbias*& *nbias*& *nbias*&\
AVG &*mbias* & *mbias*& *mbias*& *mbias*&\
Regional
--------
The ${\mathit{RMSE}}_{GAW}$ is convenient because it aims to quantify the performances of the *forecasters* using only one number. However, often the more scientifically and practically relevant information are the spatial distributions of the ${\mathit{RMSE}}$. In this subsection, the spatial distribution of the *forecaster* performances will be investigated using the $R_{ref,fct}$ metric defined above. This metric will allow us to compare the performances of the different *forecasters* and, in particular, to compare their performances to that of the trivial *forecaster*–the climatology. The statistical significance of the improvement achieved by the *forecasters* was tested by introducing the null hypothesis that the temporal distribution of $R_{ref,fct}$ is symmetric around $0$. Grid cells in which the hypothesis was rejected with a $90\%$ confidence level in favor of a better *forecaster* performance are marked with white dots. Similarly, grid cells in which the hypothesis was rejected in favor of a poorer *forecaster* performance are marked with black dots. Grid cells in which the data does not provide enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis are not marked.
![\[fig:R\_tas\] Surface temperature ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ skill score. Upper left panel: EGA, upper right panel: EWA, lower left panel: LAA and lower right panel: REG. Positive values correspond to a smaller ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ than the climatology and vice versa. White circles represent significant improvement and black circles represent a significantly poorer performance.](R_tas.pdf){width="39pc"}
Figure \[fig:R\_tas\] depicts the spatial distributions of $R_{CLM,EGA}$ (upper left panel), $R_{CLM,EWA}$ (upper right panel), $R_{CLM,LAA}$ (lower left panel) and $R_{CLM,REG}$ (lower right panel) for the surface temperature. This figure better clarifies the origin of the EGA’s superior performance over the other *forecasters* (as seen from the surface temperature panels, the $20$-year learning period bins of Fig. \[fig:RMS\_bias\]). The largest variability is observed for $R_{CLM,EGA}$ and the smallest variability for $R_{CLM,LAA}$. While the LAA shows a positive skill score over large regions, the score is relatively low, reflecting a small improvement in the prediction compared with the climatology. For the EGA, on the other hand, we see that over regions in the North Atlantic, South America, central Africa, and Oceania, there is a large improvement relative to the climatology, while in regions in the East China Sea, the South Atlantic Ocean and the Eastern Central Pacific Ocean, there is a much poorer performance compared with the climatology. The regression *forecaster* shows a poorer performance compared with the climatology (negative skill score) over most of the globe. All the *forecasters* show a positive skill over regions in North Africa, Asia and North America, suggesting that the models are capable of capturing deviations from the climatology in these regions.
![\[fig:R\_uas\] Surface zonal wind ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ skill score. Upper left panel: EGA, upper right panel: EWA, lower left panel: LAA and lower right panel: REG. Positive values correspond to a smaller ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ than the climatology and vice versa. White circles represent significant improvement and black circles represent a significantly poorer performance.](R_uas.pdf){width="39pc"}
![\[fig:R\_vas\] Surface meridional wind ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ skill score. Upper left panel: EGA, upper right panel: EWA, lower left panel: LAA and lower right panel: REG. Positive values correspond to a smaller ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ than the climatology and vice versa. White circles represent significant improvement and black circles represent a significantly poorer performance.](R_vas.pdf){width="39pc"}
The spatial distribution of the ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ skill score for the zonal and meridional wind components are shown in Figures \[fig:R\_uas\] and \[fig:R\_vas\], respectively. Both wind components have similar characteristics. The EGA shows a similar distribution of the skill for the wind components to that found for the surface temperature. The EWA and the LAA show almost zero skill over most of the globe due to the fact that they both assign a very high weight to the climatology and a very small weight to the other models. Although the improvement relative to the climatology is small, it was found to be statistically significant in many regions. The REG shows a poorer performance compared with the climatology over most of the globe.
![\[fig:R\_ps\] Surface pressure ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ skill score. Upper left panel: EGA, upper right panel: EWA, lower left panel: LAA and lower right panel: REG. Positive values correspond to a smaller ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ than the climatology and vice versa. White circles represent significant improvement and black circles represent a significantly poorer performance.](R_ps.pdf){width="39pc"}
Figure \[fig:R\_ps\] shows the spatial distribution of the surface pressure $R_{CLM,EGA}$ (upper left panel), $R_{CLM,EWA}$ (upper right panel), $R_{CLM,LAA}$ (lower left panel) and $R_{CLM,REG}$ (lower right panel). The EGA’s performance for the surface pressure is poor compared with its performance for the other variables. Large regions in the Pacific and Indian Oceans show a larger ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ of the EGA than the climatology, while in some regions in the Atlantic Ocean, North Euro-Asia, Greenland and the South Pacific the EGA shows a better performance than the climatology. The EWA and LAA assign a very high weight to the climatology and, therefore, show an ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ skill score close to zero. However, the small improvement achieved by the LAA is statistically significant over most of the globe. The REG shows a poorer performance than the climatology over most regions, with some exceptions in the central Atlantic Ocean and the Arabian Peninsula.
The EGA shows the highest ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ skill score over most of the globe for the surface temperature and wind components, while the LAA shows the highest score for the surface pressure. There are several regions (such as the North Atlantic, North Indian Ocean and North Euro-Asia) where the SLAs seem to provide a smaller ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ than the climatology. This suggests that at least some of the models capture processes that result in a deviation from the climatology and that the SLAs are capable of tracking these models.
Uncertainties\[sec:Uncertainties\]
==================================
The ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ is an important measure of the quality of the predictions; however, the uncertainties associated with the predictions of the *forecasters* are crucial for a meaningful assessment of the predictions’ quality. The uncertainties are quantified here using the standard deviation of the ensemble. A natural reference for comparing the variance of the ensemble weighted by the *forecasters* is the variance of the equally weighted ensemble that represents no learning. It was mentioned earlier that the linear regression does not assign weights to the models in the ensemble but rather attempts to find the linear combination of their predictions that minimizes the sum of squared errors. Therefore, in this section, we will compare the uncertainties of the three SLAs and the equally weighted ensemble, denoted here as AVR. Our analysis proceeds similarly to the analysis of the ${\mathit{RMSE}}$; first we present the globally averaged standard deviation, ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}$, and then we present the spatial distribution of the ${\mathit{STD}}$ skill score.
Global
------
![\[fig:STD\_bias\_nclm\] Globally averaged ${\mathit{STD}}$. ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}$ for the three SLAs (EWA, EGA, and LAA) and for the equally weighted ensemble, AVR, for learning periods of $5$, $10$, $15$, $20$ and $25$ years and the four climate variables (surface temperature, two wind components and pressure. The ensemble used by the *forecasters* (and AVR) does not include the climatology. The left panels correspond to no bias correction, the middle panels correspond to average bias correction, and the right panels correspond to climatology bias correction (see Section \[sec:bias\] for the details of the different bias correction methods).](STD_nclm.pdf){width="\linewidth"}
Figure \[fig:STD\_bias\_nclm\] shows ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW} $ of the EGA, EWA, LAA and AVR for different learning periods and for the four climate variables considered in this study. The results of Fig. \[fig:STD\_bias\_nclm\] were derived from an ensemble that does not include the climatology. The four left panels correspond to no bias correction, the four middle panels correspond to average bias correction and the four right panels correspond to climatology bias correction. The data is provided in Tables 9-12 of the Supplementary Information. As expected, the more detailed the bias correction, the smaller the uncertainty because it is associated with the anomaly rather than with the actual prediction. We also notice that without bias correction, the EWA has the smallest ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}$, while with bias correction, the LAA shows the smallest ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}$. Both the EWA and the LAA are expected to have lower ${\mathit{STD}}$s because they track the best models. With no bias correction, all the SLAs show smaller uncertainties than the equally weighted ensemble, while for the climatology bias correction, the EGA shows a higher ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}$ than the AVR. This suggests that in large regions, the EGA assigns high weights to models spanning a broad range of predicted values. In addition, we notice that the ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}$ is smaller for longer learning periods, or more precisely, for shorter prediction periods, as expected. The reduction of ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}$ is more significant for the LAA because the longer learning allows it to better track the climatology despite the built-in switching rate.
![\[fig:STD\_bias\_clm\] Globally averaged ${\mathit{STD}}$ with climatology. ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}$ for the three SLAs (EWA, EGA, and LAA) and for the equally weighted ensemble, AVR, for learning periods of $5$, $10$, $15$, $20$ and $25$ years and the four climate variables (surface temperature, two wind components and pressure). The ensemble used by the *forecasters* (and AVR) includes the climatology. The left panels correspond to no bias correction, the middle panels correspond to average bias correction, and the right panels correspond to climatology bias correction (see Section \[sec:bias\] for the details of the different bias correction methods).](STD_clm.pdf){width="\linewidth"}
Figure \[fig:STD\_bias\_clm\] is similar to Fig. \[fig:STD\_bias\_nclm\] but for an ensemble that includes the climatology. The data used to generate Fig. \[fig:STD\_bias\_clm\] is provided in Tables 13-16 of the Supplementary Information. It is apparent that in this case, the ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}$ of all the SLAs is smaller than that of the AVR, and for the longer learning periods, it is much smaller. The large reduction in the ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}$ of the EWA and EGA is clearly associated with the fact that they track the climatology in most regions (because it is the best *expert* in these regions). The ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}$ of the EGA is also reduced because it assigns a high weight to the climatology in many regions, but it still assigns significant weights to the other models; therefore, it has a larger ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}$ than the other SLAs. The ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}$ of the equally weighted ensemble does not change much because the climatology is only assigned a weight of $1/N_e$, and in most regions, the climatology is spanned by the other models.
Regional
--------
![\[fig:STD\_tas\] Spatial distribution of the surface temperature ${\mathit{STD}}$ skill score. Upper panel: EGA, middle panel: EWA, and lower panel: LAA. Positive values correspond to a smaller ${\mathit{STD}}$ than the equally weighted ensemble and vice versa. White circles represent a statistically significant reduction of the ${\mathit{STD}}$ and black circles represent a statistically significant increase of the ${\mathit{STD}}$ relative to the ${\mathit{STD}}$ of the equally weighted ensemble.](S_tas.pdf){width="19pc"}
The uncertainty has a large spatial variability. We focus on the $20$-year learning period and the ensemble that includes the climatology. The ${\mathit{STD}}$ skill score shows the average temporal variability of the ensemble weighted by the *forecasters* compared with that of the equally weighted ensemble during the validation period. Figure \[fig:STD\_tas\] shows the spatial distribution of the surface temperature ${\mathit{STD}}$ skill score for the three SLAs. The EGA has a positive ${\mathit{STD}}$ skill score (smaller ${\mathit{STD}}$ than the equally weighted ensemble) in most of the globe, but there are many regions in which its ${\mathit{STD}}$ is significantly larger than that of the AVR. The EWA reduces the ${\mathit{STD}}$ over most of the globe except for the tropics. This reduction of the ${\mathit{STD}}$ stems from the high weight assigned to the climatology. In many regions, the $S_{AVR,EWA}$ is around $2$, which reflects an almost vanishing ${\mathit{STD}}$ of the EWA. The LAA also shows a smaller ${\mathit{STD}}$ than the AVR over most of the globe except for small regions in the tropics. Similarly to the EWA, the reduction of the uncertainties achieved by the LAA stems from the high weight assigned to the climatology. However, one can see that the $S_{AVR,LAA}$ is smaller than the $S_{AVR,EWA}$, which reflects a lower weight of the climatology and higher weights of the other models due to the built-in switching rate in the LAA.
![\[fig:STD\_uas\] Spatial distribution of the surface zonal wind ${\mathit{STD}}$ skill score. Upper panel: EGA, middle panel: EWA, and lower panel: LAA. Positive values correspond to a smaller ${\mathit{STD}}$ than the equally weighted ensemble and vice versa. White circles represent a statistically significant reduction of the ${\mathit{STD}}$ and black circles represent a statistically significant increase of the ${\mathit{STD}}$ relative to the ${\mathit{STD}}$ of the equally weighted ensemble.](S_uas.pdf){width="19pc"}
![\[fig:STD\_vas\] Spatial distribution of the surface meridional wind ${\mathit{STD}}$ skill score. Upper panel: EGA, middle panel: EWA, and lower panel: LAA. Positive values correspond to a smaller ${\mathit{STD}}$ than the equally weighted ensemble and vice versa. White circles represent a statistically significant reduction of the ${\mathit{STD}}$ and black circles represent a statistically significant increase of the ${\mathit{STD}}$ relative to the ${\mathit{STD}}$ of the equally weighted ensemble.](S_vas.pdf){width="19pc"}
Figures \[fig:STD\_uas\] and \[fig:STD\_vas\] show the ${\mathit{STD}}$ skill score of the EGA, EWA and LAA for the zonal and meridional wind components. For the wind components, all the SLAs show significant reductions of the ${\mathit{STD}}$ over most of the globe. The EGA and LAA show larger ${\mathit{STD}}$s in some small regions in the tropics. The results suggest that all the SLAs assign a high weight to the climatology, with the EWA almost fully converging to it, while the EGA and LAA extract information from the models as well.
![\[fig:STD\_ps\] Spatial distribution of the surface pressure ${\mathit{STD}}$ skill score. Upper panel: EGA, middle panel: EWA, and lower panel: LAA. Positive values correspond to a smaller ${\mathit{STD}}$ than the equally weighted ensemble and vice versa. White circles represent a statistically significant reduction of the ${\mathit{STD}}$ and black circles represent a statistically significant increase of the ${\mathit{STD}}$ relative to the ${\mathit{STD}}$ of the equally weighted ensemble.](S_ps.pdf){width="19pc"}
Figure \[fig:STD\_ps\] shows the surface pressure ${\mathit{STD}}$ skill score for the three SLAs. The EWA and LAA show positive skill scores over the entire globe, and the EGA only shows negative skill in a very small region in Oceania. The EWA fully converges to the climatology and has a vanishing ${\mathit{STD}}$ (resulting in an $S_{AVR,EWA}$ around $2$ over the entire globe). The LAA also converges to the climatology, but due to the built-in switching probability, the weight assigned to the climatology is slightly smaller than $1$, and accordingly, the $S_{AVR,LAA}$ is slightly smaller than $2$.
EGA weights\[sec:Weights\]
==========================
![\[fig:cwega\] Spatial distribution of the weight assigned to the climatology by the EGA *forecaster* for **(a)** surface temperature, **(b)** surface zonal wind, **(c)** surface meridional wind and **(d)** surface pressure.](EGA_w.pdf){width="39pc"}
![\[fig:cwewa\] Spatial distribution of the weight assigned to the climatology by the EWA *forecaster* for **(a)** surface temperature, **(b)** surface zonal wind, **(c)** surface meridional wind and **(d)** surface pressure. ](EWA_w.pdf){width="39pc"}
![\[fig:cwlaa\] Spatial distribution of the weight assigned to the climatology by the LAA *forecaster* for **(a)** surface temperature, **(b)** surface zonal wind, **(c)** surface meridional wind and **(d)** surface pressure. ](LAA_w.pdf){width="39pc"}
Some of the results above regarding the skill of the *forecasters* were explained by the weights assigned to the climatology. Due to its superior performance, compared with each of the models in the ensemble, it is expected that the SLAs would assign it a high weight. However, assigning too high a weight to the climatology implies that the *forecaster* is not capable of capturing deviations from the climatology due to the physical processes captured in the models. Ideally, *forecasters* should balance between the smaller ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ of the climatology and the additional information available from the other models.
Figures \[fig:cwega\], \[fig:cwewa\] and \[fig:cwlaa\] show the spatial distribution of the weight assigned to the climatology, for each of the four climate variables, by the EGA, EWA and LAA, respectively. The weights in these figures correspond to the weights assigned at the end of the $20$-year learning period (i.e., the weights used for the predictions). The colorbar was set to emphasize the differences. The EWA assigns the climatology weights close to $1$ over the entire globe for the surface wind components and pressure. For the surface temperature, there are large regions in the tropics, close to the North Pole and along the coast of Antarctica where the weight of the climatology is not the only dominant *expert*. Similar patterns are observed for the LAA; however, the weight assigned to the climatology here is never $1$ because this SLA is based on the fixed-share SLA that is designed to have a finite switching probability. Both the weights assigned by the EWA and those assigned by the LAA stem from the fact that these SLAs are designed to track the best *expert*, which in our ensemble turns out to be the climatology over most of the globe.
The EGA assigns a lower weight than the EWA and LAA to the climatology over most of the globe for all the climate variables considered here. For the surface temperature, only in some regions (mostly in the eastern Pacific Ocean) are the predictions of the EGA dominated by the climatology. For the surface wind components, the regions dominated by the climatology are somewhat larger. The weight assigned to the climatology by the EGA for the surface pressure shows a much larger variability (note the nontrivial color map) than the weight assigned for the other variables. This variability also resulted in a somewhat poorer performance by the EGA in the predictions of this variable. This different performance for the surface pressure may be related to the lower quality of the data for this variable. Unlike the EWA and the LAA, the EGA is not designed to track the best *expert* but rather to track the measurements. Therefore, the lower weight assigned to the climatology suggests that useful information can be extracted from the models, and their ability to capture some of the processes affecting the climate dynamics in decadal time scales can be quantified by the weight assigned to them by the EGA.
Summary and Discussion\[sec:Summary\]
=====================================
An ensemble of climate models is known to improve climate predictions and to help better assess the uncertainties associated with them. In this paper, we tested five different methods to combine the results of the decadal predictions of different models–EWA, EGA, LAA, REG and the equally weighted ensemble. The first three *forecasters* represent learning algorithms that weight the ensemble models according to their performances during a learning period. The REG attempts to find the linear combination of the model predictions that minimizes the sum of squared errors during the learning period, and the equally weighted ensemble represents no learning. We tried different learning periods and found the $20$-year learning experiment to be the most promising. This learning period ensures that the learning exceeds well beyond the drift of the models. The ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ and ${\mathit{STD}}$ are smaller than those of shorter learning periods, and the results suggest that the lead time (the time from the initialization of the models) has a small effect. The predictions of the surface temperature, wind and pressure were studied, and their qualities were assessed.
The simple average was shown to have larger errors and larger uncertainties than the *forecasters* that used a learning period to weight/combine the model predictions. The linear regression showed smaller errors than the equally weighted average. When no bias correction was applied to the data and the ensemble did not include the climatology, the errors of the regression were even smaller than those of the learning algorithms. However, in the more relevant ensemble that includes the climatology, the errors of the linear regression were higher than those of the learning algorithms. This poorer performance is associated with the basic assumptions of the linear regression and its oversimplified method to linearly combine the model predictions. The SLAs do not rely on these assumptions and use more advanced methods to weight the models, resulting in smaller errors. The REG method does not weight the models but rather finds an optimal linear combination of them; therefore, there is no straightforward method to estimate the uncertainties associated with the linear regression predictions. The EWA and the LAA were found to be more appropriate in cases in which tracking of the best model is of interest. The climatology outperformed all the other models; therefore, the EWA and the LAA converged to it over most of the globe and for all the four climate variables. Tracking the best model (by the EWA and LAA) was shown to result in too small uncertainties and thus in overconfident predictions. For the purpose of improving decadal climate predictions, we found the EGA to be more appropriate because it showed both the ability to reduce the errors and to provide more meaningful estimates of the uncertainties.
Although the globally averaged ${\mathit{RMSE}}$ of the EGA is only a few percentage points smaller than that of the climatology, it was shown to be statistically significant. In addition, we found that in many regions, the improvement is larger. The spatial distribution of the EGA performance showed that it is skillful over large continuous regions. This finding suggests that the models were able to capture some physical processes that resulted in deviations from the climatology and that the EGA enabled the extraction of this additional information. Similarly, the large regions over which the climatology outperforms the *forecasters* may suggest that physical processes, associated with the climate dynamics affecting these regions, are not well captured by the models. The EGA performance was much poorer for the surface pressure than for the other variables. This poorer performance might be related to the quality of the models’ output or to the large fluctuations of this variable. The better predictions of the EWA and LAA for the surface pressure cannot be considered significant because their performance is similar to that of the climatology. The reduction of the uncertainties is much more substantial than the reduction of the errors and can reach to about $60-70\%$, globally. The uncertainties considered here are only those associated with the model variability within the ensemble. The internal uncertainties, scenario uncertainties and other sources of uncertainty were not studied here.
The results presented here are in agreement with previous results (see Ref. [@meehl_decadal_2009] and references therein). However, in this work, monthly means were considered, whereas in previous works, the averages of longer periods, which have smaller fluctuations, were considered. A predictive skill of the EGA can be observed in the North Atlantic, in the North Indian Ocean and in some regions in the Pacific Ocean. In addition, the EGA showed predictive skill over many land areas, such as North Euro-Asia, Greenland, and, to some extent, also the Americas. The results suggest that learning algorithms can be used to improve climate predictions and to reduce the uncertainties associated with them.
The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant number \[293825\]. We acknowledge the World Climate Research Programme’s Working Group on Coupled Modelling, which is responsible for the CMIP, and we thank the climate modeling groups (listed in Table \[Models\_table\] of this paper) for producing and making available their model output. For the CMIP, the U.S. Department of Energy’s Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison provides coordinating support and led development of software infrastructure in partnership with the Global Organization for Earth System Science Portals. E.S. wishes to acknowledge a fellowship from the Israel Water Authority.
Supplementary Information
=========================
This Supplementary Information provides the globally averaged root mean square errors for the different *forecasters* and different learning periods. The results provided here were used to select the optimal bias correction method for each *forecaster* and each climate variable. In addition, the globally averaged standard deviations of the ensemble weighted by the different *forecasters* are provided.
[|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c]{} Forecaster & Bias correction & &\
& & 5 & 10 & 15 & 20 & 25 &\
& & 1.4432& 1.4267& 1.4177 &1.3716 & 1.3876 &\
& &1.3624& 1.3394& 1.346& 1.2972& 1.3143 &\
& & 1.3257& 1.2584& 1.2614& 1.2123& 1.2312 &\
& & 1.4812& 1.4687& 1.4755& 1.4287& 1.4552 &\
& & 1.3811& 1.356& 1.3573& 1.3158& 1.3349 &\
& & 1.3397& 1.2632& 1.2556& 1.2086& 1.2317 &\
& & 1.4764& 1.4898& 1.5233& 1.5062& 1.5472 &\
& &1.3595& 1.368& 1.3948& 1.3717& 1.4013 &\
& & 1.3193& 1.2825& 1.2906& 1.2593& 1.288 &\
& & 1.4895& 1.3632& 1.3376& 1.2922& 1.301 &\
& & 1.4789& 1.3607& 1.3381& 1.2902& 1.2989 &\
& & 1.5446& 1.3241& 1.2868& 1.2304& 1.2415 &\
& & 1.7776& 1.7918& 1.8111& 1.8046& 1.8422 &\
& & 1.4152& 1.4118& 1.4184& 1.3904& 1.4194 &\
& & 1.2898& 1.2475& 1.2472& 1.2038& 1.2338 &\
CLM & & 1.2393& 1.1994& 1.2213& 1.1881& 1.1956&\
[|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c]{} Forecaster & Bias correction & &\
& & 5 & 10 & 15 & 20 & 25 &\
& & 1.7814& 1.7694& 1.7765& 1.7618& 1.8004 &\
& & 1.6905& 1.6806& 1.6829& 1.6698& 1.7076 &\
& & 1.7468& 1.672& 1.6589& 1.628& 1.667 &\
& & 1.8047& 1.7979& 1.8027& 1.7946& 1.8312 &\
& & 1.7021& 1.6934& 1.695& 1.6806& 1.7221 &\
& & 1.7589& 1.6802& 1.6634& 1.6297& 1.6738 &\
& & 1.8114& 1.8259& 1.8557& 1.8678& 1.9199 &\
& & 1.7105& 1.7234& 1.7499& 1.75& 1.8074 &\
& & 1.758& 1.7014& 1.7077& 1.6873& 1.7431 &\
& & 1.7633& 1.7197& 1.7134& 1.699& 1.7366 &\
& & 1.7296& 1.6865& 1.6801& 1.6637& 1.7034 &\
& & 1.8124& 1.6892& 1.6645& 1.6277& 1.6662 &\
& & 1.8947& 1.8982& 1.9094& 1.9126& 1.9665 &\
& & 1.7182& 1.7112& 1.7188& 1.7072& 1.7519 &\
& & 1.7429& 1.6697& 1.6629& 1.6312& 1.677 &\
CLM & & 1.6285& 1.5719& 1.569& 1.5323& 1.5692 &\
[|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c]{} Forecaster & Bias correction & &\
& & 5 & 10 & 15 & 20 & 25 &\
& & 1.4532& 1.4502& 1.4575& 1.4488& 1.4701 &\
& & 1.3923& 1.3839& 1.3897& 1.3808& 1.3987 &\
& & 1.4251& 1.3607& 1.3553& 1.3336& 1.3474 &\
& & 1.4722& 1.4703& 1.4765& 1.4698& 1.4937 &\
& &1.4033& 1.3941& 1.398& 1.3892& 1.4102 &\
& &1.4355& 1.3647& 1.3577& 1.3355& 1.3528 &\
& & 1.4756& 1.493& 1.5169& 1.5275& 1.5599 &\
& &1.4065& 1.4162& 1.4371& 1.4412& 1.47 &\
& & 1.4336& 1.3829& 1.3896& 1.3792& 1.4019 &\
& & 1.4412& 1.4078& 1.4081& 1.3956& 1.4149 &\
& & 1.4171& 1.3839& 1.3831& 1.3692& 1.3867 &\
& & 1.4673& 1.3651& 1.3526& 1.3279& 1.3401 &\
& &1.5319& 1.5349& 1.5424& 1.544& 1.5708 &\
& & 1.4145& 1.4109& 1.4174& 1.4114& 1.4323 &\
& & 1.4185& 1.36& 1.3563& 1.3355& 1.352&\
CLM & & 1.3352& 1.2853& 1.2876& 1.2617& 1.2731 &\
[|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c]{} Forecaster & Bias correction & &\
& & 5 & 10 & 15 & 20 & 25 &\
& &3.7837& 3.735& 3.7369& 3.7327& 3.8133 &\
& &2.6627& 2.6388& 2.6592& 2.6314& 2.7475 &\
& & 2.7774& 2.628& 2.6278& 2.5765& 2.682&\
& & 3.9589& 3.9483& 3.9562& 3.9528& 4.043 &\
& &2.689& 2.6561& 2.6687& 2.6458& 2.7556 &\
& & 2.8111& 2.6444& 2.6335& 2.5824& 2.6838 &\
& & 4.1878& 4.1653& 4.2056& 4.2313& 4.3497 &\
& & 2.7081& 2.7503& 2.8186& 2.8327& 2.9609 &\
& & 2.8254& 2.7417& 2.7802& 2.7597& 2.8885&\
& & 2.8237& 2.6976& 2.6875& 2.6583& 2.7572 &\
& & 2.824& 2.6978& 2.6877& 2.6584& 2.7574 &\
& & 3.035& 2.7184& 2.6809& 2.6158& 2.7049 &\
& & 6.4757& 6.4749& 6.4933& 6.4998& 6.5855&\
& & 2.6786& 2.659 &2.6839& 2.6639& 2.7813 &\
& & 2.7506& 2.6155& 2.6208& 2.5701& 2.6785&\
CLM & &2.5746& 2.4531& 2.4606& 2.3935& 2.4933 &\
[|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c]{} Forecaster & Bias correction & &\
& & 5 & 10 & 15 & 20 & 25 &\
& & 1.229& 1.1919& 1.2146& 1.1562& 1.1516 &\
& &1.2204& 1.1909& 1.2088& 1.1681& 1.17 &\
& & 1.2616& 1.2095& 1.2202& 1.177& 1.183 &\
& & 1.2382& 1.1992& 1.2207& 1.1869& 1.1937 &\
& & 1.2389& 1.1993& 1.2205& 1.1873& 1.1926 &\
& & 1.2468& 1.1993& 1.2157& 1.1797& 1.1825 &\
& & 1.2179& 1.1907& 1.2141& 1.1825& 1.1931 &\
& &1.2125& 1.1865& 1.21& 1.1787& 1.1888 &\
& & 1.2354& 1.1945& 1.2146& 1.1814& 1.1904 &\
& & 1.3822& 1.2546& 1.2539& 1.2035& 1.1928 &\
& & 1.3784& 1.2526& 1.2537& 1.2046& 1.1918 &\
& & 1.4939& 1.291& 1.2645& 1.2073& 1.1915 &\
& & 1.6645& 1.6783& 1.6983& 1.6896& 1.726 &\
& & 1.3597& 1.3562& 1.3644& 1.3366& 1.3649 &\
& & 1.2748& 1.2328& 1.2342& 1.1913& 1.219 &\
CLM & & 1.2393& 1.1994& 1.2213& 1.1881& 1.1956&\
[|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c]{} Forecaster & Bias correction & &\
& & 5 & 10 & 15 & 20 & 25 &\
& & 1.6029 & 1.5622 & 1.565 & 1.5288 & 1.5642 &\
& & 1.6004 & 1.5643 & 1.5636 & 1.5365 & 1.5722 &\
& & 1.6666 & 1.5962 & 1.585 & 1.5525 & 1.5881 &\
& & 1.6264 & 1.5708 & 1.5686 & 1.531 & 1.5684 &\
& & 1.6251 & 1.5712 & 1.5685 & 1.5324 & 1.57 &\
& & 1.6382 & 1.5741 & 1.57 & 1.5347 & 1.5718 &\
& & 1.6016 & 1.5622 & 1.5634 & 1.5305 & 1.569 &\
& & 1.6026 & 1.5629 & 1.5636 & 1.53 & 1.5679 &\
& & 1.6356 & 1.5732 & 1.5693 & 1.5332 & 1.5708 &\
& & 1.682 & 1.6037 & 1.5887 & 1.5486 & 1.5819 &\
& & 1.6844 & 1.605 & 1.5892 & 1.5493 & 1.5832 &\
& & 1.7564 & 1.6348 & 1.6009 & 1.5623 & 1.5911 &\
& & 1.8141 & 1.8157 & 1.8275 & 1.8284 & 1.8813 &\
& & 1.6765 & 1.6683 & 1.6758 & 1.6631 & 1.7073 &\
& & 1.7176 & 1.6471 & 1.641 & 1.6092 & 1.6541 &\
CLM & & 1.6285 & 1.5719 & 1.569 & 1.5323 & 1.5692 &\
[|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c]{} Forecaster & Bias correction & &\
& & 5 & 10 & 15 & 20 & 25 &\
& & 1.3119 & 1.2777 & 1.282 & 1.2587 & 1.2707 &\
& & 1.3108 & 1.2785 & 1.2835 & 1.263 & 1.2748 &\
& & 1.364 & 1.3025 & 1.3002 & 1.2769 & 1.287 &\
& & 1.3339 & 1.2848 & 1.2874 & 1.2607 & 1.2737 &\
& & 1.3329 & 1.2846 & 1.2872 & 1.2616 & 1.2731 &\
& & 1.3411 & 1.2874 & 1.2885 & 1.2627 & 1.2742 &\
& & 1.3102 & 1.2762 & 1.2816 & 1.2588 & 1.2716 &\
& & 1.3124 & 1.2779 & 1.2829 & 1.2594 & 1.2717 &\
& & 1.3395 & 1.286 & 1.2875 & 1.2621 & 1.2738 &\
& & 1.3744 & 1.3068 & 1.3023 & 1.274 & 1.2851 &\
& & 1.3753 & 1.3075 & 1.3028 & 1.2754 & 1.2861 &\
& & 1.4337 & 1.3232 & 1.3111 & 1.2837 & 1.2929 &\
& & 1.4671 & 1.4692 & 1.4776 & 1.4779 & 1.5038 &\
& & 1.3774 & 1.3732 & 1.3804 & 1.3735 & 1.3935 &\
& & 1.3996 & 1.3427 & 1.34 & 1.3188 & 1.3347&\
CLM & & 1.3352 & 1.2853 & 1.2876 & 1.2617 & 1.2731 &\
[|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c]{} Forecaster & Bias correction & &\
& & 5 & 10 & 15 & 20 & 25 &\
& & 2.5682 & 2.465 & 2.4716 & 2.4189 & 2.4999 &\
& &2.5228 & 2.4518 & 2.4667 & 2.412 & 2.5131 &\
& & 2.6355 & 2.4967 & 2.4986 & 2.4404 & 2.5374&\
& & 2.5735 & 2.453 & 2.4607 & 2.3942 & 2.4938 &\
& & 2.5712 & 2.4528 & 2.4603 & 2.3942 & 2.4942 &\
& & 2.5833 & 2.4569 & 2.4631 & 2.3978 & 2.4976 &\
& & 2.6987 & 2.5417 & 2.5194 & 2.4457 & 2.536 &\
& & 2.5318 & 2.4412 & 2.454 & 2.3912 & 2.4932 &\
& & 2.5821 & 2.4552 & 2.4614 & 2.3951 & 2.4957&\
& & 2.7339 & 2.5263 & 2.5076 & 2.4396 & 2.5213 &\
& & 2.7338 & 2.5263 & 2.5076 & 2.4396 & 2.5213 &\
& & 2.8891 & 2.5684 & 2.5303 & 2.4565 & 2.5325 &\
& & 5.9201 & 5.917 & 5.9363 & 5.9402 & 6.0273&\
& & 2.6251 & 2.6026 & 2.6277 & 2.6045 & 2.7222 &\
& & 2.7146 & 2.5816 & 2.5876 & 2.5354 & 2.6441&\
CLM & &2.5746 & 2.4531 & 2.4606 & 2.3935 & 2.4933 &\
Forecaster Bias correction
------------ ----------------- -------- --------- --------- --------- ---------
5 10 15 20 25
No correction 1.5722 1.5516 1.5509 1.5003 1.4699
Avg. correction 1.2071 1.1681 1.1419 1.1 1.0898
Clm. correction 1.1107 1.047 1.0066 0.97441 0.96212
No correction 1.1803 1.1255 1.0967 1.0734 1.0492
Avg. correction 1.0505 1.0143 0.99385 0.96995 0.96079
Clm. correction 1.0001 0.9584 0.9334 0.9094 0.90286
No correction 1.3797 1.1943 1.0777 0.9866 0.91267
Avg. correction 1.1392 1.0059 0.91539 0.83884 0.77893
Clm. correction 1.0596 0.92525 0.83163 0.77086 0.71868
No correction 1.7773 1.7817 1.7849 1.7888 1.7888
Year bias 1.2573 1.2335 1.2129 1.2 1.1874
Month bias 1.1132 1.053 1.0151 0.99245 0.9729
: \[table:T\_STD\_nclm\] The surface temperature ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}$ for the different *forecasters* and bias correction methods.
Forecaster Bias correction
------------ ----------------- -------- --------- --------- --------- ---------
5 10 15 20 25
No correction 1.3211 1.3083 1.2938 1.2958 1.301
Avg. correction 1.218 1.1991 1.1895 1.1955 1.1906
Clm. correction 1.1857 1.1267 1.1117 1.1121 1.1013
No correction 1.1648 1.1222 1.1094 1.1066 1.1125
Avg. correction 1.1275 1.0924 1.0866 1.0938 1.0903
Clm. correction 1.0902 1.034 1.0298 1.0247 1.0193
No correction 1.2084 1.0821 0.98004 0.91758 0.86497
Avg. correction 1.1193 1.0126 0.92726 0.88286 0.83293
Clm. correction 1.0989 0.96991 0.88354 0.83389 0.7855
No correction 1.3665 1.3673 1.3694 1.3751 1.377
Avg. correction 1.1962 1.189 1.1858 1.1892 1.187
Clm. correction 1.1566 1.1034 1.0871 1.085 1.0759
: \[table:U\_STD\_nclm\] The zonal surface wind ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}$ for the different *forecasters* and bias correction methods.
Forecaster Bias correction
------------ ----------------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ---------
5 10 15 20 25
No correction 1.0428 1.0292 1.0279 1.0221 1.0122
Avg. correction 0.959 0.95016 0.94543 0.94398 0.93683
Clm. correction 0.93743 0.9019 0.88682 0.88115 0.86831
No correction 0.91457 0.88655 0.87795 0.87873 0.86699
Avg. correction 0.88297 0.87172 0.86361 0.86215 0.85405
Clm. correction 0.85492 0.83007 0.81715 0.80731 0.79725
No correction 0.94936 0.85194 0.78035 0.7294 0.67994
Avg. correction 0.88457 0.80834 0.74702 0.70583 0.66468
Clm. correction 0.86813 0.76843 0.69957 0.65128 0.60696
No correction 1.0623 1.0622 1.0646 1.0653 1.0663
Avg. correction 0.9454 0.93813 0.93673 0.93579 0.9352
Clm. correction 0.92446 0.88248 0.86953 0.86301 0.85696
: \[table:V\_STD\_nclm\] The meridional surface wind ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}$ for the different *forecasters* and bias correction methods.
Forecaster Bias correction
------------ ----------------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
5 10 15 20 25
No correction 4.4105 4.351 4.3096 4.2797 4.2831
Avg. correction 2.4633 2.4556 2.451 2.453 2.4329
Clm. correction 2.4548 2.3638 2.3503 2.343 2.314
No correction 2.5294 2.3962 2.3722 2.3379 2.327
Avg. correction 2.3429 2.3491 2.3509 2.3472 2.3384
Clm. correction 2.3384 2.3005 2.3073 2.2899 2.2663
No correction 3.7348 3.267 2.9498 2.7572 2.5945
Avg. correction 2.2853 2.1309 2.0012 1.9073 1.8249
Clm. correction 2.2975 2.0974 1.9856 1.8839 1.7998
No correction 5.8832 5.885 5.8841 5.8911 5.8787
Avg. correction 2.4017 2.3929 2.3839 2.3834 2.3636
Clm. correction 2.3771 2.2727 2.2459 2.2339 2.2015
: \[table:P\_STD\_nclm\] The surface pressure ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}$ for the different *forecasters* and bias correction methods.
Forecaster Bias correction
------------ ----------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
5 10 15 20 25
No correction 0.85636 0.79338 0.74092 0.74888 0.77041
Avg. correction 0.69405 0.65224 0.60268 0.60546 0.59947
Clm. correction 0.82139 0.76932 0.72812 0.69949 0.68463
No correction 0.069617 0.04385 0.034291 0.034327 0.046811
Avg. correction 0.093904 0.055604 0.042137 0.042974 0.0541
Clm. correction 0.32004 0.22664 0.18245 0.18477 0.22204
No correction 0.86891 0.69606 0.60843 0.56257 0.52853
Avg. correction 0.64118 0.49176 0.41823 0.37824 0.35085
Clm. correction 0.61502 0.44528 0.35476 0.31043 0.28258
No correction 1.8474 1.8482 1.8513 1.8555 1.8556
Avg. correction 1.301 1.2736 1.2536 1.2398 1.2267
Clm. correction 1.1244 1.0643 1.0281 1.006 0.98709
: \[table:T\_STD\] The surface temperature ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}$ for the different **forecasters** and bias correction methods. The climatology is included in the ensemble.
Forecaster Bias correction
------------ ----------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
5 10 15 20 25
No correction 0.73276 0.65502 0.60472 0.6103 0.55895
Avg. correction 0.73511 0.66343 0.60299 0.60858 0.55592
Clm. correction 0.84851 0.76309 0.71594 0.69938 0.65361
No correction 0.084994 0.046667 0.035807 0.034519 0.030238
Avg. correction 0.11876 0.066557 0.052488 0.046515 0.041827
Clm. correction 0.34414 0.19312 0.13497 0.11729 0.10056
No correction 0.70173 0.54873 0.47246 0.43713 0.41112
Avg. correction 0.60517 0.46204 0.39078 0.35748 0.33391
Clm. correction 0.60982 0.43764 0.35328 0.3177 0.29133
No correction 1.439 1.4335 1.4333 1.4364 1.4383
Avg. correction 1.2418 1.2278 1.2233 1.2237 1.2214
Clm. correction 1.173 1.1189 1.1023 1.0993 1.0906
: \[table:U\_STD\] The zonal surface wind ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}$ for the different *forecasters* and bias correction methods. The climatology is included in the ensemble.[]{data-label="my-label"}
Forecaster Bias correction
------------ ----------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
5 10 15 20 25
No correction 0.56695 0.50983 0.47015 0.47185 0.44052
Avg. correction 0.56347 0.52115 0.47243 0.47293 0.43637
Clm. correction 0.67315 0.61536 0.56948 0.55546 0.52289
No correction 0.056521 0.031311 0.025234 0.025545 0.022147
Avg. correction 0.078621 0.046682 0.036763 0.030673 0.026266
Clm. correction 0.26654 0.15412 0.11447 0.094416 0.080736
No correction 0.54687 0.42964 0.37097 0.3416 0.32204
Avg. correction 0.48228 0.36769 0.31136 0.28407 0.26622
Clm. correction 0.47982 0.34436 0.27938 0.25008 0.22985
No correction 1.1258 1.119 1.1194 1.1178 1.1187
Avg. correction 0.98815 0.9738 0.97075 0.96766 0.96716
Clm. correction 0.93731 0.89451 0.88127 0.87434 0.86855
: \[table:V\_STD\] The meridional surface wind ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}$ for the different *forecasters* and bias correction methods. The climatology is included in the ensemble.
Forecaster Bias correction
------------ ----------------- --------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
5 10 15 20 25
No correction 2.9392 2.717 2.5768 2.5104 2.3833
Avg. correction 1.5787 1.5048 1.4308 1.3989 1.2599
Clm. correction 1.7647 1.631 1.5915 1.5789 1.4751
No correction 0.18324 0.099206 0.073743 0.064644 0.055238
Avg. correction 0.19148 0.13322 0.10974 0.088419 0.07355
Clm. correction 0.60822 0.39215 0.31246 0.27342 0.22431
No correction 2.9241 2.4551 2.1702 2.0292 1.9133
Avg. correction 1.1266 0.85932 0.71971 0.65848 0.60953
Clm. correction 1.1816 0.83857 0.67345 0.60363 0.54823
No correction 6.2919 6.2863 6.283 6.2882 6.2762
Avg. correction 2.4483 2.4306 2.42 2.4176 2.3972
Clm. correction 2.3963 2.2911 2.2639 2.2515 2.2187
: \[table:P\_STD\] The surface pressure ${\mathit{STD}}_{GAW}$ for the different *forecasters* and bias correction methods. The climatology is included in the ensemble.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'In this paper, we explore optimizations to run Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) models locally on mobile devices. RNN models are widely used for Natural Language Processing, Machine translation, and other tasks. However, existing mobile applications that use RNN models do so on the cloud. To address privacy and efficiency concerns, we show how RNN models can be run locally on mobile devices. Existing work on porting deep learning models to mobile devices focus on Convolution Neural Networks (CNNs) and cannot be applied directly to RNN models. In response, we present [MobiRNN]{}, a mobile-specific optimization framework that implements GPU offloading specifically for mobile GPUs. Evaluations using an RNN model for activity recognition shows that [MobiRNN]{} does significantly decrease the latency of running RNN models on phones.'
author:
- Qingqing Cao
- Niranjan Balasubramanian
- |
Aruna Balasubramanian\
\
bibliography:
- 'ref.bib'
title: 'MobiRNN: Efficient Recurrent Neural Network Execution on Mobile GPU'
---
Introduction
============
Cloud-based deep learning solutions support many mobile applications. The cloud-based applications collect data from the phone, ship it to the cloud, and then apply deep learning models on the cloud. By sending all the data to the cloud, privacy is affected significantly, especially when the data can be used to infer sensitive information such as medical conditions. Cloud connectivity also may not always be available and is often unreliable.
Due to privacy and reliability concerns, many have explored optimizations for running deep learning models locally on the phone, focusing mostly on applications built on convoluted neural networks (CNNs) [@deepcompression; @deepx; @deepsense; @sparsesep; @wu2016quantized; @cnncompression]. In this work we investigate optimizations for applications built on Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs), a type of deep learning solution common in Natural Language Processing (e.g., Machine Translation) and Human activity recognition.
Porting RNNs to small form factor devices such as smartphones is a relatively under-studied problem and there are no good solutions. First, existing CNN optimizations are not directly useful for RNNs. The sequential nature of RNNs introduces dependencies that limit the amount of extreme parallelizations. Second, existing RNN optimizations that perform GPU offloading [@pcgpurnn] are designed for the desktop GPU and do not work well for mobile GPU. Mobile GPUs have fewer GPU cores and a limited integrated memory which limit the benefits of existing offloading techniques.
In response we develop [MobiRNN]{}, a mobile specific optimization for RNNs that focusses on offloading deep learning tasks to the mobile GPU. Our approach to offloading is to use a mobile-specific parallelization framework RenderScript [@renderscript]. At its core, RenderScript offers a way to define computation in terms of some custom data structures. These data structures are parallelized automatically by the RenderScript across the available cores on the GPU. The developer does not make any parallelization decision.
We evaluate our implementation for the activity recognition task. We use an RNN model that is trained to predict activities based on sensor inputs. The goal of our evaluation is to study the effectiveness of offloading the RNN model to the GPU. Our main result is that [MobiRNN]{} improves the time to run RNN models by over 4 times; in contrast GPU offloading techniques designed for desktop GPUs [*degrades*]{} performance by about 4 times. We also find that (1) the speed ups we get with GPU offloading depends on the mobile device type and model complexity, (ii) running a multi-threaded RNN on the CPU gets at least 70% of the performance benefits that one can get leveraging the GPU, and (iii) an overloaded GPU (a common occurrence in mobile devices since GPU is used for rendering and other tasks) significantly reduces the speed up from GPU offloading.
We open sourced the [MobiRNN]{} library for researcher’s further interest and evaluation. The source code is available at <https://github.com/csarron/MobiRNN-EMDL17>.
Background {#sec:background}
==========
Our goal is to study how Recurrent neural networks can be optimized for mobile devices. Much of what is known about mobile device optimizations for deep neural networks exists for Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and general feed forward deep neural networks (DNNs). In this section, we introduce Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) models, a widely-used form of Recurrent neural networks and point out the deficiencies in existing optimizations and the gaps in our understanding.
Recurrent Neural Networks
-------------------------
Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) models, a form of Recurrent neural networks, are highly effective for prediction problems defined over sequential data. As sequential data is fed in, for each time step the models consume one unit of input and make a prediction decision based on both the current input unit and the inputs seen thus far. A key requirement therefore is to remember some information about the past. Often the current decision will depend only on the recent past. For example, in activity recognition, if in the previous steps the user was driving, then it is quite likely that the user is still driving. Sometimes a current decision may depend on an event that happened much earlier in the past, an issue referred to as the long-term dependency problem. Other times the current decision might simply involve erasing what happened in the past as if the sequence is beginning anew.
LSTMs offer two relevant mechanisms that work together to process input sequence, one symbol at a time. First it provides a memory (cell state), typically a single real-valued vector that maintains state over time. Second it provides various gates (input, forget, and output) that control how this memory is accessed and modified using information in the current input and what is in the memory already. For example, the input gate controls how much the input data can enter the cell while the forget gate decides how should the cell dispose history information and the output gate determines what to let through. Although there are many variants [@lstmodyssey] of LSTM model, we focus on the basic LSTM model [@basiclstm].
Figure \[fig:celldepend\] shows the dependencies among the cells as well as the input and output to each cell. Each cell is represented as a rectangle in the figure, and their corresponding inputs and outputs are shown. The input to a cell in layer $i$ at time $t$ is represented as $x_{t}^{i}$, where $x$ is a vector. Each cell also gets input from an earlier cell, represented by vectors $c$ and $h$. $c$ represents the cell state and $h$ represents the hidden state. Both of these inputs are generated by a previous cell. For instance, the input to a cell at (layer $i+1$, time $t+1$) in terms of the cell state, hidden variables, and input $x$ is the output for both a cell at (layer $i$, time $t+1$), and at (layer $i+1$, time $t$). At each time step, the LSTM computes memory updates, and decisions based on the current memory. The computations are realized through matrix multiplications, simple vector additions and a set of non-linear transformations.
The key difference of the LSTM models with respect to the CNNs or other deep neural networks is that the input is processed sequentially which limits parallelization. As with most deep learning based models the computation involves static pre-learned weight matrices (and biases) and dynamic values (vectors) obtained either from input or from previous computations. However, many computations have a sequential dependency and cannot be fully parallelized unlike models where the entire input is presented at once.
![The basic structure of a basic LSTM model. The figure shows the dependencies between the cells.[]{data-label="fig:celldepend"}](cell_struct.pdf){height="0.5\linewidth"}
Existing work on deep learning on mobile devices
-------------------------------------------------
DNN and CNN optimizations for mobile devices focus mostly on compression (reduction model size) and decomposition (parallelizing model computations). Lane et al. pioneered running DNN and CNN on mobile devices [@deepear; @deepx; @sparsesep]. DeepEar [@deepear] demonstrated the possibility of applying DNNs to audio sensing area on low-power mobile DSPs. DeepX [@deepx] then enabled the execution of DNN and CNN on mobile devices through runtime layer compression and deep architecture decomposition. Later, SparseSep [@sparsesep] further improved the deep model execution using a layer compression compiler and adopted sparse inference runtime and convolution separation runtime. Because the CNN and DNN models often tend to be large, these compression and decomposition optimizations work especially well. However, for LSTMs that have relatively smaller model sizes, these optimizations are not necessarily effective.
Mobile GPUs provide another optimization avenue. Deep-Sense [@deepsense] and CNNDroid [@cnndroid] both showed a mobile GPU can be used to improve the CNN/DNN execution time. For example, in CNNDroid, they reported more than 10-fold speedup for AlexNet model on CIFAR-10 dataset. However, it remains to be seen if the benefits will carryover for LSTMs given the differences in computational dependencies due to their serial architecture. Further, unlike the non-mobile setting, GPUs in the mobile devices are used for other critical applications such as rendering the main UI. It is not clear how much benefit can be squeezed out of the mobile GPU without adversely affecting user experience.
More recent works on RNN(LSTM) optimizations using GPUs [@pcgpurnn] focus on desktop GPUs. But as we describe in the next section, the structure of the desktop GPU is different from the mobile GPU, making it more challenging to port GPU offloading techniques on desktops to mobile devices.
MobiRNN {#sec:impl}
=======
In this work, we dig deep into one optimization technique for neural networks: that of offloading to the GPUs.
Inherent dependencies between the cells limit the possibility for the kinds of extreme parallelization that are possible in CNNs. However, there is significant scope for parallelizing operations within each cell. This type of within cell parallelization using a CUDA GPU programming framework has shown performance improvements in desktop CPU settings [@pcgpurnn]. In this work we show that for the Mobile GPU setting directly applying a CUDA-like model is ineffective and actually deteriorates performance. Here we first describe a direct application of the desktop CUDA model and point out its issues. We then describe our mobile device specific GPU offloading model for RNNs (MobiRNN).
CUDA-based GPU Offloading
-------------------------
The CUDA programming model used in a desktop GPU provides a way to specify how to break down a large unit of computation into smaller work units that then get executed on the GPU [@cuda]. Work units are executed in parallel one in each of the available cores in the GPU. If there are more work units than cores then the units wait until one of the cores becomes available. Figure \[fig:cuda-offloading\] illustrates this for computations that are part of a single gate operation – a 32 dimension input vector multiplied with a (32 x 120) weight matrix. One factorization of this operation is to break this down into a set of 120 vector products, where the input vector multiplied with each of the 120 columns in the matrix. These 120 work units are scheduled twelve at a time leading to 120 function calls to the GPU.
This type of optimization is ill-suited for mobile GPUs especially when the factorization is not designed carefully. Mobile GPUs have fewer cores and have a shared memory unlike the desktop GPUs. This reduced memory forces a factorization of the work into many small work units. However, this fine-grained factorization incurs a scheduling cost. There is a non-negligible overhead for each work unit, which can quickly add up erasing any gains to be had from parallel execution.
Figure \[fig:timecuda\] supports this observation. We see that the performance of the LSTM model when run on the GPU using the factorization described for desktop GPUs [@pcgpurnn]. Details of the LSTM model and the evaluation set up is described later (in §\[sec:eval\]). Rather than improving performance, offloading to the GPU made the model run up to 4 times slower compared to running the model on the CPU.
![Comparison of offloading the LSTM model to the GPU using the same techniques used on desktop GPUs. The CPU execution time is shown for comparison. Details on the evaluation set up are in §\[sec:eval\].[]{data-label="fig:timecuda"}](time_cuda.pdf){width="\columnwidth"}
MobiRNN GPU Offloading
----------------------
Our approach to offloading is to use a mobile-specific parallelization framework rather than custom-design work units. We use RenderScipt [@renderscript] a high performance language framework that parallelizes work across all processors available on a device, including CPUs and GPUs. At its core, RenderScript offers a way to define computation in terms of some custom data structures designed for data parallel operations, which are then automatically broken down into work units that get executed in the GPU. In this model, the developer makes no factorization decisions. Figure \[fig:mobirnn-offloading\] illustrates a type of breakdown that is possible with RenderScript where the vector products are packed into a smaller number of work units – 12 work units that compute ten vector products each – thereby reducing the overhead associated with scheduling.
Further, we also optimize memory allocations for variables using RenderScript primitives that allow for reuse of previously allotted memory, thereby reducing unnecessary and frequent on-demand memory allocation. For example, since the dimension of the cell state($c$) and hidden state($h$) matrix is known as the model is fixed, they can be preallocated. In Figure \[fig:celldepend\], the maximum parallelization is 3, thus only 6(2\*3) matrices are preallocated instead of allocating 24(2\*3\*4), as one cell finishes calculation, the $c$ and $h$ memory are reused.
Other Optimizations for MobiRNN
-------------------------------
Divergence statements (if, switch etc) hurt performance in streaming processors like GPU, since they force splits in computation and induce serialization. We carefully architect our code to avoid divergence statements in GPU execution. We also use known optimizations like combining inputs and weights, fuse point-wise operations (these two are also suitable for desktop GPUs).
Other common optimizations like weights quantization, matrix decomposition and tiling matrix multiplication are not implemented in [MobiRNN]{} since they are not our focus. The optimization can be further improved by leveraging hardware features such as using linear algebra library(OpenBlas/Eigen) for matrix operations. Similarly, tilling matrix multiplication used commonly in CUDA-based GEMM can also further improve the performance of MobiRNN.
RNNs on Mobile Devices {#sec:eval}
======================
The goal of our evaluation is to study the effectiveness of offloading deep learning models to the GPU. Different from previous works that focus on Convolutional Neural Networks, our work focuses on Recurrent Neural Network models (in the form of LSTMs). We study the effect of offloading the models to the GPU on mobile devices. Our system [MobiRNN]{} uses a set of optimization techniques that are well suited for RNNs and for mobile GPU architecture. We implement [MobiRNN]{} on Android.
Our main findings are that (i) leveraging the GPU for running RNN models does provide speed ups over running the models on the CPU, but the speed up depends on the mobile device and the model complexity, (ii) running a multi-threaded RNN model on a CPU gets at least 70.5% of the performance benefits that one can get leveraging the GPU, and (iii) an overloaded GPU (a common occurrence in mobile devices since GPU is used for rendering and other tasks) significantly affects performance.
Experimental setup and methodology {#sec:setup}
----------------------------------
We experiment with an LSTM model that is used for activity recognition [@har]. The stacked LSTM model is trained on the smartphone sensor dataset [@dataset] which has 7352 training and 2947 test sets. For each set, there are 128 readings with 9 dimensions corresponding to the different sensor data. The label data categories each set into one of size activities. The trained model can be used to predict the activity time based on the input sensor data.
We test the model on the mobile device, and train the model on a server. Training is performed using the TensorFlow [@tf] deep learning framework. The model has two parameters that can be tuned: the number of layers and the number of hidden units. In the default case, we configure the model with 2 layers and 32 hidden units.
The experiments include running the LSTM model on a randomly selected 100 test cases. The experiments are performed on one Nexus 5 running Android version 6.0.1, and one Nexus 6p running Android 7.1.
Running LSTM models on the CPU versus GPU
-----------------------------------------
Figure \[fig:timecmp\] shows that [MobiRNN]{} uses techniques well-suited for mobile GPUs, and as a result, the model runs at least 3.93 times faster on the GPU compared to the CPU. In terms of absolute values, in one case on Nexus 5, the CPU-based classification took 142ms versus 29ms on the GPU. Recall from Figure \[fig:timecuda\] that porting the RNN model to the GPU using CUDA-like techniques performed worse since it was not well-suited for the more constrained mobile GPU.
However, speed up depends on the phone model. The newer Nexus 6P phones are equipped with a Octa-core CPU (twice the cores of Nexus 5) and higher memory bandwidth (25.6 GB/s, twice of Nexus 5). Therefore, running the RNN model on the CPU is faster on the Nexus 6P phone compared to Nexus 5. However, the performance of the RNN model on the GPU are comparable on the two phones. The result is that the speed up we get from running the model on the GPU is 3.93 compared to the 2.83 speed up we get on the newer Nexus 6P phones.
![Comparing the relative efficiency of running the LSTM model on the GPU versus the CPU. The results show the aggregate time for running 100 test cases. []{data-label="fig:timecmp"}](time_cmp.pdf){width="\columnwidth"}
Effect of increasing model complexity
-------------------------------------
Figure \[fig:model\] shows the effect of increasing the model complexity. The model complexity can be increased by either increasing the number of hidden units or the number of layers (§\[sec:background\]). On the Nexus 5 phone we increased the number of hidden units from 32 to 256 (the corresponding parameters increase from seventeen thousand to 1 million) and increased the number layers from 1 to 3.
Figure \[fig:model\] shows the speed up when running the model on GPU using [MobiRNN]{} compared to running it on the CPU. As the model complexity increases, the speed up using the GPU increases initially. This is to be expected, since for more complex models, parallelization helps even more.
However, when the model complexity increases due to number of hidden units rather than the number of layers, the speed up due to the use of GPU saturates. Increasing number of hidden layers increases the model size, resulting in the mobile device takes longer to load the parameters. In this case, the memory bandwidth is the bottleneck, decreasing the utility of parallelization. For example, the LSTM model with 2 layer and 128 hidden units has 263000 parameters, which is four times that of the LSTM model with 2 layer and 64 hidden units.
![Comparing the relative efficiency of running the LSTM model on the GPU versus the CPU as the model complexity increases. []{data-label="fig:model"}](time_model.pdf){width="\columnwidth"}
Multithreading comparison
-------------------------
Most of the performance benefit from leveraging the GPU comes from parallelization. We evaluate an alternate design point: that of running a multi-threaded LSTM model on the CPU. Porting the LSTM to a multi-threaded CPU is straightforward: when the GPU driver of RenderScript runtime is disabled on the mobile device, the [MobiRNN]{} GPU implementation simply runs on the CPU using multiple threads.
Figure \[fig:thread\] shows the speed up when running the LSTM model on the GPU and running the multi-threaded LSTM model on the CPU, for increasing model complexity. These results were obtained on the Nexus 5 phone. Multithreading does speed up performance considerably even when the model is run on the CPU. For one case in the baseline, single thread CPU time is 142ms on average. However, the GPU gives an average of 32% speed up over the multithreaded version across the models.
The single threaded CPU version is a stand alone script that does not use RenderScript, whereas both the GPU and the multi-threaded versions use the RenderScript. Part of the speedup over the single threaded version is also because of the efficiency of RenderScript.
We expect that multithreading on the CPU will provide even more benefits on the newer Nexus 6P phone, since the CPU on this newer phone is more powerful. This result shows that the offloading to GPU may not always be the best solution for improving the performance of deep learning models, and other design points need to be explored.
![Comparing the performance of running a multi-threaded LSTM model on the CPU compared to porting the model to the GPU.[]{data-label="fig:thread"}](time_thread.pdf){width="\columnwidth"}
Performance of various GPU utilizations
---------------------------------------
Unlike dedicated GPU engines, the Android GPU is designed to perform a number of tasks. For example, on Android 3.0 [@ha] and above, screen rendering is performed on the GPU since it supports hardware acceleration. If the GPU is overloaded, then offloading deep learning tasks to the GPU may likely affect performance considerably.
To this end, we evaluated [MobiRNN]{} under different GPU load on the Nexus 6P phone. We perform these experiments under three GPU loads: low utilization ($<$30%), medium (30$\sim$50%) and high($>$70%) load. To obtain the GPU utilization, we use ADB scripts, but for GPUs such as Adreno, the GPU utilization can be obtained using APIs [@qdn].
Figure \[fig:util\] shows that the latency of the LSTM model correlates with the load on the GPU; as the GPU is more loaded, it takes longer for the LSTM model to run on the CPU. GPU load is correlated with the time it takes to run the LSTM model. As the load on the GPU increases, the time it takes to run the model also increases. For comparison, we show the time taken to run the same LSTM models on the CPU. For fairness in comparison, we perform these experiments under similar low/medium/high CPU loads. We find that under low and medium loads, running the LSTM model on the GPU reduces latencies; however, under both high GPU and high CPU load it is better to run the RNN on the CPU rather than the GPU. This result suggests that [MobiRNN]{} should take into account GPU utilization before offloading tasks to the GPU.
![Time to run LSTM on as load on the processor increases. Dots show time when running LSTMs on GPU. Lines show performance when running LSTMs on CPU. []{data-label="fig:util"}](time_util_cpu.pdf){width="\columnwidth"}
Conclusion
==========
In this work, we show how GPU offloading can be used to optimize Recurrent Neural Network models on mobile devices. Porting GPU offloading techniques designed for desktop GPUs [*as-is*]{} to mobile devices performs poorly because the mobile GPUs are much more constrained. Instead, we design a set of mobile-specific techniques for GPU offloading on mobile devices that we call [MobiRNN]{}. Our evaluations show that [MobiRNN]{} does significantly reduce the time to run RNN models on mobile devices. However, the speed up due to GPU offloading depends on the mobile device type, model complexity, and the load on the GPU.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'In this paper, we explore the nucleation of vacuum bubbles in the Brans-Dicke type theory of gravity. In the Euclidean signature, we evaluate the fields at the vacuum bubbles as solutions of the Euler-Lagrange equations of motion as well as the bubble nucleation probabilities by integrating the Euclidean action. We illustrate three possible ways to obtain vacuum bubbles: true vacuum bubbles for $\omega > -3/2$, false vacuum bubbles for $\omega < -3/2$, and false vacuum bubbles for $\omega > -3/2$ when the vacuum energy of the false vacuum in the potential of the Einstein frame is *less* than that of the true vacuum. After the bubble is nucleated at the $t=0$ surface, we can smoothly interpolate the field combinations to some solutions in the Lorentzian signature and consistently continue their subsequent evolutions. Therefore, we conclude that, in general scalar-tensor theories like this Brans-Dicke type theories, which may include and represent certain features of string theory, vacuum bubbles come in false vacuum bubbles as well as in true vacuum bubbles, as long as a special condition is assumed on the potential.'
author:
- |
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Hongsu Kim</span>$^{a}$[^1], <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Bum-Hoon Lee</span>$^{b,c}$[^2], <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Wonwoo Lee</span>$^{c}$[^3],\
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Young Jae Lee</span>$^{d}$[^4] <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Dong-han Yeom</span>$^{c,d,e}$[^5]\
$^{a}$\
$^{b}$\
$^{c}$\
$^{d}$\
$^{e}$
title: |
**Nucleation of vacuum bubbles in\
Brans-Dicke type theory**[^6]
---
Introduction
============
In this paper, we study (Euclidean) vacuum bubble nucleations and their subsequent evolution in the context of the Brans-Dicke type theory of gravity [@brdi01].
The Brans-Dicke theory [@brdi01] is the most studied and hence the best known among all the alternative theories of classical gravity to Einstein’s general relativity [@will]. Historically, this theory has been thought of as a minimal extension of general relativity that properly accommodates both Mach’s principle and Dirac’s large number hypothesis [@will][@weinberg]. The action of the Brans-Dicke theory takes the form $$S_{\mathrm{E}}[g, \Phi] = \frac{1}{16 \pi} \int d^{4}x \sqrt{-g} \left( \Phi R - \frac{\omega}{\Phi} \Phi_{;\mu}\Phi_{;\nu}g^{\mu\nu} \right),$$ where $R$ is the Ricci scalar, $\omega$ is a dimensionless coupling parameter, and $\Phi$ is the Brans-Dicke scalar field. The theory employs the viewpoint that Newton’s constant $G$ is allowed to vary with space and time and can be written in terms of a scalar field $\Phi$ as $G = 1/\Phi$. As a scalar-tensor theory of gravity, the Brans-Dicke theory involves an adjustable but undetermined Brans-Dicke parameter $\omega$. As is well known, the larger the value of $\omega$, the more dominant the tensor (curvature) degree, and the smaller the value of $\omega$, the larger the effect of the Brans-Dicke scalar. As long as we select a sufficiently large value of $\omega$, the prediction of the theory will agree with all observations/experiments [@will]. For this reason, the Brans-Dicke theory has remained a viable theory of gravity. Moreover, interesting models [@hongsu] that explain dark matter and dark energy have been developed, possibly implying that the Brans-Dicke theory may be a more relevant theory of classical gravity that is consistent with observations.
In this paper, we focus on nucleations of vacuum bubbles. It is thus convenient to use the Euclidean signature. Generally speaking, in non-linear field theories, there are non-topological soliton configurations. These are solutions of classical field equations in pure scalar field theories with non-linear potential terms. An interesting and significant example for such a non-topological soliton configuration is the true vacuum bubble. That is, the bubble arises via quantum tunneling (i.e., the super cooled first-order cosmological phase transition) from the high temperature symmetric false vacuum state to the low temperature symmetry-breaking true vacuum state. Along this line, the dynamics of quantum tunneling was first developed by [@Coleman:1980aw] in the flat space-time background and by [@CDL][@parke] in the curved space-time background. The formulation that we shall employ in the present work can indeed be regarded as an extension or generalization of this last reference.
In order to study the nucleation and evolution of vacuum bubbles, we need a non-linear potential that can give metastable local false vacua and a global true vacuum. One possible way is to employ the Brans-Dicke gravity which involves a scalar field with such a potential. If this is possible, it will be an interesting model since it preserves the weak equivalence principle, which was the initial motivation of the Brans-Dicke theory. In this paper, however, as a toy model, we shall introduce a potential in the Brans-Dicke field sector. Indeed, if we relax the original constraints of Brans and Dicke that protect the weak equivalence principle, the non-linear potential for the Brans-Dicke scalar field can be used and it would allow vacuum bubble solutions. And this is why we call this kind of theory a Brans-Dicke *type* theory.
To summarize our results in advance, we illustrate three possible ways to obtain vacuum bubbles: true vacuum bubbles for $\omega > -3/2$, false vacuum bubbles for $\omega < -3/2$, and false vacuum bubbles for $\omega > -3/2$ when the vacuum energy of the false vacuum in the potential of the Einstein frame is *less* than that of the true vacuum. (The third solution of a false vacuum bubble is related to the authors’ previous papers due to a non-minimally coupled field [@lll2006].) After the bubble is nucleated at the $t=0$ surface, we can smoothly interpolate the field combinations to the solutions in the Lorentzian signature and consistently continue their subsequent evolutions. Note that, in this paper, we evaluate field configurations and probability amplitudes in the Jordan frame in a consistent manner.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section \[sec:Euc\], we discuss the Euclidean action of the Brans-Dicke type theory. In Section \[sec:Nuc\], we classify and confirm possible nucleation processes of vacuum bubbles in the Brans-Dicke type theory. In Section \[sec:Nucandevo\], we discuss nucleation and evolution of false vacuum bubbles in the thin wall approximation. Finally, in Section \[sec:Dis\], we summarize the present study and discuss related problems.
\[sec:Euc\]Euclidean action in Brans-Dicke type theory
======================================================
In this section, we describe the Brans-Dicke type theory in the Euclidean signature.
Brans-Dicke type theory in the Euclidean signature
--------------------------------------------------
The action of the Brans-Dicke type theory [@brdi01] with a potential takes the following form: $$\begin{aligned}
S_{\,\mathrm{E}} = \int\sqrt{g}d^{4}x \; \mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{BD}},\end{aligned}$$ where the Lagrangian density is $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{BD}} = \frac{1}{16\pi} \left( - \Phi R + \frac{\omega}{\Phi}\Phi_{;\mu}\Phi_{;\nu}g^{\mu\nu} + V(\Phi) \right).\end{aligned}$$ Here, $\sqrt{g}=\sqrt{+\det g}$, $\Phi$ is the Brans-Dicke scalar field, $R$ is the Ricci scalar, $\omega$ is the dimensionless coupling parameter of the Brans-Dicke type theory, and $V(\Phi)$ is the potential of the Brans-Dicke scalar field.
By extremizing this action with respect to the metric $g_{\mu\nu}$ and the Brans-Dicke field $\Phi$, one gets the classical Euler-Lagrange equations of motion given, respectively, by [@Faraoni:2004pi] $$\begin{aligned}
G_{\mu\nu} = \frac{1}{\Phi} \left(-g_{\mu\nu}\Phi_{;\rho \sigma}g^{\rho\sigma}+\Phi_{;\mu\nu}\right) + \frac{\omega}{\Phi^{2}} \left(\Phi_{;\mu}\Phi_{;\nu}-\frac{1}{2}g_{\mu\nu}\Phi_{;\rho}\Phi_{;\sigma}g^{\rho\sigma}\right) -g_{\mu\nu}\frac{V(\Phi)}{2\Phi},\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
\Phi_{;\mu\nu}g^{\mu\nu}= \frac{1}{3+2\omega}\left(\Phi V'(\Phi) - 2V(\Phi)\right).\end{aligned}$$
In the following subsections, we discuss the possible origin of our choices of the coupling $\omega$ and the potential $V(\Phi)$. In this paper, we work in the geometrical unit $c=G=1$.
### Where does $\omega$ come from?
From observational tests, it is known that the value of $\omega$ should be greater than $4 \times 10^{4}$ [@Ber]. However, in various physical models, small $\omega$ parameters can be allowed. Even though a small $\omega$ is not for our Universe, if a small $\omega$ is allowed in the fundamental theory and if such a small value of $\omega$ has implications, the study of various $\omega$ will have theoretical importance.
We now start with the example of dilaton gravity, which has the effective action in the following form [@Gasperini:2007zz]: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:dilaton} S = \frac{1}{2 \lambda_{s}^{d-1}}\int d^{d+1}x \sqrt{-g} e^{-\phi} \left( R + (\nabla \phi)^{2} \right),\end{aligned}$$ where $d$ is the space dimensions, $\lambda_{s}$ is the length scale of string units, $R$ is the Ricci scalar, and $\phi$ is the dilaton field. It is interesting to note that a simple field redefinition brings this dilaton gravity into a Brans-Dicke type theory. That is, if we define $\Phi$ as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:def} \frac{e^{-\phi}}{\lambda_{s}^{d-1}} = \frac{\Phi}{8 \pi G_{d+1}},\end{aligned}$$ where $G_{d+1}$ is the $d+1$-dimensional gravitation constant, then we end up with a Brans-Dicke type theory with $\omega = -1$.
If there are higher loop corrections coming from string theory, there will be other coupling terms in $\phi$. For example, the effective action of heterotic string theory compactified on a $Z_{N}$ orbifold takes the following form [@Foffa:1999dv]: $$\begin{aligned}
S = \frac{1}{2 \lambda_{s}^{2}}\int d^{4}x \sqrt{-g} e^{-\phi} \left( R + (1+e^{\phi}G(\phi))(\nabla \phi)^{2} \right),\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
G(\phi)= \left( \frac{3\kappa}{2} \right) \frac{6+\kappa e^{\phi}}{(3+\kappa e^{\phi})^{2}}\end{aligned}$$ and $\kappa$ is a positive constant of order one which is determined by the coefficients of the anomaly. The coupling parameter should then be field dependent: $\omega(\Phi) = -1-e^{\phi}G(\phi)$. In this specific model, $\omega$ depends on $\lambda_{s}$ and $\kappa$, and it is possible to find $\omega < -3/2$. For the case at hand, obviously, the Brans-Dicke scalar field equation is subject to change and it turns out to be [@Faraoni:2004pi] $$\begin{aligned}
\Phi_{;\mu\nu}g^{\mu\nu}= \frac{1}{3+2\omega}\left(\Phi V'(\Phi) - 2V(\Phi) -\frac{d\omega}{d\Phi} \Phi_{;\mu}\Phi_{;\nu}g^{\mu\nu} \right).\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, if the variation in $\Phi$ is sufficiently small, and hence the variation of $\omega(\Phi)$ is sufficiently small, an $\omega$ of less than $-3/2$ could be naturally justified.
In the first model of Randall and Sundrum [@Randall:1999ee], two branes have been employed to account for the hierarchy problem. Because of the warp factor between the two branes, we obtain a positive tension brane and a negative tension brane in the anti-de Sitter (AdS) space background. According to Garriga and Tanaka [@Garriga:1999yh], it is interesting to note that, each brane can be described by the Brans-Dicke type theory in the weak field limit with the $\omega$ parameter $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:gt} \omega = \frac{3}{2} \left( e^{\pm s/l} - 1 \right),\end{aligned}$$ where $s$ is the location of the negative tension brane along the fifth dimension, $l=\sqrt{-6/\Lambda}$ is the length scale of the anti-de Sitter space, and the sign $\pm$ denotes the sign of the tension. To explain the hierarchy problem, we require $s/l \sim 35$. We then obtain a sufficiently large value of $\omega$ on the positive tension brane while $\omega \gtrsim -3/2$ on the negative tension brane [@Garriga:1999yh][@Fujii:2003pa]. In principle, however, $s/l$ can be chosen arbitrarily, and hence one may infer that various $\omega$ near $-3/2$ may be allowed by models of the brane world scenarios.
### Comments on the choice of the Jordan frame
In the present work, we consistently calculate all quantities in the Jordan frame. In this subsection, we briefly comment on the choice of the Jordan frame and its merits.
First of all, the conformal transformation from the Jordan frame to the Einstein frame is consistent only if $\omega > -3/2$. Therefore, in general Brans-Dicke type models, the Jordan frame is more general than the Einstein frame, in some sense.
If $\omega > -3/2$, then it is possible to transform a solution of a vacuum bubble from the Jordan frame to the Einstein frame. However, it is not trivial whether the bubble in the Einstein frame is Coleman-De Luccia type [@CDL][@parke] or some other type [@LL][@LW]; also it is not trivial whether it is a true vacuum bubble or a false vacuum bubble.
In previous work [@Lee:2010yd], the authors studied the dynamics of thin wall bubbles for Brans-Dicke type theories in Lorentzian signatures. One of the interesting results is that a thin wall of a false vacuum bubble may violate the null energy condition in the Jordan frame. However, since we assumed the thin wall approximation, such a property seemed not to depend on the choice of $\omega$. If a bubble expands along a causal patch in the Jordan frame, it should be the same in the Einstein frame. However, we already know that if $\omega > -3/2$, the Einstein frame does not violate the null energy condition, and it may imply that such dynamics is not consistent in the Einstein frame. Then, the natural open question is, what is the proper interpretation of such bubbles in the Einstein frame for a given $\omega$? Is it consistent even if we do not assume the thin wall approximation?
To answer this question, the natural direction of study is, first, to classify possible small false vacuum bubbles in the Jordan frame, and second, to interpret the meanings of such bubbles in the Einstein frame. Accordingly, in this paper, we choose the Jordan frame to study a nucleation of vacuum bubbles.
### Effective potential: a toy model
Generally, string theory predicts a non-minimal and non-universal coupling of various fields to the dilaton [@Gasperini:2007zz]. Hence, we may well include the potential term for the dilaton field in the original action, if we pay the price of violating the weak equivalence principle.
In practice, obviously, we need to choose a specific potential. In this paper, the origin of such a potential is not our concern, and thus we will not address this issue. Rather, we will take a simple potential and explore its consequences.
We now start with the effective force function $F(\Phi)$ given by $$\begin{aligned}
F(\Phi) &\equiv& \Phi V'(\Phi) - 2 V(\Phi) \\
&=& A \left(\Phi-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} \right) \left(\Phi-\Phi_{\mathrm{f}} \right) \left(\Phi- \left( \frac{\Phi_{\mathrm{t}}+\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}}{2} + \delta \right) \right),\end{aligned}$$ where $A$ is a positive constant, $\Phi_{\mathrm{t}}$ and $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}$ denote the field value inside or outside the vacuum bubble (the subscript $\mathrm{t}$ denotes a true vacuum and the subscript $\mathrm{f}$ denotes a false vacuum), and $\delta$ is a free parameter that determines the location of the bump of the potential. We can then choose that the inside and outside regions to be in stable equilibrium.
In the present work, for convenience, we choose $\Phi_{\mathrm{t}}=1$ and $V(\Phi_{\mathrm{t}})=V_{0}$ in the true vacuum region. The potential $V(\Phi)$ and the effective potential $U(\Phi)$ then take the following form: $$\begin{aligned}
V(\Phi) = \Phi^{2} \left( \int_{1}^{\Phi} \frac{F(\bar{\Phi})}{\bar{\Phi}^{3}} d \bar{\Phi} + V_{0} \right)\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
U(\Phi) = \int_{1}^{\Phi} F(\bar{\Phi}) d \bar{\Phi} = \int_{1}^{\Phi}\left( \bar{\Phi} V'(\bar{\Phi}) - 2V(\bar{\Phi}) \right) d \bar{\Phi},\end{aligned}$$ with the field equation being given by $\nabla^{2} \Phi = U'/(3+2\omega)$.
Note that the potential in the Einstein frame $U_{E}$ is [@Faraoni:2004pi] $$\begin{aligned}
U_{E}(\Phi) = \int_{1}^{\Phi} \frac{F(\bar{\Phi})}{\bar{\Phi}^{3}} d \bar{\Phi} + V_{0}.\end{aligned}$$ Of course, we have to represent $U_{E}$ by a new field $\Phi_{E}$, where $$\begin{aligned}
\Phi = \exp \Phi_{E}\sqrt{\frac{16 \pi}{2\omega+3}},\end{aligned}$$ in order to make the canonical action in the Einstein frame. However, the relation between $\Phi$ and $\Phi_{E}$ is one-to-one and onto. Therefore, the only effect is to stretch the potential along the field direction, and this does not affect the vacuum energy at each field value.
Euclidean action in Brans-Dicke type theory
-------------------------------------------
Now we evaluate the Euclidean action of the Brans-Dicke type theory to calculate the probability amplitude of bounces. First, as usual, we assume the $O(4)$ symmetric metric [@Coleman:1980aw][@CDL][@parke][@LW][@LL]: $$\begin{aligned}
ds^{2}_{\mathrm{E}} = d\eta^{2} + \rho^{2}(\eta) (d\chi^{2} + \sin^{2} \chi (d\theta^{2} + \sin^{2}\theta d\varphi^{2})),\end{aligned}$$ where $\rho$ is a function that corresponds to the scale factor in the Lorentzian signature, $\eta$ is the Euclidean time parameter, and $\chi$, $\theta$, and $\varphi$ are angle coordinates on the three-dimensional sphere.
In terms of this $O(4)$ symmetric metric, then, the classical Euler-Lagrange equations of motion are given by $$\begin{aligned}
G_{\eta\eta} &=& 3 \frac{\dot{\rho}^{2}-1}{\rho^{2}} = -3 \frac{\dot{\rho}}{\rho} \frac{\dot{\Phi}}{\Phi} + \frac{\omega}{2} \left(\frac{\dot{\Phi}}{\Phi}\right)^{2} - \frac{V}{2\Phi}\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\nabla^{2} \Phi &=& \ddot{\Phi} + 3 \frac{\dot{\rho}}{\rho} \dot{\Phi} \\
&=& \frac{1}{2 \omega + 3} \left(\Phi V'(\Phi) - 2V(\Phi)\right),\end{aligned}$$ where the over-dot denotes a derivative with respect to $\eta$.
Note that the two key equations to evaluate the Euclidean action of the Brans-Dicke type theory are $$\begin{aligned}
(\nabla \Phi)^{2} = \dot{\Phi}^{2}\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\Phi R &=& \omega \frac{(\nabla \Phi)^{2}}{\Phi} + 3 \nabla^{2} \Phi + 2 V \\
&=& - \left( \frac{6}{\rho^{2}} \Phi \right) (\rho \ddot{\rho} + \dot{\rho}^{2} -1),\end{aligned}$$ and the volume factor becomes $$\begin{aligned}
\sqrt{g} d^{4} x = 2 \pi^{2} \rho^{3} d\eta.\end{aligned}$$
Using these equations, then, we obtain the Euclidean action as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
S_{\,\mathrm{E}} &=& 2 \pi^{2} \int \rho^{3} d \eta \frac{1}{16\pi} \left( - \Phi R + \omega \frac{\dot{\Phi}^{2}}{\Phi} + V \right) \\
&=& \frac{\pi}{8} \int \rho^{3} d \eta \left( \frac{6}{\rho^{2}} \Phi (\rho \ddot{\rho} + \dot{\rho}^{2} -1) + \omega \frac{\dot{\Phi}^{2}}{\Phi} + V \right).\end{aligned}$$ Upon integration by parts, we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
S_{\,\mathrm{E}} = \frac{\pi}{8} \int d \eta \left( - 6 \dot{\Phi} \dot{\rho} \rho^{2} - 6 \Phi \rho \dot{\rho}^{2} - 6 \Phi \rho + \omega \rho^{3} \frac{\dot{\Phi}^{2}}{\Phi} + \rho^{3} V \right) + \textrm{boundary term}\end{aligned}$$ and the boundary term is irrelevant here as we are interested in the difference between the action of an bounce and the background. Finally, after simple calculations, we end up with $$\begin{aligned}
S_{\,\mathrm{E}} = \frac{\pi}{4} \int d \eta \left( \rho^{3} V - 6 \rho \Phi \right).\end{aligned}$$
This result is indeed consistent with the result of Coleman and De Luccia [@CDL]: $$\begin{aligned}
S_{\,\mathrm{E}} = 4\pi^{2} \int d \eta \left( \rho^{3} V - \frac{3 \rho}{8 \pi G} \right),\end{aligned}$$ and we obtain our result again if we change $V$ by $V/16 \pi$ and $G$ by $1/\Phi$.
Finally, if we have a solution of the Euclidean metric and field combinations, then we can approximate the probability amplitude $P$ of the Euclidean bounce by $$\begin{aligned}
P \sim A e^{-B},\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
B = S_{\,\mathrm{E}}(\mathrm{bounce}) - S_{\,\mathrm{E}}(\mathrm{background}).\end{aligned}$$
\[sec:Nuc\]Nucleation of vacuum bubbles in Brans-Dicke type theory
==================================================================
![\[fig:bounce\]Possible bounce solutions in the Brans-Dicke type theory. The Lorentzian dynamics is determined by $U(\Phi)/(3+2\omega)$, while the Euclidean dynamics is determined by $-U(\Phi)/(3+2\omega)$. $T$ and $F$ are the location of a true vacuum and a false vacuum, respectively, in the Lorentzian signature. Diagram (A) is for $\omega > -3/2$ and means a true vacuum bubble in a false vacuum background. Diagram (B) is for $\omega < -3/2$ and means a false vacuum bubble in a true vacuum background. Diagram (C) is for $\omega > -3/2$, where $V(T) < V(F)$ and $U_{E}(T) > U_{E}(F)$; hence a nucleation of a false vacuum bubble is possible.](bounce)
In this section, we illustrate and check out possible bounce solutions of the Brans-Dicke type theory. The dynamics of the Brans-Dicke scalar field is governed by the field equation $$\begin{aligned}
\ddot{\Phi} + 3 \frac{\dot{\rho}}{\rho} \dot{\Phi} = \frac{1}{2 \omega + 3} \frac{dU}{d\Phi} = - \frac{d}{d\Phi} \frac{-U}{2\omega+3},\end{aligned}$$ which is, in turn, determined by $-U(\Phi)/(3+2\omega)$. The second term on the left-hand side is the damping term that eventually causes the scalar field to stop rolling for most cases. However, clearly it is the potential $V(\Phi)$ that determines the nature of the vacuum as being true or false, since the energy-momentum tensor is given by $V(\Phi)$.
In Figure \[fig:bounce\], we classify possible bounce solutions. The left diagrams of Figure \[fig:bounce\] are typical effective potentials $U(\Phi)$ or potentials $V(\Phi)$. Let us first consider the cases $V(T) < V(F)$ and $U(T) < U(F)$, where $T$ is the field value of the true vacuum and $F$ is the field value of the false vacuum. Diagram (A) in Figure \[fig:bounce\] is for $\omega > -3/2$ and describes the generation of a true vacuum bubble in a false vacuum background. Diagram (B) is for $\omega < -3/2$ and describes a false vacuum bubble in a true vacuum background. However, if $V(T) < V(F)$ and $U(T) > U(F)$, then there may be a false vacuum bubble even in the $\omega > -3/2$ case. Note that the sufficient condition is not only $U(T) > U(F)$ but also $U_{E}(T) > U_{E}(F)$ (this will be confirmed in the following subsections). Diagram (C) is a situation for $\omega > -3/2$, where $V(T) < V(F)$ and $U_{E}(T) > U_{E}(F)$; hence a nucleation of a false vacuum bubble is possible.
In the following subsections, we numerically check the possibilities of the bounce solutions in detail.
Background Bubble $A$ $\delta$ $V_{0}$ $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}}$
------------ -------- ---------- -------------- ------------------ ---------------------------------------
dS dS $10^{4}$ $\mp$ 0.0025 $\mathfrak{V}$ $\mp$ 0.025
dS Flat $10^{4}$ $\mp$ 0.0025 0 $\mp$ 0.025
dS AdS $10^{4}$ $\mp$ 0.0025 $-\mathfrak{V}$ $\mp$ 0.025
Flat AdS $10^{4}$ $\mp$ 0.0025 $-2\mathfrak{V}$ $\mp$ 0.025
AdS AdS $10^{4}$ $\mp$ 0.0025 $-3\mathfrak{V}$ $\mp$ 0.025
: \[table:condition1\]Potentials $V(\Phi)$ for true vacuum bubble bounces. The upper signs of $\pm$ are for $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}<1$ (Figure \[fig:lessTV\]) and the lower signs of $\pm$ are for $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}>1$ (Figure \[fig:moreTV\]). Here, $\mathfrak{V}=3.092\times10^{-5}$ for $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}<1$ and $\mathfrak{V}=3.418\times10^{-5}$ for $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}>1$.
Background Bubble $A$ $\delta$ $V_{0}$ $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}}$
------------ -------- ----------- -------------- ------------------ ---------------------------------------
dS dS $-10^{4}$ $\pm$ 0.0025 $\mathfrak{V}$ $\mp$ 0.025
Flat dS $-10^{4}$ $\pm$ 0.0025 0 $\mp$ 0.025
AdS dS $-10^{4}$ $\pm$ 0.0025 $-\mathfrak{V}$ $\mp$ 0.025
AdS Flat $-10^{4}$ $\pm$ 0.0025 $-2\mathfrak{V}$ $\mp$ 0.025
AdS AdS $-10^{4}$ $\pm$ 0.0025 $-3\mathfrak{V}$ $\mp$ 0.025
: \[table:condition2\]Potentials $V(\Phi)$ for false vacuum bubble bounces. The upper signs of $\pm$ and $\mp$ are for $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}<1$ (Figure \[fig:lessFV\]) and the lower signs of $\pm$ and $\mp$ are for $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}>1$ (Figure \[fig:moreFV\]). Here, $\mathfrak{V}=3.336\times10^{-5}$ for $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}<1$ and $\mathfrak{V}=3.174\times10^{-5}$ for $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}>1$.
![\[fig:lessTV\]Potentials $V(\Phi)$ for $A=10^{4}$, $\delta=-0.0025$, $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} = - 0.025$, and hence for $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}<1$. We choose $V_{0}$ as in Table \[table:condition1\] to vary the true vacuum energy. From top to bottom, each potential describes a de Sitter background and a de Sitter bubble, a de Sitter background and a flat bubble, a de Sitter background and an anti-de Sitter bubble, a flat background and an anti-de Sitter bubble, and an anti-de Sitter background and an anti-de Sitter bubble.](less_TV)
![\[fig:moreTV\]Potentials $V(\Phi)$ for $A=10^{4}$, $\delta=0.0025$, $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} = 0.025$, and hence for $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}>1$. We choose $V_{0}$ as in Table \[table:condition1\] to vary the true vacuum energy.](more_TV)
![\[fig:bounce\_lessTV\]For $\omega > -3/2$, we illustrate bounce solutions for true vacuum bubbles in false vacuum backgrounds by the potentials in Figure \[fig:lessTV\] ($\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}<1$). Initial conditions are in Table \[table:false\] ($\delta < 0$ and $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} < 0$). We plot $\Phi$, $\rho$, and $\dot{\rho}$ as functions of $\eta$. Each caption for each curve describes a background and a bubble (e.g., $\mathrm{dS}-\mathrm{dS}$ describes a de Sitter background and a de Sitter bubble).](type1_Phi_smallf "fig:") ![\[fig:bounce\_lessTV\]For $\omega > -3/2$, we illustrate bounce solutions for true vacuum bubbles in false vacuum backgrounds by the potentials in Figure \[fig:lessTV\] ($\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}<1$). Initial conditions are in Table \[table:false\] ($\delta < 0$ and $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} < 0$). We plot $\Phi$, $\rho$, and $\dot{\rho}$ as functions of $\eta$. Each caption for each curve describes a background and a bubble (e.g., $\mathrm{dS}-\mathrm{dS}$ describes a de Sitter background and a de Sitter bubble).](type1_rho_smallf "fig:") ![\[fig:bounce\_lessTV\]For $\omega > -3/2$, we illustrate bounce solutions for true vacuum bubbles in false vacuum backgrounds by the potentials in Figure \[fig:lessTV\] ($\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}<1$). Initial conditions are in Table \[table:false\] ($\delta < 0$ and $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} < 0$). We plot $\Phi$, $\rho$, and $\dot{\rho}$ as functions of $\eta$. Each caption for each curve describes a background and a bubble (e.g., $\mathrm{dS}-\mathrm{dS}$ describes a de Sitter background and a de Sitter bubble).](type1_rhodot_smallf "fig:")
![\[fig:bounce\_moreTV\]For $\omega > -3/2$, we illustrate bounce solutions for true vacuum bubbles in false vacuum backgrounds by the potentials in Figure \[fig:lessTV\] ($\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}<1$). Initial conditions are in Table \[table:false\] ($\delta > 0$ and $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} > 0$). We plot $\Phi$, $\rho$, and $\dot{\rho}$ as functions of $\eta$. Each caption for each curve describes a background and a bubble (e.g., $\mathrm{dS}-\mathrm{dS}$ describes a de Sitter background and a de Sitter bubble).](type1_Phi_largef "fig:") ![\[fig:bounce\_moreTV\]For $\omega > -3/2$, we illustrate bounce solutions for true vacuum bubbles in false vacuum backgrounds by the potentials in Figure \[fig:lessTV\] ($\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}<1$). Initial conditions are in Table \[table:false\] ($\delta > 0$ and $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} > 0$). We plot $\Phi$, $\rho$, and $\dot{\rho}$ as functions of $\eta$. Each caption for each curve describes a background and a bubble (e.g., $\mathrm{dS}-\mathrm{dS}$ describes a de Sitter background and a de Sitter bubble).](type1_rho_largef "fig:") ![\[fig:bounce\_moreTV\]For $\omega > -3/2$, we illustrate bounce solutions for true vacuum bubbles in false vacuum backgrounds by the potentials in Figure \[fig:lessTV\] ($\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}<1$). Initial conditions are in Table \[table:false\] ($\delta > 0$ and $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} > 0$). We plot $\Phi$, $\rho$, and $\dot{\rho}$ as functions of $\eta$. Each caption for each curve describes a background and a bubble (e.g., $\mathrm{dS}-\mathrm{dS}$ describes a de Sitter background and a de Sitter bubble).](type1_rhodot_largef "fig:")
$\omega > -3/2$: true vacuum bubbles in false vacuum backgrounds
----------------------------------------------------------------
First, we consider true vacuum bubbles in false vacuum backgrounds. There are five possibilities: a de Sitter (dS) bubble in a de Sitter background, a flat bubble in a de Sitter background, an anti-de Sitter bubble in a de Sitter background, an anti-de Sitter bubble in a flat background, and an-anti de Sitter bubble in an-anti de Sitter background. Also, there are two possibilities for $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}$, depending on whether it is more or less than $1$. Therefore, to study these possibilities, we considered ten potentials, as illustrated in Table \[table:condition1\]. Here, we used $\omega=10$, and hence it is greater than $-3/2$. Figures \[fig:lessTV\] and \[fig:moreTV\] show the potentials we used.
### $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}<1$
In Figure \[fig:bounce\_lessTV\], we denote bounce solutions for true vacuum bubbles in false vacuum backgrounds by potentials in Figure \[fig:lessTV\] ($\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}<1$). We plot $\Phi$, $\rho$, and $\dot{\rho}$ as functions of $\eta$.
### $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}>1$
In Figure \[fig:bounce\_moreTV\], we denote bounce solutions for true vacuum bubbles in false vacuum backgrounds by potentials in Figure \[fig:moreTV\] ($\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}>1$). We plot $\Phi$, $\rho$, and $\dot{\rho}$ as functions of $\eta$.
Note that $\rho$ is a $\sin$ function for a de Sitter space, proportional to $\eta$ for a flat space, and a $\sinh$ function for an anti-de Sitter space. Therefore, $\dot{\rho}$ is a $\cos$ function for a de Sitter space, $1$ for a flat space, and a $\cosh$ function for an anti-de Sitter space. In our results, $\rho$ is too close to compare, but $\dot{\rho}$ can be distinguished. Such behaviors ($\cos$, $1$, $\cosh$, etc.) consistently hold for inside and outside of the transition region.
![\[fig:lessFV\]Potentials $V(\Phi)$ for $A=-10^{4}$, $\delta=0.0025$, $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} = - 0.025$, and hence for $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}<1$. We choose $V_{0}$ as in Table \[table:condition2\] to vary the true vacuum energy. From top to bottom, each potential means a de Sitter background and a de Sitter bubble, a flat background and a de Sitter bubble, an anti-de Sitter background and a de Sitter bubble, an anti-de Sitter background and a flat bubble, and an anti-de Sitter background and an anti-de Sitter bubble.](less_FV)
![\[fig:moreFV\]Potentials $V(\Phi)$ for $A=-10^{4}$, $\delta=-0.0025$, $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} = 0.025$, and hence for $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}>1$. We choose $V_{0}$ as in Table \[table:condition2\] to vary the true vacuum energy.](more_FV)
![\[fig:bounce\_lessFV\]For $\omega < -3/2$, we illustrate bounce solutions for false vacuum bubbles in true vacuum backgrounds by the potentials in Figure \[fig:lessFV\] ($\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}<1$). Initial conditions are in Table \[table:false\] ($\delta>0$ and $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} < 0$). We plot $\Phi$, $\rho$, and $\dot{\rho}$ as functions of $\eta$. Each caption for each curve means a background and a bubble (e.g., $\mathrm{dS}-\mathrm{dS}$ means a de Sitter background and a de Sitter bubble).](type2_Phi_smallf "fig:") ![\[fig:bounce\_lessFV\]For $\omega < -3/2$, we illustrate bounce solutions for false vacuum bubbles in true vacuum backgrounds by the potentials in Figure \[fig:lessFV\] ($\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}<1$). Initial conditions are in Table \[table:false\] ($\delta>0$ and $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} < 0$). We plot $\Phi$, $\rho$, and $\dot{\rho}$ as functions of $\eta$. Each caption for each curve means a background and a bubble (e.g., $\mathrm{dS}-\mathrm{dS}$ means a de Sitter background and a de Sitter bubble).](type2_rho_smallf "fig:") ![\[fig:bounce\_lessFV\]For $\omega < -3/2$, we illustrate bounce solutions for false vacuum bubbles in true vacuum backgrounds by the potentials in Figure \[fig:lessFV\] ($\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}<1$). Initial conditions are in Table \[table:false\] ($\delta>0$ and $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} < 0$). We plot $\Phi$, $\rho$, and $\dot{\rho}$ as functions of $\eta$. Each caption for each curve means a background and a bubble (e.g., $\mathrm{dS}-\mathrm{dS}$ means a de Sitter background and a de Sitter bubble).](type2_rhodot_smallf "fig:")
![\[fig:bounce\_moreFV\]For $\omega < -3/2$, we illustrate bounce solutions for false vacuum bubbles in true vacuum backgrounds by the potentials in Figure \[fig:moreFV\] ($\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}>1$). Initial conditions are in Table \[table:false\] ($\delta<0$ and $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} > 0$). We plot $\Phi$, $\rho$, and $\dot{\rho}$ as functions of $\eta$. Each caption for each curve means a background and a bubble (e.g., $\mathrm{dS}-\mathrm{dS}$ means a de Sitter background and a de Sitter bubble).](type2_Phi_largef "fig:") ![\[fig:bounce\_moreFV\]For $\omega < -3/2$, we illustrate bounce solutions for false vacuum bubbles in true vacuum backgrounds by the potentials in Figure \[fig:moreFV\] ($\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}>1$). Initial conditions are in Table \[table:false\] ($\delta<0$ and $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} > 0$). We plot $\Phi$, $\rho$, and $\dot{\rho}$ as functions of $\eta$. Each caption for each curve means a background and a bubble (e.g., $\mathrm{dS}-\mathrm{dS}$ means a de Sitter background and a de Sitter bubble).](type2_rho_largef "fig:") ![\[fig:bounce\_moreFV\]For $\omega < -3/2$, we illustrate bounce solutions for false vacuum bubbles in true vacuum backgrounds by the potentials in Figure \[fig:moreFV\] ($\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}>1$). Initial conditions are in Table \[table:false\] ($\delta<0$ and $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} > 0$). We plot $\Phi$, $\rho$, and $\dot{\rho}$ as functions of $\eta$. Each caption for each curve means a background and a bubble (e.g., $\mathrm{dS}-\mathrm{dS}$ means a de Sitter background and a de Sitter bubble).](type2_rhodot_largef "fig:")
$\omega < -3/2$: false vacuum bubbles in true vacuum backgrounds
----------------------------------------------------------------
Second, we consider false vacuum bubbles in true vacuum backgrounds. There are five possibilities: a de Sitter bubble in a de Sitter background, a de Sitter bubble in a flat background, a de Sitter bubble in an-anti de Sitter background, a flat bubble in an anti-de Sitter background, and an anti-de Sitter bubble in an anti-de Sitter background. Also, there are two possibilities for $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}$, depending on whether it is more or less than $1$. Therefore, to study these possibilities, we considered ten potentials, as illustrated in Table \[table:condition2\]. Here, we used $\omega=-2$, and hence it is less than $-3/2$. Figures \[fig:lessFV\] and \[fig:moreFV\] show the potentials we used.
It should be noted that two peaks in potentials in Figures \[fig:lessFV\] and \[fig:moreFV\] are *stable* vacua for $\omega < -3/2$. This is obvious since the dynamics of the field is determined by the field equation in the Lorentzian signatures $$\begin{aligned}
\ddot{\Phi} + 3 \frac{\dot{\rho}}{\rho} \dot{\Phi} = - \frac{1}{2 \omega + 3} \frac{dU}{d\Phi} = \frac{1}{| 2 \omega + 3 |} \frac{dU}{d\Phi},\end{aligned}$$ and hence it is determined by $-U(\Phi)/| 2 \omega + 3 |$.
### $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}<1$
In Figure \[fig:bounce\_lessFV\], we denote bounce solutions for false vacuum bubbles in true vacuum backgrounds by potentials in Figure \[fig:lessFV\] ($\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}<1$). We plot $\Phi$, $\rho$, and $\dot{\rho}$ as functions of $\eta$.
### $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}>1$
In Figure \[fig:bounce\_moreFV\], we denote bounce solutions for false vacuum bubbles in true vacuum backgrounds by potentials in Figure \[fig:moreFV\] ($\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}>1$). We plot $\Phi$, $\rho$, and $\dot{\rho}$ as functions of $\eta$.
We also note that behaviors of $\dot{\rho}$ ($\cos$, $1$, $\cosh$, etc.) are consistent for the inside and the outside of the transition region.
\[sec:via\]False vacuum bubble nucleation via effective potentials
------------------------------------------------------------------
Although $V(\Phi_{\mathrm{t}}) < V(\Phi_{\mathrm{f}})$, if the vacuum energy of $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}$ in the Einstein frame is smaller than that of $\Phi_{\mathrm{t}}$, i.e., $U_{E}(\Phi_{\mathrm{t}}) > U_{E}(\Phi_{\mathrm{f}})$, where $U_{E}$ is the potential in the Einstein frame, then, interestingly, it may be possible to obtain a false vacuum bubble in the Jordan frame, even if $\omega > -3/2$. Note that the dynamics of the Brans-Dicke field is determined by the effective potential $U$. Hence, we also should check whether $U(\Phi_{\mathrm{t}}) > U(\Phi_{\mathrm{f}})$.
Note that such conditions can be represented as $$\begin{aligned}
V(\Phi_{\mathrm{f}})-V(\Phi_{\mathrm{t}}) = \Phi_{\mathrm{f}}^{2} \left( \int_{1}^{\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}} \frac{F(\bar{\Phi})}{\bar{\Phi}^{3}} d \bar{\Phi} + V_{0} \right) - V_{0} > 0\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
U_{E}(\Phi_{\mathrm{f}})-U_{E}(\Phi_{\mathrm{t}}) = \int_{1}^{\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}} \frac{F(\bar{\Phi})}{\bar{\Phi}^{3}} d \bar{\Phi} \equiv \Delta E < 0.\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, we require $V_{0} > \Phi^{2}_{\mathrm{f}} |\Delta E|/ (\Phi^{2}_{\mathrm{f}}-1)$ and we conclude that such false vacuum bubbles can form only in a de Sitter space background ($V_{0}>0$) if $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}} > 1$. (In the next section, we shall discuss that a false vacuum bubble can expand in the Lorentzian signatures only if $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}} > 1$. Hence, we only consider this case.)
If we choose parameters as $\omega = 10$, $A=10^{4}$, $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} = 0.01$, $\delta = -0.001$, and $V_{0}=0.0001$, we obtain potentials for such conditions (Figure \[fig:type3\_potential\]). Here, we plot $V$, $U_{E}$, and $U$. We find that $V(\Phi_{\mathrm{t}}) < V(\Phi_{\mathrm{f}})$, and hence $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}$ is in a false vacuum in the Jordan frame, but $U_{E}(\Phi_{\mathrm{t}}) > U_{E}(\Phi_{\mathrm{f}})$ and $U(\Phi_{\mathrm{t}}) > U(\Phi_{\mathrm{f}})$. Therefore, $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}$ is in a true vacuum in the Einstein frame. If a true vacuum bubble can form in the Einstein frame [@CDL], it will correspond to a false vacuum bubble in the Jordan frame.
We obtained the bounce solution in Figure \[fig:type3\]. Here, we plot $\Phi$, $\rho$, and $\dot{\rho}$. Therefore, we confirmed that a false vacuum bubble is likely to form even in the $\omega > -3/2$ cases.
![\[fig:type3\_potential\]For $\omega = 10$, $A=10^{4}$, $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} = 0.01$, $\delta = -0.001$, and $V_{0}=0.0001$, we plot potentials $V$, $U_{E}$, and $U$.](type3_V "fig:") ![\[fig:type3\_potential\]For $\omega = 10$, $A=10^{4}$, $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} = 0.01$, $\delta = -0.001$, and $V_{0}=0.0001$, we plot potentials $V$, $U_{E}$, and $U$.](type3_U_E "fig:") ![\[fig:type3\_potential\]For $\omega = 10$, $A=10^{4}$, $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} = 0.01$, $\delta = -0.001$, and $V_{0}=0.0001$, we plot potentials $V$, $U_{E}$, and $U$.](type3_U "fig:")
![\[fig:type3\]For $\omega = 10$, $A=10^{4}$, $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} = 0.01$, $\delta = -0.001$, and $V_{0}=0.0001$, we obtained a false vacuum bubble solution. We plot $\Phi$, $\rho$, and $\dot{\rho}$ as functions of $\eta$.](type3_Phi "fig:") ![\[fig:type3\]For $\omega = 10$, $A=10^{4}$, $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} = 0.01$, $\delta = -0.001$, and $V_{0}=0.0001$, we obtained a false vacuum bubble solution. We plot $\Phi$, $\rho$, and $\dot{\rho}$ as functions of $\eta$.](type3_rho "fig:") ![\[fig:type3\]For $\omega = 10$, $A=10^{4}$, $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} = 0.01$, $\delta = -0.001$, and $V_{0}=0.0001$, we obtained a false vacuum bubble solution. We plot $\Phi$, $\rho$, and $\dot{\rho}$ as functions of $\eta$.](type3_rhodot "fig:")
\[sec:Nucandevo\]Nucleation and evolution of vacuum bubbles in the thin wall approximation
==========================================================================================
In this section, we evaluate the probability amplitude of bounces in the thin wall approximation. In the thin wall approximation, we assume that the transition region is sufficiently thin, namely, $$\begin{aligned}
\dot{\Phi}\frac{\dot{\rho}}{\rho} \ll 1,\end{aligned}$$ since $\dot{\Phi} \sim 0$ for the inside and the outside of the wall and $\bar{\rho}$ is sufficiently large on the wall.
We can then approximate the Einstein equation by $$\begin{aligned}
G_{\eta\eta} &=& 3 \frac{\dot{\rho}^{2}-1}{\rho^{2}} = -3 \frac{\dot{\rho}}{\rho} \frac{\dot{\Phi}}{\Phi} + \frac{\omega}{2} \left(\frac{\dot{\Phi}}{\Phi}\right)^{2} - \frac{V}{2\Phi} \\
&\simeq& \frac{\omega}{2} \left(\frac{\dot{\Phi}}{\Phi}\right)^{2} - \frac{V}{2\Phi}.\end{aligned}$$ Then we approximate $\dot{\rho}$ by $$\begin{aligned}
\dot{\rho}^{2} &=& 1 - \rho \dot{\rho} \frac{\dot{\Phi}}{\Phi} + \frac{\rho^{2}}{6 \Phi^{2}} \left( \omega \dot{\Phi}^{2} - \Phi V \right)\\
&\simeq& 1 + \frac{\rho^{2}}{6 \Phi^{2}} \left( \omega \dot{\Phi}^{2} - \Phi V \right),\end{aligned}$$ and obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{d\rho}{d\eta} = \sqrt{1 + \frac{\rho^{2}}{6 \Phi^{2}} \left( \omega \dot{\Phi}^{2} - \Phi V \right)}.\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, inside and outside of the wall, we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:drhodeta}
\frac{d\rho}{d\eta} = \sqrt{1 - \frac{\rho^{2}}{6 \Phi} V}.\end{aligned}$$
Also, we can obtain the following from the field equation by the thin wall approximation: $$\begin{aligned}
\dot{\Phi} \ddot{\Phi} &=& \frac{1}{2} \frac{d \dot{\Phi}^{2}}{d \eta} \\
&\simeq& \left( \frac{1}{2 \omega + 3} \left(\Phi V'(\Phi) - 2V(\Phi)\right) \right) \frac{d \Phi}{d \eta}\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{d\Phi}{d\eta}
%&=& \sqrt{\frac{2}{2 \omega + 3}}\sqrt{\int_{\Phi_{-}}^{\Phi} \left(\bar{\Phi} V'(\bar{\Phi}) - 2V(\bar{\Phi})\right) d \bar{\Phi}-\int_{1}^{\Phi_{-}} \left(\bar{\Phi} V'(\bar{\Phi}) - 2V(\bar{\Phi})\right) d \bar{\Phi}}\\
&=& \sqrt{\frac{2}{2 \omega + 3}} \sqrt{\int_{\Phi_{\mathrm{i}}}^{\Phi}\left( \bar{\Phi} V'(\bar{\Phi}) - 2V(\bar{\Phi}) \right) d \bar{\Phi}}\\
&=& \sqrt{\frac{2}{2 \omega + 3}} \sqrt{U(\Phi)-U(\Phi_{\mathrm{i}})} \label{eq:dPhideta},\end{aligned}$$ where $\Phi_{\mathrm{i}}$ is the field value of the inside of the bubble. Then, if $U(\Phi_{\mathrm{i}}) < U(\Phi)$ and we consider a true vacuum bubble in a false vacuum background, $2 \omega + 3$ should be positive; if $U(\Phi_{\mathrm{i}}) > U(\Phi)$ and we consider a false vacuum bubble in a true vacuum background, $2 \omega + 3$ should be negative. In our previous bounce examples, these correlations hold for all cases.
The probability amplitude is then $$\begin{aligned}
P \sim A e^{-B},\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
B = B_{\mathrm{outside}} + B_{\mathrm{wall}} + B_{\mathrm{inside}}\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
B_{\mathrm{outside}} &=& S_{\mathrm{E}}(\mathrm{bounce}| \rho>\bar{\rho}) - S_{\mathrm{E}}(\mathrm{background}| \rho>\bar{\rho}),\\
B_{\mathrm{wall}} &=& S_{\mathrm{E}}(\mathrm{bounce}| \rho=\bar{\rho}) - S_{\mathrm{E}}(\mathrm{background}| \rho=\bar{\rho}),\\
B_{\mathrm{inside}} &=& S_{\mathrm{E}}(\mathrm{bounce}| \rho<\bar{\rho}) - S_{\mathrm{E}}(\mathrm{background}| \rho<\bar{\rho}).\end{aligned}$$ Here, $S_{\mathrm{E}}(\cdots|\rho>\bar{\rho})$, $S_{\mathrm{E}}(\cdots|\rho=\bar{\rho})$, and $S_{\mathrm{E}}(\cdots|\rho<\bar{\rho})$ denote integrations of the Lagrangian density at the solution (bounce or background) for $\rho>\bar{\rho}$, $\rho=\bar{\rho}$, and $\rho<\bar{\rho}$, respectively.
True vacuum bubbles in a false vacuum background
------------------------------------------------
For a true vacuum bubble in a false vacuum background, we demand the following field combination: $$\begin{aligned}
\Phi(\eta) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
\Phi_{\mathrm{f}} & \rho(\eta) > \bar{\rho},\\
1 & \rho(\eta) < \bar{\rho},
\end{array} \right.\end{aligned}$$ where $\bar{\rho}$ is the location of the wall and the transition region is sufficiently thin. Here, we assume that $$\begin{aligned}
V(\Phi) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
V_{0} & \Phi = 1,\\
\Lambda & \Phi = \Phi_{\mathrm{f}}.
\end{array} \right.\end{aligned}$$
We then obtain the following quantities \[using Equations (\[eq:drhodeta\]) and (\[eq:dPhideta\])\]: $$\begin{aligned}
B_{\mathrm{outside}} &=& 0\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
B_{\mathrm{wall}} &=& \frac{\pi}{4} \int d\eta \left( \bar{\rho}^{3} V(\Phi) - 6 \bar{\rho} \Phi - \bar{\rho}^{3} \Lambda + 6 \bar{\rho} \Phi_{\mathrm{f}} \right) \\
%&=& \frac{\pi}{4} \int_{1}^{\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}} d\Phi \left( \frac{d \eta}{d \Phi} \right) \left( \bar{\rho}^{3} V(\Phi) - 6 \bar{\rho} \Phi - \bar{\rho}^{3} \Lambda + 6 \bar{\rho} \Phi_{\mathrm{f}} \right) \\
&=& \frac{\pi}{4} \sqrt{\left| \frac{2 \omega + 3}{2} \right|} \int_{1}^{\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}} \frac{d\Phi}{\sqrt{\left| U(\Phi)-U(1) \right|}} \left( \bar{\rho}^{3} V(\Phi) - 6 \bar{\rho} \Phi - \bar{\rho}^{3} \Lambda + 6 \bar{\rho} \Phi_{\mathrm{f}} \right) \\
&\equiv& 2 \pi^{2} \bar{\rho}^{3} \sigma(\omega, \bar{\rho}),\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
B_{\mathrm{inside}} &=& \frac{\pi}{4} \int d \eta \left(\rho^{3} V_{0} - 6 \rho - \rho^{3} \Lambda + 6 \rho \Phi_{\mathrm{f}} \right)\\
%&=& \frac{\pi}{4} \left[ \int_{0}^{\bar{\rho}} d \rho \left( \frac{d \eta}{d \rho} \right) \left(\rho^{3} V_{0} - 6 \rho \right) + \int_{0}^{\bar{\rho}} d \rho \left( \frac{d \eta}{d \rho} \right) \left(- \rho^{3} \Lambda + 6 \rho \Phi_{\mathrm{f}} \right) \right]\\
%&=& \frac{3 \pi}{2} \int_{0}^{\bar{\rho}} \rho d \rho \left( - \sqrt{1-\frac{V_{0}}{6}\rho^{2}} + \Phi_{\mathrm{f}} \sqrt{1-\frac{\Lambda}{6 \Phi_{\mathrm{f}}}\rho^{2}} \right)\\
&=& \frac{3 \pi}{2} \left[ - \frac{2}{V_{0}} \left( 1-\left( 1- \frac{V_{0}}{6}\bar{\rho}^{2} \right) ^{3/2}\right) + \frac{2 \Phi_{\mathrm{f}}^{2}}{\Lambda} \left( 1-\left( 1- \frac{\Lambda}{6 \Phi_{\mathrm{f}}}\bar{\rho}^{2} \right) ^{3/2}\right) \right].\end{aligned}$$
Here, we define the tension function of the thin wall $\sigma \equiv B_{\mathrm{wall}}/2 \pi^{2} \bar{\rho}^{3}$ which is a function of $\omega$ and $\bar{\rho}$.
As an example, in Figure \[fig:B\_TV\], we plot the function $B$ for the $\omega = 10$, $A=10^{4}$, $\delta = 0.0025$, $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} = 0.025$, and $V_{0}=0$ case. This figure shows that there is a stationary point that indicates the size of the bubble and probability.
![\[fig:B\_TV\]$B(\bar{\rho})$ for a true vacuum bubble in a false vacuum background: $\omega = 10$, $A=10^{4}$, $\delta = 0.0025$, $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} = 0.025$, and $V_{0}=0$.](B_TV)
![\[fig:B\_type3\]$B(\bar{\rho})$ for a false vacuum bubble in a true vacuum background: $\omega = 10$, $A=10^{4}$, $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} = 0.01$, $\delta = -0.001$, and $V_{0}=0.0001$. Then $V(T) < V(F)$ and $U_{E}(T) > U_{E}(F)$.](B_type3)
False vacuum bubbles in a true vacuum background
------------------------------------------------
We demand the following field combination: $$\begin{aligned}
\Phi(\eta) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
1 & \rho(\eta) > \bar{\rho},\\
\Phi_{\mathrm{f}} & \rho(\eta) < \bar{\rho},
\end{array} \right.\end{aligned}$$ where $\bar{\rho}$ is the location of the wall and the transition region is sufficiently thin. Here, we assume that $$\begin{aligned}
V(\Phi) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
V_{0} & \Phi = 1,\\
\Lambda & \Phi = \Phi_{\mathrm{f}}.
\end{array} \right.\end{aligned}$$
Then, as in the previous subsection, we obtain the following quantities \[using Equations (\[eq:drhodeta\]) and (\[eq:dPhideta\])\]: $$\begin{aligned}
B_{\mathrm{outside}} &=& 0,\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
B_{\mathrm{wall}} &=& \frac{\pi}{4} \int d\eta \left( \bar{\rho}^{3} V(\Phi) - 6 \bar{\rho} \Phi - \bar{\rho}^{3} V_{0} + 6 \bar{\rho} \right) \\
%&=& \frac{\pi}{4} \int_{\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}}^{1} d\Phi \left( \frac{d \eta}{d \Phi} \right) \left( \bar{\rho}^{3} V(\Phi) - 6 \bar{\rho} \Phi - \bar{\rho}^{3} V_{0} + 6 \bar{\rho} \right) \\
&=& \frac{\pi}{4} \sqrt{\left| \frac{2 \omega + 3}{2} \right|} \int_{\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}}^{1} \frac{d\Phi}{\sqrt{\left| U(\Phi)-U(\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}) \right|}} \left( \bar{\rho}^{3} V(\Phi) - 6 \bar{\rho} \Phi - \bar{\rho}^{3} V_{0} + 6 \bar{\rho} \right) \\
&\equiv& 2 \pi^{2} \bar{\rho}^{3} \sigma(\omega, \bar{\rho}),\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
B_{\mathrm{inside}} &=& \frac{\pi}{4} \int d \eta \left(\rho^{3} \Lambda - 6 \rho \Phi_{\mathrm{f}} - \rho^{3} V_{0} + 6 \rho \right)\\
%&=& \frac{\pi}{4} \left[ \int_{0}^{\bar{\rho}} d \rho \left( \frac{d \eta}{d \rho} \right) \left( \rho^{3} \Lambda - 6 \rho \Phi_{\mathrm{f}} \right) - \int_{0}^{\bar{\rho}} d \rho \left( \frac{d \eta}{d \rho} \right) \left(\rho^{3} V_{0} - 6 \rho \right) \right]\\
%&=& \frac{3 \pi}{2} \int_{0}^{\bar{\rho}} \rho d \rho \left( - \Phi_{\mathrm{f}} \sqrt{1-\frac{\Lambda}{6 \Phi_{\mathrm{f}}}\rho^{2}} + \sqrt{1-\frac{V_{0}}{6}\rho^{2}} \right)\\
&=& \frac{3 \pi}{2} \left[ - \frac{2 \Phi_{\mathrm{f}}^{2}}{\Lambda} \left( 1-\left( 1- \frac{\Lambda}{6 \Phi_{\mathrm{f}}}\bar{\rho}^{2} \right) ^{3/2}\right) + \frac{2}{V_{0}} \left( 1-\left( 1- \frac{V_{0}}{6}\bar{\rho}^{2} \right) ^{3/2}\right) \right].\end{aligned}$$
As an example, in Figure \[fig:B\_type3\], we plot the function $B$ for the $\omega = 10$, $A=10^{4}$, $\Phi_{\mathrm{f}}-\Phi_{\mathrm{t}} = 0.01$, $\delta = -0.001$, and $V_{0}=0.0001$ case. This figure shows that there is a stationary point that indicates the size of the bubble and probability.
Dynamics of vacuum bubbles in the Lorentzian signatures
-------------------------------------------------------
Let us assume that a thin wall bubble has a field value $\Phi_{-}$ inside of it and $\Phi_{+}$ outside of it. The junction equation then takes the following form [@Lee:2010yd]: $$\label{eq:jc001}
\epsilon_{-} \Phi_{-}\sqrt{\dot{\bar{\rho}}^2 + f_{-}} - \epsilon_{+} \Phi_{+} \sqrt{\dot{\bar{\rho}}^2 + f_{+}} = 4\pi \bar{\rho} \sigma_{0},$$ where $$f_{\pm} = 1 - \frac{V(\Phi_{\pm})}{6\Phi_{\pm}}\bar{\rho}^{2}$$ and $\epsilon_{\pm}$ are $+1$ if the outward normal to the wall is pointing towards increasing $\bar{\rho}$ and $-1$ if pointing towards decreasing $\bar{\rho}$.
Note that the true vacuum bubble case and the false vacuum case can be interchanged by $- \leftrightarrows +$ of each subscript and by $\sigma \rightarrow - \sigma$. Then, it is equivalent to the change $\epsilon_{\pm} \rightarrow - \epsilon_{\pm}$ and the flip $- \leftrightarrows +$ of each subscript. However, to obtain the potential $V_{\mathrm{eff}}(\bar{\rho})$ which obeys $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{2}\dot{\bar{\rho}}^{2} + V_{\mathrm{eff}}(\bar{\rho}) = 0,\end{aligned}$$ we do not need to know the signs of each root. Therefore, the analysis of effective potentials is the same for both cases.
The authors studied the effective potential $V_{\mathrm{eff}}$ in [@Lee:2010yd] for false vacuum bubbles. It was realized that there are two effective potentials $V^{(1,2)}_{\mathrm{eff}}(\bar{\rho})$, and it is not difficult to confirm that each effective potential is a monotonically decreasing function. Therefore, the causal structures are determined by $\epsilon_{\pm}$ in the $\bar{\rho} \rightarrow \infty$ limit. The sign structures for $\epsilon_{\pm}$ are given in Tables \[table:true\] and \[table:false\]. (We used the results in [@Lee:2010yd] to obtain Table \[table:false\], and we flipped the signs to obtain Table \[table:true\]: $\epsilon_{\pm} \rightarrow - \epsilon_{\pm}$ and flip $- \leftrightarrows +$.) Also, the contents of each root never become zero; this implies that the asymptotic $\epsilon_{\pm}$ is always correct for our cases.
$\Phi_{+} > 1$ $\Phi_{+} < 1$
---------------------- ---------------- ----------------
$\epsilon^{(1)}_{+}$ $\pm$ $\pm$
$\epsilon^{(1)}_{-}$ $+$ $+$
$\epsilon^{(2)}_{+}$ $-$ $+$
$\epsilon^{(2)}_{-}$ $-$ $+$
: \[table:true\]Summary of the signs for true vacuum bubbles. The $\pm$ depends on tensions.
$\Phi_{-} > 1$ $\Phi_{-} < 1$
---------------------- ---------------- ----------------
$\epsilon^{(1)}_{+}$ $-$ $-$
$\epsilon^{(1)}_{-}$ $\mp$ $\mp$
$\epsilon^{(2)}_{+}$ $+$ $-$
$\epsilon^{(2)}_{-}$ $+$ $-$
: \[table:false\]Summary of the signs for false vacuum bubbles. The $\mp$ depends on tensions.
If we vary $B = B_{\mathrm{outside}} + B_{\mathrm{wall}} + B_{\mathrm{inside}}$ with respect to $\bar{\rho}$ for both the true and false vacuum bubble cases, we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
0=\frac{\partial B}{\partial \bar{\rho}} &=& 6 \pi^{2} \bar{\rho}^{2} \sigma(\omega,\bar{\rho}) + 2 \pi^{2} \bar{\rho}^{3} \frac{\partial \sigma(\omega, \bar{\rho})}{\partial \bar{\rho}} + \frac{3 \pi}{2} \bar{\rho} \left( - \Phi_{-} \sqrt{f_{-}} + \Phi_{+} \sqrt{f_{+}} \right)\\
%&=& 2 \pi^{2} \bar{\rho}^{3} \frac{\partial \sigma}{\partial \bar{\rho}} + \frac{3 \pi}{2} \bar{\rho} \left( 4 \pi \bar{\rho} \sigma - \Phi_{-} \sqrt{f_{-}} + \Phi_{+} \sqrt{f_{+}} \right)\\
&=& \frac{3 \pi}{2} \bar{\rho} \left( 4 \pi \bar{\rho} \left(\frac{\bar{\rho}}{3}\frac{\partial \sigma}{\partial \bar{\rho}}+ \sigma\right) - \Phi_{-} \sqrt{f_{-}} + \Phi_{+} \sqrt{f_{+}} \right).\end{aligned}$$ If we define $\sigma_{0} \equiv \frac{\bar{\rho}}{3}\frac{\partial \sigma}{\partial \bar{\rho}}+ \sigma$, we can derive the solution of Equation (\[eq:jc001\]) and $\epsilon_{\pm} = + 1$. This smoothly joins the Euclidean patch to the Lorentzian patch at the $t=0$ surface.
Here, $\epsilon_{\pm} = + 1$ implies that for true vacuum bubbles, we use $V^{(1)}_{\mathrm{eff}}$ or $V^{(2)}_{\mathrm{eff}}$ with $\Phi_{+} < 1$; $\Phi_{+} > 1$ and $V^{(2)}_{\mathrm{eff}}$ is disallowed. However, for false vacuum bubbles, only $\Phi_{-} > 1$ and $V^{(2)}_{\mathrm{eff}}$ is allowed. For each allowed case, $\epsilon_{\pm} = +1$ implies that each bubble expands over the background. For the false vacuum case, the result is consistent with our previous paper [@Lee:2010yd]: the only expanding bubble in a nearly flat background is for the $\Phi_{-} > 1$ and $V^{(2)}_{\mathrm{eff}}$ case.
For all cases, if the solution is allowed, $\epsilon_{\pm} = +1$ implies that each bubble can expand over the background. For a false vacuum bubble case, $\Phi_{-} > 1$ is not allowed and may imply that such a bubble is unstable even though it may be nucleated. For allowed false vacuum solutions, the causal structure of the wall is given by Figure \[fig:thinshell\]. For a false vacuum bubble, there is a time when a false vacuum bubble is larger than the inner cosmological horizon, while it is smaller than the outer cosmological horizon. In this case, if one transmits a pulse of energy to the bubble and induces an apparent horizon, and if the apparent horizon is larger than the size of the bubble, a de Sitter black hole can be seen that separates the inside bubble universe from the outside.
![\[fig:thinshell\]Causal structures for $\mathrm{dS}-\mathrm{dS}$ cases. For a true vacuum bubble, the inside cosmological horizon is larger than the outside cosmological horizon; for a false vacuum bubble, the inside cosmological horizon is smaller than the outside cosmological horizon.](thinshell)
\[sec:Dis\]Discussion
=====================
In this paper, we explored the nucleation of vacuum bubbles in the Brans-Dicke type theory of gravity. In the Euclidean signature, we first evaluated the fields at the vacuum bubbles as solutions of the Euler-Lagrange equations of motion. Second, we calculated the bubble nucleation probabilities by integrating the Euclidean action assuming the thin wall approximation.
We illustrated three possible ways to obtain vacuum bubbles: true vacuum bubbles for $\omega > -3/2$, false vacuum bubbles for $\omega < -3/2$, and false vacuum bubbles for $\omega > -3/2$ when the vacuum energy of the false vacuum in the potential of the Einstein frame is *less* than that of the true vacuum. After the bubble is nucleated at the $t=0$ surface, we can smoothly interpolate the field combinations to some solutions of the Lorentzian signature and consistently continue their subsequent evolutions.
Next, it might be relevant to address the issue of the conformal frame choice between the Jordan frame and the Einstein frame. In the previous work [@Lee:2010yd], we studied dynamics of expanding small false vacuum bubbles in the Brans-Dicke theory by using the thin wall approximation. The effect of the non-minimal coupling of the Brans-Dicke field makes the effective tension of the wall negative, and therefore the small false vacuum bubble can expand to the surrounding background. If there is an expanding small false vacuum bubble, it will violate the null energy condition around the wall when it begins to inflate [@Lee:2010yd][@Hansen:2009kn]. If we consider this fact, for false vacuum bubbles with $\omega < -3/2$, the nucleation of the bubbles is not strange since $\omega < -3/2$ means that the conformal transformation is not well defined or the defined scalar field in the Einstein frame behaves as a ghost since its kinetic term in the Lagrangian fails to be positive definite and becomes negative. However, if a false vacuum bubble for $\omega > -3/2$ is possible, it seems to be strange. In the Jordan frame, this is not a problem since working in the Jordan frame can violate the null energy condition [@Kang:1996rj]; however, working in the Einstein frame with $\omega > -3/2$ does not violate the null energy condition and it would be a problem. In the present work, however, our solution does not suffer from this paradoxical situation, since a false vacuum bubble in the Jordan frame corresponds to a true vacuum bubble in the Einstein frame. In the Einstein frame, therefore, there is no reason to conclude that such a bubble violates the null energy condition. Also, it is not so strange, although we obtain a small false vacuum bubble, since the nucleation of a true vacuum bubble in the Einstein frame is generally possible. [^7]
Then, two interesting questions arise. First, could we define and perform the conformal transformation on the wall? Second, which conformal frame would be physical? Indeed, this is a long-standing problem which has not been resolved yet. In addition, for the gravity theory with only tensor degrees of freedom, the choice of relevant conformal frame via conformal transformations is the usual issue to address. For the scalar-tensor gravity theories such as the present Brans-Dicke type theory or the superstring theories, however, the conformal transformation needs to be extended to the Weyl rescaling. Therefore, when one investigates the physical characteristics of a conformal frame, the Weyl rescaling of the scalar field should be carefully taken into account as well for a consistent study. In the present work, however, this issue has not been properly addressed but we expect that even if we consider the Weyl rescaling of the scalar degree of freedom, the conclusions presented in the present work would remain essentially the same.
If the Einstein frame is physical, our conclusions in Section \[sec:via\] will be irrelevant, and further studies of the nucleation of small false vacuum bubbles should be done. However, if the Jordan frame were physical, the generation of a small false vacuum bubble would be allowed. It is known that there is controversy regarding the latter question [@Faraoni:2004pi], and the most conservative interpretation is that the two frames are equivalent, at least at the classical level. If we include quantum effects in a given frame, then the frame would be physical. In this sense, the choice of the Jordan frame is still a viable option. We leave these two questions open until they can be answered in the future work.
We now conclude that, in general, the scalar-tensor theories or the Brans-Dicke type theories, which may include and represent certain features of string theory, allow vacuum bubble solutions, not only true vacuum bubbles but also false vacuum bubbles. One potential problem is that, if we wish to derive a scalar-tensor or Brans-Dicke type model from string theory, it would be in dilaton gravity; but in dilaton gravity, the potential of the dilaton field would be restricted by the theory. If we assume a special condition on the potential, then dilaton gravity could generate a false vacuum bubble; however, it is still unclear whether dilaton gravity can indeed admit such a special potential. Therefore, we also leave this question open for future work.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
DY would like to thank Ewan Stewart for discussions and encouragement. DY and YJL were supported by Korea Research Foundation Grants No. KRF-313-2007-C00164 and No. KRF-341-2007-C00010 funded by the Korean government (MOEHRD) and BK21. DY, BHL and WL were supported by a Korea Science and Engineering Foundation (KOSEF) grant funded by the Korean government (MEST) through the Center for Quantum Spacetime (CQUeST) of Sogang University with Grant No. R11 - 2005 - 021. WL was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea funded by the Korean Government (Ministry of Education, Science and Technology) Grant No. NRF-2010-355-C00017. HK was supported by the research fund of the KVN division at KASI.
[99]{}
C. Brans and C. H. Dicke, Phys. Rev. [**124**]{}, 925 (1961).
C. M. Will, [*“Was Einstein Right?,”*]{} New York, Basic Books (1986).
S. Weinberg, [*“Gravitation and Cosmology,”*]{} New York, John Wiley and Sons (1972).
H. Kim, Phys. Lett. B [**606**]{}, 223 (2005);\
H. Kim, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**364**]{}, 813 (2005);\
T. H. Lee and B. J. Lee, Phys. Rev. D [**69**]{}, 127502 (2004);\
H. W. Lee, K. Y. Kim and Y. S. Myung, Eur. Phys. J. C [**71**]{}, 1585 (2011). M. B. Voloshin, I. Yu. Kobzarev, and L. B. Okun, Yad. Fiz. [**20**]{}, 1229 (1974) \[Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. [**20**]{}, 644 (1975)\];\
S. R. Coleman, Phys. Rev. D [**15**]{}, 2929 (1977) \[Erratum-ibid. Phys. Rev. D [**16**]{}, 1248 (1977)\];\
C. G. Callan and S. R. Coleman, Phys. Rev. D [**16**]{}, 1762 (1977).
S. R. Coleman and F. De Luccia, Phys. Rev. D [**21**]{}, 3305 (1980).
S. Parke, Phys. Lett. [**121B**]{}, 313 (1983).
W. Lee, B. H. Lee, C. H. Lee and C. Park, Phys. Rev. D [**74**]{}, 123520 (2006) \[arXiv:hep-th/0604064\];\
W. Lee, C. Park, B.-H. Lee, and C. H. Lee, J. Korean Phys. Soc. [**50**]{}, S85 (2007);\
B. H. Lee, C. H. Lee, W. Lee, S. Nam and C. Park, Phys. Rev. D [**77**]{}, 063502 (2008) \[arXiv:0710.4599 \[hep-th\]\];\
B. H. Lee, C. H. Lee, W. Lee, S. Nam and C. Park, J. Korean Phys. Soc. [**53**]{}, 1101 (2008).
V. Faraoni, [*“Cosmology in scalar tensor gravity,”*]{} Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers (2004).
B. Bertotti, L. Iess and P. Tortora, Nature [**425**]{}, 374 (2003).
M. Gasperini, [*“Elements of string cosmology,”*]{} Cambridge, Cambridge University Press (2007).
S. Foffa, M. Maggiore and R. Sturani, Nucl. Phys. B [**552**]{}, 395 (1999) \[arXiv:hep-th/9903008\]. L. Randall and R. Sundrum, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**83**]{}, 3370 (1999) \[arXiv:hep-ph/9905221\].
J. Garriga and T. Tanaka, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**84**]{}, 2778 (2000) \[arXiv:hep-th/9911055\].
Y. Fujii and K. Maeda, [*“The scalar-tensor theory of gravitation,”*]{} Cambridge, Cambridge University Press (2003).
B.-H. Lee and W. Lee, Classical Quantum Gravity [**26**]{}, 225002 (2009) \[arXiv:0809.4907\].
K. M. Lee and E. J. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. D [**36**]{}, 1088 (1987).
B. H. Lee, W. Lee and D. Yeom, JCAP [**1101**]{}, 005 (2011) \[arXiv:1006.3127 \[gr-qc\]\]. J. Hansen, D. Hwang and D. Yeom, JHEP [**0911**]{}, 016 (2009) \[arXiv:0908.0283 \[gr-qc\]\]. G. Kang, Phys. Rev. D [**54**]{}, 7483 (1996) \[arXiv:gr-qc/9606020\];\
D. Hwang and D. Yeom, Class. Quant. Grav. [**27**]{}, 205002 (2010) \[arXiv:1002.4246 \[gr-qc\]\].
[^1]: [email protected]
[^2]: [email protected]
[^3]: [email protected]
[^4]: [email protected]
[^5]: [email protected]
[^6]: CQUeST-2011-0404
[^7]: In Einstein gravity, the nucleation of a large false vacuum bubble is possible in the de Sitter space [@LW]. The possible types in de Sitter space have been studied in [@LL]. The relation of vacuum bubble solutions between the Jordan frame and the Einstein frame should be clarified, and we open this issue for future work, whether it corresponds to a true/false vacuum bubble or to a small/large vacuum bubble.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We consider the Bilevel Knapsack with Interdiction Constraints, an extension of the classic 0-1 knapsack problem formulated as a Stackelberg game with two agents, a leader and a follower, that choose items from a common set and hold their own private knapsacks. First, the leader selects some items to be interdicted for the follower while satisfying a capacity constraint. Then the follower packs a set of the remaining items according to his knapsack constraint in order to maximize the profits. The goal of the leader is to minimize the follower’s profits. The presence of two decision levels makes this problem very difficult to solve in practice: the current state-of-the-art algorithms can solve to optimality instances with 50-55 items at most. We derive effective lower bounds and present a new exact approach that exploits the structure of the induced follower’s problem. The approach successfully solves all benchmark instances within one second in the worst case and larger instances with up to 500 items within 60 seconds.'
address:
- |
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Gestionale e della Produzione, Politecnico di Torino,\
Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24, 10129 Torino, Italy,\
[{federico.dellacroce, rosario.scatamacchia}@polito.it ]{}
- 'CNR, IEIIT, Torino, Italy'
author:
- Federico Della Croce
- Rosario Scatamacchia
title: A new exact approach for the Bilevel Knapsack with Interdiction Constraints
---
Bilevel Knapsack with Interdiction Constraints ,Exact approach ,Bilevel programming
Introduction {#sec:Intro}
============
In the recent years, a growing attention has been centered to multilevel programming. This emerging field considers optimization problems with a hierarchal structure where many decision makers sequentially operate to reach conflicting objectives. Each agent takes decisions that may affect objectives and decisions of the agents at lower levels. At the same time, the latter decisions impact on the objectives of the agents at upper levels. Hierarchal contexts arise in many real-life applications in supply chains, energy sector, logistics and telecommunication networks among others. The presence of many decision levels makes these problems very challenging to solve.\
The most relevant research in the field has been pursued for bilevel optimization where two agents, denoted as a leader and a follower, play a Stackelberg game ([@St52]). In this game, the leader takes the first decision and then the follower reacts taking into account the leader’s strategy. Eventually, the agents receive a pay-off which depends on both leader’s and follower’s choices. The goal is typically to find a strategy for the leader that optimizes his own objective. Two standard assumptions are considered in a Stackelberg game: *perfect knowledge*, that is each agent knows the problem solved by the other agent; *rationale behavior*, namely each agent has no interest in deviating from his own objective.\
Bilevel optimization considers Mixed-Integer Bilevel Linear Programs (MIBLP) where both the leader and the follower solve a combinatorial optimization problem with linear objective function and constraints and with either continuous or integer variables. The first generic Branch and Bound approach for MIBLP was provided in [@BaMo90]. Branch and Cut schemes were introduced in [@DeRa09], [@Den11]. Further approaches were proposed in [@CaMa15; @FiLjMoSi16; @XuWa14]. An improved generic MIBLP solver has been recently proposed in [@FiLjMoSi17]. We refer to [@FiLjMoSi17] and the references therein for an overview on MIBLP solvers and related applications.\
In this paper, we consider the Bilevel Knapsack with Interdiction Constraints (BKP), as introduced in [@Den11]. The problem is an extension of the classic 0-1 Knapsack Problem (KP) (see monographs [@KePfPi04] and [@MarTot90]) formulated as a Stackelberg game. More precisely, the leader and the follower choose items from a common set and hold their own private knapsacks. First, the leader selects some items to be interdicted for the follower while satisfying a capacity constraint. Then the follower packs a set of the remaining items according to his knapsack constraint in order to maximize the profits. The goal of the leader is to minimize the follower’s profits.\
In [@CaCarLoWo13] it is shown that BKP is $\Sigma_{2}^p$-complete in the polynomial hierarchy complexity. Essentially, BKP cannot be formulated as a single level problem unless the polynomial hierarchy collapses (as also pointed out in [@CaCarLoWo16]). This makes the problem even more difficult to solve than an NP-Complete problem. We refer to [@Je85] for an introduction on polynomial hierarchy.\
One of the best performing algorithms for BKP is given in [@CaCarLoWo16]. The algorithm, denoted as CCLW, relies on the dualization of the continuous relaxation of the follower’s problem and on iteratively computing upper bounds for the problem until a stopping criterion applies. The approach is motivated by the lack of significant lower bounds for the problem. Algorithm CCLW solves to optimality instances with 50 items within a CPU time limit of 3600 seconds, running out of time in instances with 55 items only. Very recently, an improved branch-and-cut algorithm has been given in [@FiLjMoSi18]. The proposed approach manages to solve to optimality all benchmark instances in [@CaCarLoWo16], requiring at most a computation time of about 85 seconds in an instance with 55 items. However, no computational evidence is provided in [@FiLjMoSi18] about the performance of the derived algorithm on larger instances. We also mention the work of [@FiMoSiEJOR18] where a heuristic approach is proposed for BKP and for other interdiction games. Other bilevel knapsack problems have been tackled in the literature. We mention the work in [@BrHaMa13] where the leader cannot interdict items but modifies the follower’s capacity. In [@ChZh13], the leader can modify the follower’s objective function only. As discussed in [@CaCarLoWo16], these knapsack problems are easier to handle than BKP. Recently, a polynomial algorithm has been provided in [@CaLoMa18] for the BKP variation where the follower solves a continuous knapsack problem.\
Our contribution for BKP is twofold. First, we derive effective lower bounds based on mathematical programming. Second, we present a new exact approach that exploits the induced follower’s problem and the derived lower bounds. The proposed approach shows up to be very effective successfully solving all benchmark literature instances provided in [@CaCarLoWo16] within few seconds of computation. Moreover, our algorithm manages to solve to optimality instances with up to 500 items within a CPU time limit of 60 seconds.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section \[sec:themodel\], the bilevel linear programming formulation of the problem is introduced. In Section \[sec:LB\], we discuss the lower bounds for BKP. We outline the proposed exact solution approach in Section \[sec:ExaApp\] and discuss the computational results in Section \[sec:ComRes\]. Section \[sec:Concl\] provides some concluding remarks.
Notation and problem formulation {#sec:themodel}
================================
In BKP a set of $n$ items and two knapsacks are given. Each item $i$ $(=1,\dots, n)$ has associated a profit $p_i > 0$ and a weight $w_i > 0$ for the follower’s knapsack and a weight $v_i > 0$ for the leader’s knapsack. Leader and follower have different knapsack capacities denoted by $C_u$ and $C_l$, respectively. Quantities $p_i$, $v_i$, $w_i$ $(i=1,\dots, n)$, $C_u$, $C_l$ are assumed to be integer, with $v_i < C_u$ and $w_i < C_l$ for all $i$. To avoid trivial instances, it is also assumed that $\sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} v_{i} > C_u$ and $\sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} w_{i} > C_l$. We introduce $0/1$ variables $x_i$ $(i=1, \dots,n)$ equal to one if the leader selects items $i$ and $0/1$ variables $y_i$ equal to one if item $i$ is chosen by the follower. BKP can be modeled as follows:
$$\begin{aligned}
\text{min}\quad & \sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} p_{i}y_{i} \label{eq:ObjL}\\
\text{subject to}\quad
& \sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} v_{i}x_{i} \leq C_u \label{eq:capL}\\
& x_{i} \in\{0,1\} \qquad i= 1,\dots,n \label{eq:varDefX} \\
\text{where $y_1, \dots, y_n$ solve} \nonumber\\
\text{the follower's problem:}\quad
\text{max}\quad & \sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} p_{i}y_{i} \label{eq:ObjF}\\
\text{subject to}\quad
& \sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} w_{i}y_{i} \leq C_l \label{eq:capF}\\
&y_{i} \leq 1 - x_{i} \qquad i= 1,\dots,n \label{eq:Interd} \\
&y_{i} \in\{0,1\} \qquad i= 1,\dots,n \label{eq:varDefY} \end{aligned}$$
The leader’s objective function minimizes the profits of the follower through the interdiction constraints . These constraints ensure that each item $i$ can be selected by the follower, i.e. $y_i \leq 1$, only if the item is not interdicted by the leader, i.e. $x_i = 0$. Constraint represents the leader’s capacity constraint. The objective function maximizes the follower’s profits and constraint represents the follower’s capacity constraint. Constraints and define the domain of the variables.
The optimal solution value of model - is denoted by $z^*$. The optimal solution vectors of variables $x_i$ and $y_i$ are respectively denoted by $x^*$ and $y^*$. Notice that in model - there always exists an optimal solution for the leader which is maximal, namely where items are included in the leader’s knapsack until there is no enough capacity left. Let us now recall the optimal solution of the continuous relaxation of a standard KP, namely the follower’s model - without constraints and constraints replaced by inclusion in $[0, 1]$. Under the assumption $\sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} w_{i} > C_l$, this solution has the following structure. Consider the sorting of the items by non-increasing ratios of profits over weights:
$$\label{eq:SortByEff}
\frac{p_1}{w_1} \geq \frac{p_2}{w_2} \geq \dots \geq \frac{p_n}{w_n}.$$
According to this order, items $j = 1,2,\dots$ are inserted into the knapsack as long as $\sum\limits_{k=1}^{j} w_{k} \leq C_l$. The first item $s$ which cannot be fully packed is commonly denoted in the knapsack literature as the *split* item (or *break*/*critical* item). The optimal solution of the KP linear relaxation is given by setting $y_j = 1$ for $j= 1,\dots,s-1$, $y_j = 0$ for $j= s+1,\dots,n$ and $y_s = (C_l - \sum\limits_{j=1}^{s-1} w_j)/w_s$. The solution with items $1, \dots, (s-1)$ is a feasible solution for KP and is commonly denoted as the *split solution*. In the remainder of the paper, we assume the ordering of the items . We denote by $KP(x)$ the follower’s knapsack problem induced by a leader’s strategy encoded in vector $x$, i.e. a knapsack problem with item set $$S:=\{i: x_i = 0, x_i \in x \}.$$ We also denote by $KP^{LP}(x)$ the corresponding Linear Programming (LP) relaxation. If $\sum_{i \in S} w_i > C_l$, we define the *critical* item $c$ of $KP^{LP}(x)$ as the last item with a strictly positive value in its optimal solution. Thus, we have $y_c \in (0, 1]$ and a corresponding split solution with profit $$\label{eq:SplitSol}
\sum\limits_{i \in S: i < c} p_i = \sum\limits_{i = 1}^{c-1} p_i(1 - x_i)$$ which constitutes a feasible solution for $KP(x)$. Notice that we denote by $z(M)$ the optimal solution value of any given mathematical model $M$.
Computing lower bounds on BKP {#sec:LB}
=============================
Consider the optimal solution vector $x^*$. In the induced follower’s knapsack problem $KP(x^*)$ with item set $S$, two cases can occur: either there is no critical item in $KP^{LP}(x^*)$, namely $\sum_{i \in S} w_i \leq C_l$, or one critical item exists, namely $\sum_{i \in S} w_i > C_l$. The first case can be easily handled by considering that the follower will pack all items not interdicted by the leader. This case is discussed in Section \[NOcrit\].\
In the second case, we derive effective lower bounds on BKP that constitute the main ingredient of the exact approach presented in Section \[sec:ExaApp\]. Since we don’t know a priori the leader’s optimal solution $x^*$, we proceed by guessing the critical item of $KP^{LP}(x^*)$, namely we formulate an Integer Linear Programming (ILP) model where we impose that a given item $c$ must be critical and evaluate the profit of the corresponding split solution. We consider binary variables $k_j$ $(j= 1, \dots, w_c)$ associated with the weight contribution of the critical item and introduce the following model (denoted as $CRIT_1(c)$).
$$\begin{aligned}
\text{min}\quad & \sum\limits_{i=1}^{c-1} p_{i}(1-x_i) \label{eq:ObjCRIT}\\
\text{subject to}\quad
& \sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} v_{i}x_{i} \leq C_u \label{eq:capLeadCRIT}\\
& \sum\limits_{i=1}^{c-1} w_{i}(1-x_{i}) + \sum\limits_{j=1}^{w_c} jk_j = C_l \label{eq:capFollCRIT}\\
& \sum\limits_{j=1}^{w_c} k_j = 1 \label{eq:capSOSCRIT}\\
& x_c = 0 \label{eq:NotInterCRIT}\\
& x_{i} \in\{0,1\} \qquad i= 1,\dots,n \label{eq:varDefXCRIT} \\
& k_{j} \in\{0,1\} \qquad j= 1,\dots,w_c \label{eq:varDefKCRIT} \end{aligned}$$
The objective function minimizes the value of the split solution. Constraint represents the leader’s capacity constraint. Constraints and ensure that item $c$ is critical as it is the last item packed, with a weight in the interval $[1, w_c]$. Constraint indicates that item $c$ can be critical only if it is not interdicted by the leader. Constraints and indicate that all variables are binary. We can state the following proposition.
\[firstProp\] If there exists a critical item $c$ in $KP^{LP}(x^*)$, then $z(CRIT_1(c))$ is a valid lower bound on $z^*$.
Under the assumption that item $c$ is critical in $KP^{LP}(x^*)$, the optimal BKP solution $x^*$ constitutes a feasible solution for model $CRIT_1(c)$. Let denote by $z_1$ the corresponding solution value that coincides with the value of the split solution in $KP(x^*)$. Since the follower maximizes the profits in $KP(x^*)$ obtaining a solution with a value greater than (or equal to) the one of the split solution, we have $z_1 \leq z^*$. But this means that there exists an optimal solution of model $CRIT_1(c)$ such that $z(CRIT_1(c)) \leq z_1$ which implies a lower bound on $z^*$.
The previous proposition already provides a first significant lower bound for the problem. However, following the reasoning in the proof of Proposition \[firstProp\], we remark that improved bounds on $z^*$ can be derived by considering any feasible solution for $KP(x^*)$ that might be obtained by removing (adding) items that were not interdicted by the leader and that were selected (not selected) by the split solution, provided that the follower capacity is not exceeded. Indeed, this corresponds to removing tuples of items $i \in [1,c-1]: x_i=0$ and/or to adding tuples of items $i \in [c,n]: x_i=0$ from the split solution without exceeding the follower capacity.
Notice that, the state-of-the-art algorithms for KP, *Minknap* ([@Pis97]) and *Combo* ([@MarPisTot99]) consider that in general only few items with ratio $p_i/w_i$ close to that of the critical item change their values in an optimal solution with respect to the values taken in the split solution. These items constitute the so-called *core* of the knapsack. *Minknap* and *Combo* start with the computation of the split solution and an expanding core initialized with the critical item only. Then, the algorithms iteratively enlarge the core by evaluating both the removal of items from the split solution and the addition of items after the critical item. The empirical evidence illustrates that an optimal (or close to be optimal) KP solution is typically found after few iterations.
We cannot precisely characterize the features of these exact algorithms by a set of constraints within an ILP model, but we can mimic the same algorithmic reasoning by considering subsets of the items set $c-\delta,...,c+\delta$ including the critical item $c$ for any given core size $2\delta+1$. In each subset, the items $i: i \leq c-1$ are removed from the split solution, while the items $j: j \geq c$ are added to the solution. Correspondingly, the initial profit and weight of the split solution are modified by subtracting the profits and the weights of the removed items and by summing up the profits and the weights of the added items.
Then, for any given subset $\tau$ of the items set $c-\delta,...,c+\delta$, let $p^{\tau}$ and $w^{\tau}$ be the overall profit (namely the value of the improvement upon the split solution) and weight contributions of the items in $\tau$, namely: $$\begin{aligned}
p^{\tau} = -\sum\limits_{i \in \tau: i < c} p_i + \sum\limits_{j \in \tau: j \geq c} p_j; \label{pT}\\
w^{\tau} = -\sum\limits_{i \in \tau: i < c} w_i + \sum\limits_{j \in \tau: j \geq c} w_j. \label{wT}\end{aligned}$$
A subset $\tau$ with $p^\tau \leq 0$ is not considered since it does not improve upon the split solution. Instead, an improving subset with $p^\tau > 0$ is feasible only if $w^{\tau} \leq w_c$ and all items in $\tau$ are not interdicted by the leader. In that case, by keeping the notation of model $CRIT_1(c)$, an improvement $\pi$ can be determined if the following constraint is added:
$$\label{TupleCons}
\pi \geq p^\tau(\sum\limits_{j = \max\{1;w^\tau\}}^{w_c} k_j - \sum\limits_{i \in \tau} x_i).
$$
Correspondingly, a new model can be generated by introducing a non-negative variable $\pi$ that carries the maximum additional profit to the split solution value provided by any of the additional constraints (\[TupleCons\]) indicated above. These constraints, denoted as $\mathcal{F}(\pi, x, k)$, link variable $\pi$ to variables $x_i$ and $k_j$. The model (denoted as $CRIT_2(c)$) is as follows.\
[$\quad CRIT_2(c)$:]{} $$\begin{aligned}
\text{min}\quad & \sum\limits_{i=1}^{c-1} p_{i}(1-x_i) + \pi \label{eq:ObjCRIT2}\\
\text{subject to}\quad
& \mathcal{F}(\pi,x,k) \label{genConstonPi2} \\
& \eqref{eq:capLeadCRIT}, \eqref{eq:varDefKCRIT} \tag*{} \\
& \pi \geq 0 \label{eq:varDefPi} \end{aligned}$$
Clearly, due to the addition of constraints in $\mathcal{F}(\pi,x,k)$, for any $c$ we have $z(CRIT_1(c)) \leq z(CRIT_2(c))$. Notice that, in all these additional constraints, only items which will not be interdicted by the leader can be packed and the follower’s capacity constraint is not violated. We denote as *proper* any set $\mathcal{F}(\pi,x,k)$ that satisfies both conditions. After the set $\mathcal{F}(\pi, x, k)$ is built, variable $\pi$ will carry the maximum profit obtainable in addition to the profit of the split solution.
\[secTh\] If $KP^{LP}(x^*)$ admits a critical item $c$ and model $CRIT_2(c)$ has a proper set $\mathcal{F}(\pi, x, k)$, then $z(CRIT_2(c)) \leq z^*$.
Since model $CRIT_2(c)$ considers feasible solutions for $KP(x^*)$, the inequality holds by applying the same argument of Proposition \[firstProp\].
A new exact approach for BKP {#sec:ExaApp}
============================
Overview
--------
We propose an exact algorithm for BKP that considers the possible existence of a critical item in $KP^{LP}(x^*)$ and exploits the bounds provided by model $CRIT_2(c)$. The approach involves two main steps. In the first step, the possible non-existence of a critical item is first evaluated. Then, the approach assumes the existence of a critical item and identifies a set of possible candidate items. For each candidate item $c$ and a parameter $\delta$ to identify the core size, model $CRIT_2(c)$ is built by considering several subsets of additional constraints (\[TupleCons\]). Then the linear relaxation $CRIT_2^{LP}(c)$ is solved, where the integrality constraints and are replaced by inclusion in $[0,1]$.
The feasible problems $CRIT_2^{LP}(c)$ are sorted by increasing optimal value so as to identify an order of the most promising subproblems to explore. A limited number of feasible BKP solutions is also computed in this step.
In the second step, each relevant subproblem is explored by constraint generation until the subproblem can be pruned. An optimal BKP solution is eventually returned. The approach takes as input five parameters $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\delta$, $\mu$, $\gamma$ and relies on an ILP solver along its steps. We discuss the steps of the algorithm in the following. The corresponding pseudo code is then provided.
Step 1 {#TheStep1}
------
### Handling the possible non-existence of a critical item {#NOcrit}
We first consider the case where there does not exist a critical item in $KP^{LP}(x^*)$. Thus, the follower will select all available items which are not interdicted by the leader and an optimal solution of BKP is found by solving the following problem $NCR$.\
$$\begin{aligned}
\text{min}\quad & \sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} p_{i}(1-x_{i}) \label{eq:ObjFirst}\\
\text{subject to}\quad
& \sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} v_{i}x_{i} \leq C_u \label{eq:capLFirst}\\
& \sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} w_{i}(1-x_{i}) \leq C_l \label{eq:capFWmax}\\
& x_{i} \in\{0,1\} \qquad i= 1,\dots,n \label{eq:varDefXFirst}\end{aligned}$$ If problem $NCR$ is feasible, let denote by $x'$ the related optimal solution representing the leader’s strategy. The corresponding follower’s solution is denoted by $y'$, with $y'_i = 1 - x'_i$ $(i=1, \dots, n)$. The current best solution $(x^*, y^*)$ with value $z^*$ (which will be optimal at the end of the algorithm) is initialized accordingly (Lines \[NoC\]-\[endNoC\] of the pseudo code).
### Identifying the relevant critical items {#criticalitems}
We now assume that there exists a critical item $c$ in $KP^{LP}(x^*)$ (Lines \[CritItems\]-\[endCritItems\]) and estimate the first and last possible items $l$ and $r$ that can be critical according to ordering . For item $l$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{comL}
l := \min \{ j: \sum\limits_{i=1}^{j} w_{i} \geq C_l\}. \end{aligned}$$ All items $1, \dots, (l-1)$ cannot in fact be critical even without the leader’s interdiction. For the last item $r$, we first compute the maximum weight of the follower that can be interdicted by the leader (similarly as in [@CaCarLoWo16]) by solving the following problem (denoted by $LW$).\
$$\begin{aligned}
\text{max}\quad & \sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} w_{i}x_{i} \label{eq:ObjWmax}\\
\text{subject to}\quad
& \sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} v_{i}x_{i} \leq C_u \label{eq:capLWmax}\\
& x_{i} \in\{0,1\} \qquad i= 1,\dots,n \label{eq:varDefXWmax}\end{aligned}$$ Item $r$ is defined as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{comR}
r := \min \{ j: \sum\limits_{i=1}^{j} w_{i} \geq C_l + z(LW)\}. \end{aligned}$$ Since from we have$\sum\limits_{i=1}^{r} w_{i}(1 -x_i) \geq C_l$ for any leader’s strategy, all items from $(r+1)$ to $n$ cannot be critical.
### Building models $CRIT_2(c)$ {#BuildMod}
For each candidate critical item $c \in [l,r]$, we formulate model $CRIT_2(c)$ by constructing a proper set $\mathcal{F}(\pi, x, k)$ as follows. Consider the subsets involving items in the interval $[c - \delta, c + \delta]$. Even for small value of $\delta$, the number of subsets can be very large. Hence, in order to limit the number of constraints in $\mathcal{F}(\pi, x, k)$, we propose a different strategy that greedily selects the subsets according to the procedure denoted as $ComputeTuples$ and sketched below. For a given value of $\delta$, we consider the interval of items $[a, b]$, with $a=\max\{1;c-\delta\}$ and $b=\min\{c+\delta;n\}$. Starting by the empty set, we enumerate at most $\alpha$ “backward” sets with items $(c-1), \dots, a$ in increasing order of size. Each set has a profit and weight equal to the sum of profits and weights of the included items. We also compute at most $\beta$ “forward” sets with items $c, \dots, b$ in increasing order of size and with a weight not superior to the maximum weight of a backward set. This in order to exclude forward sets having less chance to be combined with a backward set.
Then the backward (resp. forward) sets are ordered by increasing (resp. decreasing) profit. We combine each backward set with a forward set and generate a tuple $\tau$. If $p^{\tau} > 0$ and $w^{\tau} \leq w_c$, we add constraint to $\mathcal{F}(\pi, x, k)$. We continue adding constraints to $\mathcal{F}(\pi, x, k)$ until their number is superior to an input parameter $\mu$. If not previously included, we also add to set $\mathcal{F}(\pi, x, k)$ the constraint $\pi \geq p_c k_{w_c}$ which handles the possible adding of the critical item to the split solution if the residual capacity is equal to $w_c$.
\[algo:Tuples\]
.
Then we solve models $CRIT_2^{LP}(c)$ for each $c \in [l,r]$ and order the models by increasing optimal value so as to have an order of most promising subproblems to explore. If for the first subproblem we have $z(CRIT_2^{LP}(c)) \geq z^*$, an optimal BKP solution is already certified (Line \[endCritItems\] of the pseudo code).
### Computing feasible BKP solutions {#heursol}
According to the previous order of subproblems, we compute BKP feasible solutions by considering the first $\gamma$ subproblems (Lines \[FeasGammaSol\]-\[endFeasGammaSol\]). For a given item $c$, we solve model $CRIT_2(c)$ obtaining a solution $\hat{x}$.\
If $z(CRIT_2(c)) < z^*$, we solve the induced follower’s problem $KP(\hat{x})$ with optimal solution $\hat{y}$ and update the current best solution if $z(KP(\hat{x})) < z^*$.
Step 2 {#TheStep2}
------
This step consider all relevant (ordered) suproblems $CRIT_2(c)$. For each subproblem, we first test for standard variables fixing and then each subproblem is explored by means of a constraint generation approach (Lines \[solveSub\]-\[endsolveSub\]).
### Fixing variables in subproblems {#fixvar}
For a given problem $CRIT_2^{LP}(c)$, denote the optimal values of variables $x_{i}$ and $k_j$ by $x_{i}^{LP}$ and $k_j^{LP}$ respectively. Let $r_{x_i}$ and $r_{k_j}$ be the reduced costs of non basic variables in the optimal solution of $CRIT_2^{LP}(c)$. We apply then standard variable-fixing techniques from Integer Linear Programming: if the gap between the best feasible solution available and the optimal solution value of the continuous relaxation solution is not greater than the absolute value of a non basic variable reduced cost, then the related variable can be fixed to its value in the continuous relaxation solution. Thus, the following constraints are added to $CRIT_2(c)$:
$$\begin{aligned}
& \forall\, i: |r_{x_i}| \geq z^* - z(CRIT_2^{LP}(c)) , \quad x_i = x_i^{LP}; \label{eq:rxi}\\
& \forall\, j: |r_{k_j}| \geq z^* - z(CRIT_2^{LP}(c)), \quad k_j = k_j^{LP}.\label{eq:rkj}\end{aligned}$$
### Solving subproblems {#solvesub}
For each open subproblem $CRIT_2(c)$, we first solve $CRIT_2(c)$ obtaining a solution $\bar{x}$. If the corresponding objective value is lower than the current best feasible solution value, we solve $KP(\bar{x})$ with solution $\bar{y}$ and if an improving solution is found, the current best solution is updated, as in Section \[heursol\]. Then, we add to $CRIT_2(c)$ constraints
$$\begin{aligned}
\sum\limits_{i : \bar{x_i} = 0}^{n} x_i + \sum\limits_{i : \bar{x_i} = 1}^{n} (1-x_i) \geq 1; \label{changeone} \\
\sum\limits_{i : \bar{y_i} = 1}^{n} x_i \geq 1. \label{interdone}\end{aligned}$$
These cuts impose that at least one variable $x_i$ in solution vector $\bar{x}$ must be discarded (constraint ) and at least one item selected by the follower in solution $\bar{y}$ must be interdicted (constraint ). We solve $CRIT_2(c)$ with two more constraints and apply the same procedure until $z(CRIT_2(c)) \geq z^*$ or the problem becomes infeasible. At the end of Step 2, the optimal BKP solution $(x^*, y^*)$ is returned (Line \[returnOpt\]).
\[algo:ExAp\]
$x^* = x'$, $y^* = y'$, $z^*= z(NCR)$; \[endNoC\] [ ]{}
$(x^*, y^*)$; \[endCritItems\]
\[FeasGammaSol\] $\hat{x} \leftarrow$ solve $CRIT_2(c_i)$; $\hat{y} \leftarrow$ solve $KP(\hat{x})$; $x^* = \hat{x}$, $y^* = \hat{y}$, $z^*= z(KP(\hat{x}))$;
\[endFeasGammaSol\]
\[solveSub\]
$(x^*, y^*)$;
$x^* = \bar{x}$, $y^* = \bar{y}$, $z^*= z(KP(\bar{x}))$;
\[endsolveSub\] \[returnOpt\]
Computational results {#sec:ComRes}
=====================
All tests were performed on an Intel i7 CPU @ 2.4 GHz with 8 GB of RAM. The code was implemented in the C++ programming language. The ILP solver used along the steps of the algorithm is CPLEX 12.6.2.
The parameters of the ILP solver were set to their default values. The BKP instances with $n=35,40,45,50,55$ are generated in [@CaCarLoWo16] as follows. Profits $p_i$ and weights $w_i$ of the follower and weights $v_i$ of the leader are integers randomly distributed in $[1,100]$: 10 instances are generated for each value of $n$. The follower’s capacity $C_l$ is set to $\lceil (INS/11)\sum_i^{n}w_i\rceil$ where $INS$ $(=1, \dots, 10)$ denotes the instance identifier. The leader’s capacity is randomly selected in the interval $[C_l - 10; C_l + 10]$.
We first tested our approach on these 50 benchmark instances. After some preliminary computational tests, we chose the following parameter entries for our approach: $\alpha = 100 $, $\beta = 100$, $\delta = 10$, $\mu = 150$, $\gamma = 2$. The corresponding results are presented in Table \[tab:CPUTime1\]. For each instance, we report the optimal solution value, the CPU time to obtain an optimal solution and the number of subproblems explored in Step 2. The last column also reports the number of times model $CRIT_2(c)$ is solved along the two steps.
Algorithm CCLW in [@CaCarLoWo16] solves all instances with 50 items within a CPU time limit of 3600 seconds but runs out of time limit in instances 55-3, 55-4. Algorithm in [@FiLjMoSi18] solves all benchmark instances, requiring at most a computation time of about 85 seconds for solving instance 55-3. As the results in the table illustrate, the proposed exact approach outperforms the competing algorithms, successfully solving to optimality each instance in at most 1 second (this maximum CPU time is reached in instance 55-3) with an average of 0.2 seconds. Also, the number of subproblems explored in Step 2 and the number of models $CRIT_2(c)$ solved are very limited. Notice that the tests in [@CaCarLoWo16] and in [@FiLjMoSi18] were carried out on different but comparable machines in terms of hardware specifications.
[|rr||\*[1]{}[c|]{}\*[1]{}[c|]{}\*[1]{}[c|]{}\*[1]{}[c|]{}]{}
& & Optimal & CPU & \# Subprob. & \# $CRIT_2(\cdot)$\
*n* & *INS* & Value & Time & in Step 2 & solved\
35 & 1 & 279 & 0.11 & 3 & 5\
& 2 & 469 & 0.36 & 0 & 2\
& 3 & 448 & 0.43 & 2 & 4\
& 4 & 370 & 0.15 & 2 & 4\
& 5 & 467 & 0.14 & 2 & 4\
& 6 & 268 & 0.05 & 0 & 0\
& 7 & 207 & 0.04 & 0 & 0\
& 8 & 41 & 0.03 & 0 & 0\
& 9 & 80 & 0.03 & 0 & 0\
& 10 & 31 & 0.02 & 0 & 0\
40 & 1 & 314 & 0.16 & 1 & 3\
& 2 & 472 & 0.33 & 1 & 3\
& 3 & 637 & 0.70 & 4 & 6\
& 4 & 388 & 0.16 & 0 & 2\
& 5 & 461 & 0.11 & 0 & 2\
& 6 & 399 & 0.05 & 0 & 0\
& 7 & 150 & 0.04 & 0 & 0\
& 8 & 71 & 0.04 & 0 & 0\
& 9 & 179 & 0.03 & 0 & 0\
& 10 & 0 & 0.01 & 0 & 0\
45 & 1 & 427 & 0.21 & 3 & 5\
& 2 & 633 & 0.36 & 1 & 3\
& 3 & 548 & 0.61 & 3 & 5\
& 4 & 611 & 0.27 & 1 & 3\
& 5 & 629 & 0.22 & 2 & 4\
& 6 & 398 & 0.06 & 0 & 0\
& 7 & 225 & 0.04 & 0 & 0\
& 8 & 157 & 0.04 & 0 & 0\
& 9 & 53 & 0.03 & 0 & 0\
& 10 & 110 & 0.02 & 0 & 0\
50 & 1 & 502 & 0.35 & 5 & 7\
& 2 & 788 & 0.52 & 1 & 3\
& 3 & 631 & 0.28 & 2 & 4\
& 4 & 612 & 0.22 & 0 & 2\
& 5 & 764 & 0.18 & 0 & 2\
& 6 & 303 & 0.06 & 0 & 0\
& 7 & 310 & 0.05 & 0 & 0\
& 8 & 63 & 0.04 & 0 & 0\
& 9 & 234 & 0.04 & 0 & 0\
& 10 & 15 & 0.03 & 0 & 0\
55 & 1 & 480 & 0.37 & 3 & 5\
& 2 & 702 & 0.31 & 1 & 3\
& 3 & 778 & 1.11 & 8 & 10\
& 4 & 889 & 0.56 & 5 & 7\
& 5 & 726 & 0.09 & 0 & 0\
& 6 & 462 & 0.07 & 0 & 0\
& 7 & 370 & 0.06 & 0 & 0\
& 8 & 387 & 0.05 & 0 & 0\
& 9 & 104 & 0.04 & 0 & 0\
& 10 & 178 & 0.03 & 0 & 0\
The computational tests in both [@CaCarLoWo16] and [@FiLjMoSi18] are limited to instances with 55 items. We then tested larger instances with $n=100, 200, 300, 400, 500$ according to the generation scheme in [@CaCarLoWo16]. For each value of $n$ and $INS$, we generated 10 instances for a total of 500 instances. For these large instances, we set the parameters of our algorithm to the following values: $\alpha = 500 $, $\beta = 500$, $\delta = 20$, $\mu = 1000$, $\gamma = 5$. It is pointed out in [@CaCarLoWo16] that in instances with $INS \geq 5$ the follower’s capacity constraint is expected to be inactive for any maximal leader’s interdiction strategy. This makes these instances easy to solve. Our computational experiments confirm this trend also on larger instances: the proposed algorithm solves each instance with $n$ from 100 to 500 and $INS \geq 5$ in at most 8 seconds without never invoking Step 2. In the light of this consideration, we report in the following Table \[tab:CPUTime2\] only the results for instances with $INS \leq 4$.
[|rr|\*[1]{}[c|]{}\*[2]{}[c|]{}\*[2]{}[c|]{} \*[2]{}[c|]{}]{}
& & & & &\
& & & & &\
*n* & *INS* & \#Opt & Average & Max & Average & Max&Average&Max\
100 & 1 & 10 & 2.1 & 3.0 & 0.7 & 2.0 & 4.8 & 7.0\
& 2 & 10 & 5.6 & 9.9 & 3.8 & 9.0 & 8.9 & 16.0\
& 3 & 10 & 4.3 & 6.4 & 2.5 & 7.0 & 7.5 & 12.0\
& 4 & 10 & 2.3 & 4.5 & 0.7 & 4.0 & 5.2 & 9.0\
200 & 1 & 10 & 5.3 & 10.7 & 3.4 & 7.0 & 8.9 & 17.0\
& 2 & 10 & 7.8 & 12.2 & 5.0 & 9.0 & 10.1 & 14.0\
& 3 & 10 & 9.1 & 13.6 & 6.4 & 12.0 & 12.3 & 19.0\
& 4 & 10 & 6.0 & 8.6 & 3.5 & 8.0 & 8.3 & 13.0\
300 & 1 & 10 & 6.4 & 8.3 & 3.9 & 8.0 & 9.0 & 13.0\
& 2 & 10 & 15.5 & 37.4 & 7.2 & 14.0 & 13.5 & 23.0\
& 3 & 10 & 14.0 & 17.7 & 10.9 & 15.0 & 16.8 & 24.0\
& 4 & 10 & 8.7 & 13.2 & 4.9 & 11.0 & 9.9 & 16.0\
400 & 1 & 10 & 8.8 & 12.3 & 6.7 & 10.0 & 12.8 & 17.0\
& 2 & 10 & 15.2 & 18.7 & 9.1 & 12.0 & 15.1 & 20.0\
& 3 & 10 & 19.0 & 30.5 & 12.0 & 17.0 & 18.8 & 32.0\
& 4 & 10 & 12.6 & 16.5 & 8.4 & 23.0 & 13.8 & 30.0\
500 & 1 & 10 & 11.9 & 18.2 & 7.6 & 13.0 & 13.1 & 20.0\
& 2 & 10 & 20.6 & 26.6 & 11.0 & 20.0 & 17.0 & 25.0\
& 3 & 10 & 21.2 & 25.8 & 12.7 & 17.0 & 17.8 & 22.0\
& 4 & 10 & 15.1 & 17.1 & 4.7 & 8.0 & 9.8 & 13.0\
The results in the table are summarized in terms of average, maximum CPU time and number of optimal solutions obtained with a time limit of 60 seconds. Similarly as in Table \[tab:CPUTime1\], we also report the average and maximum number of subproblems explored in Step 2, and the average and maximum number of times model $CRIT_2(c)$ is solved. The results illustrate the effectiveness of our approach. All instances are solved to optimality requiring 37.4 seconds at most for an instance with 300 items. The number of subproblems handled by Step 2 is in general limited, reaching a maximum value of 23 (in an instance with 400 items). Also, the number of models $CRIT_2(c)$ to be solved is generally limited and never superior to 32. We finally point out that the number of constraints - added to each subproblem is also limited: in the tested instances, the while–loop of Step 2 is executed 8 iterations at most.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
---------------
We thank M. Carvalho for providing us the benchmark instances of [@CaCarLoWo16].
Concluding remarks {#sec:Concl}
==================
We proposed for the Bilevel Knapsack with Interdiction Constraints a new exact approach which outperforms the state-of-the-art algorithms available in the literature. The algorithm relies on a new lower bound derived for the problem, which is improved by exploiting the expected features of an optimal solution of the classical knapsack problem. In future research, it will be worthy on one hand to investigate different correlations between profits and weights of the items in the follower’s knapsack problem and on the other hand to which extent the proposed approach could be generalized to other bilevel optimization problems.
[1]{}
Brotcorne, L., Hanafi, S., Mansi, R.: One-level reformulation of the bilevel Knapsack problem using dynamic programming. Discrete Optimization. 10, 1–10 (2013)
Caprara, A., Carvalho, M., Lodi, A., Woeginger, G.: A Complexity and Approximability Study of the Bilevel Knapsack Problem. Proceedings of IPCO 2013. Volume 7801 of LNCS, 98–109 (2013)
Caprara, A., Carvalho, M., Lodi, A., Woeginger, G.: Bilevel Knapsack with Interdiction Constraints. INFORMS Journal on Computing. 28, 319–333 (2016)
Caramia, M., Mari, R.: Enhanced exact algorithms for discrete bilevel linear problems. Optimization Letters, 9, 1447–1468 (2015)
Carvalho, M., Lodi, A., Marcotte, P.: A polynomial algorithm for a continuous bilevel knapsack problem. Operations Research Letters. 46, 185–188 (2018)
Chen, L., Zhang, G.: Approximation algorithms for a bi-level knapsack problem. Theoretical Computer Science. 497, 1–12 (2013)
DeNegre, S.: Interdiction and discrete bilevel linear programming. PhD thesis. Lehigh University (2011)
DeNegre, S., Ralphs, T.K.: A Branch-and-cut Algorithm for Integer Bilevel Linear Programs. Operations Research and Cyber-Infrastructure, voleme 47 of Operations Research/Computer Science Interfaces, 65–78 (2009)
Fischetti, M., Ljubi[ć]{}, I., Monaci, M., Sinnl, M.: A New General-Purpose Algorithm for Mixed-Integer Bilevel Linear Programs. Operations Research. 65, 1615–1637 (2017)
Fischetti, M., Ljubi[ć]{}, I., Monaci, M., Sinnl, M.: Interdiction Games and Monotonicity, with Application to Knapsack Problems. INFORMS Journal on Computing, to appear (2018), technical report available at: <https://homepage.univie.ac.at/ivana.ljubic/research/publications/interdiction_games_and_monotonicity.pdf>
Fischetti, M., Ljubi[ć]{}, I., Monaci, M., Sinnl, M.: On the use of intersection cuts for bilevel optimization. Mathematical Programming. 172, 77–103 (2018)
Fischetti, M., Monaci, M., Sinnl, M.: A dynamic reformulation heuristic for Generalized Interdiction Problems. European Journal of Operational Research. 267, 40–51 (2018)
Jeroslow, R.: The polynomial hierarchy and a simple model for competitive analysis. Mathematical Programming. 32, 146–164, (1985)
Kellerer, H., Pferschy. U., Pisinger, D.: Knapsack Problems. Springer (2004)
Martello, S., Pisinger, D., Toth, P.: Dynamic programming and strong bounds for the 0–1 knapsack problem. Management Science. 45, 414–424 (1999)
Martello, S., Toth, P.: Knapsack Problems: Algorithms and Computer Implementations. Wiley (1990)
Moore, J.T., Bard, J.F.: The mixed integer linear bilevel programming problem. Operations Research. 38, 911–921 (1990)
Pisinger, D.: A minimal algorithm for the 0–1 knapsack problem. Operations Research. 45, 758–767 (1997)
Stackelberg, H.V.: The Theory of the Market Economy. Oxford University Press (1952)
Xu, P., Wang, L.: An exact algorithm for the bilevel mixed integer linear programming problem under three simplifying assumptions. Computers & Operations Research. 41, 309–318 (2014)
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We point out that the inclusion of a string component contributing around 5% to the CMB power spectrum amplitude on large scales can increase the preferred value of the spectral index $n_{s}$ of density fluctuations measured by CMB experiments. While this finding applies to any cosmological scenario involving strings, we consider in particular models of supersymmetric hybrid inflation, which predict $n_{s} \stackrel{>}{{}_\sim} 0.98$, in tension with the CMB data when strings are not included. Using MCMC analysis we constrain the parameter space allowed for $F$- and $D$-term inflation. For the $F$-term model, using minimal supergravity corrections, we find that $\log\kappa= -2.34\pm 0.38$ and $M= (0.518\pm 0.059)\times 10^{16}{\rm GeV}$. The inclusion of non-minimal supergravity corrections can modify these values somewhat. In the corresponding analysis for $D$-term inflation, we find $\log\kappa= -4.24\pm 0.19$ and $m_{\rm FI}= (0.245\pm 0.031)\times 10^{16}{\rm GeV} $. Under the assumption that these models are correct, these results represent precision measurements of important parameters of a Grand Unified Theory. We consider the possible uncertainties in our measurements and additional constraints on the scenario from the stochastic background of gravitational waves produced by the strings. The best-fitting model predicts a $B$-mode polarization signal $\approx 0.3 \mu {\rm K}$ rms peaking at $\ell\approx 1000$. This is of comparable amplitude to the expected signal due to gravitational lensing of the adiabatic $E$-mode signal on these scales.'
author:
- 'Richard A. Battye'
- Björn Garbrecht
- Adam Moss
title: Constraints on Supersymmetric Hybrid Inflation Models
---
Introduction
============
The publication of the most recent results from the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe [@wmap] (WMAP) has focused attention in the direction of precision constraints on inflationary models [@PrecCon] believed to be the origin of the initial spectrum of density fluctuations [@DensityPerturbations]. By measuring the power spectrum of the $E$-mode polarization of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) on large-scales, the WMAP data constrains the optical depth to reionization, $\tau_{\rm R}=0.09\pm 0.03$, with consequent improvement to parameters such as the spectral index of density fluctuations, $n_{s}=0.951^{+0.015}_{-0.019}$, which are degenerate with $\tau_{\rm R}$. Although ad-hoc inflationary models can be constructed with a range of values of $n_{s}$, some specific models predict very narrow ranges for $n_{s}$ making them vulnerable to the very tight constraints now available.
One such class of models is supersymmetric (SUSY) hybrid inflation [@hybrid], which has $F$-term [@CLLSW; @DSS] and $D$-term [@DTerminf] variants. These scenarios are particularly attractive since the potential for the inflaton is flat at tree level. It acquires corrections from loop effects and when further tree-level, non-renormalisable Planck scale suppressed operators are added, and it can naturally meet the slow-roll conditions. Within certain minimal realisations, one is left with the choice of only one dimensionless coupling constant $\kappa$ and a mass scale $M$. One can deduce the amplitude of curvature perturbations $P_{\cal R}$, their spectral index $n_{s}$ and the dimensionless string tension $G\mu$ from $\kappa$ and $M$ (up to a weak dependence on the unknown reheat temperature, $T_{R}$). Therefore, these models may be considered as rather predictive when compared to other scenarios for inflation.
One can make an analytic estimate of the scalar spectral index, which yields $n_{s} \stackrel{>}{{}_\sim} 1-{1/N_{\rm e}}$, where $N_{\rm e}$ is the number of e-foldings (measured from the end of inflation) when a particular observed scale leaves the horizon (or conversely when it comes back inside the horizon). For standard estimates of the reheat temperature, $N_{\rm e}\approx 50$, making $n_{s} \stackrel{>}{{}_\sim} 0.98$ a prediction of the simplest version of these models. If one takes the quoted observational constraint seriously, such a model would be excluded at around the $2-\sigma$ level under the assumption that only adiabatic density fluctuations are created during inflation. However, in these models cosmic strings will be formed at the end of inflation, if the phase transition induces the spontaneous breakdown of a ${\rm U}(1)$ symmetry by the waterfall fields. Since the predicted energy scale of these strings is around the grand unified (GUT) scale, they may contribute significantly to the observed perturbations [@jean97], creating an interesting phenomenology [@WB; @CHMb].
In this paper, we point out that the inclusion of a sub-dominant string contribution of around 5% to the large scale power spectrum amplitude of the CMB can increase the preferred value for the spectral index up to $n_s\approx 0.98$ (and the maximum allowed value at $2-\sigma$ level up to $n_s\approx 1.02$), something which is a generic point valid for all models of inflation which produce cosmic strings. Naively, it may seem to be a grotesque violation of Occam’s razor to have two sources of fluctuations with nearly equal amplitude; in no way do we claim that the data requires the additional string contribution in a Bayesian model selection sense. But as we shall describe, a string contribution of the required size arises very naturally in the class of models under consideration here. Note moreover, that these models constitute an attempt of fusing together the areas of particle physics and cosmology and may therefore be considered to be more attractive when put in the wider context. We then proceed to constrain the parameters $\kappa$ and $M$ for specific realizations of $F$-term and $D$-term hybrid inflation models. Our results show that the inclusion of the string contribution is critical to determining the correct constraints on the parameters.
We note that the upper bound on the string tension $\mu$ has recently been discussed by a number of authors [@pog; @fraisse05; @fraisse06; @slosel; @bevis]. Their basic conclusion, using a variety of different methods, has been that there is a $2-\sigma$ upper limit of $G\mu < (2-3)\times 10^{-7}$, something which we shall confirm. However, they have ignored the effect strings have on the preferred value of $n_{s}$. Qualitatively similar ideas were pointed out in ref. [@hind] in the context of constraints on the global texture model using the first year WMAP data. At that point in time, the constraint on $n_{s}$ was not as tight as is the case now and, therefore, the necessity of including the defect contribution was not so critical.
Models and methodology
======================
In Section \[Fterm\] and \[Dterm\] we introduce the inflationary models we are studying and discuss in particular the various contributions to the inflaton potential. In \[Sspec\] we specify the model for the string power spectrum we are using and in \[MCMC\] the details of the Markov-Chain-Monte-Carlo (MCMC) analysis are presented.
$F$-term inflation {#Fterm}
------------------
$F$-term inflation [@CLLSW; @DSS] is implemented by the superpotential $$W=\kappa \widehat S ({\widehat{\overline G}} \widehat G -M^2)\,,$$ where $\widehat S$ denotes a gauge-singlet chiral superfield, $\widehat G$ belongs to a certain $\cal N$-dimensional representation of the gauge group and ${\overline{\widehat G}}$ is a corresponding conjugate multiplet. In the subsequent discussion, we set ${\cal N}=1$, as we are studying the gauge group ${\rm U}(1)$, the breaking of which leads to the production of cosmic strings.
Having specified the model, we now enumerate the various contributions to the scalar potential, which determine the inflationary dynamics. The leading order contribution is the tree-level scalar potential $$V_0= \kappa^2 \bigg[\left| \overline G G - M^2\right|^2
+ \left|S \overline G \right|^2 + \left|S G\right|^2\bigg]\,,$$ where $G$, $\overline{G}$ and $S$ are the scalar components of the respective superfields. While $S$ is to be identified with the inflaton, $G$ and $\overline{G}$ are usually referred to as waterfall fields.
Inflation takes place along the trajectory where the vacuum expectation value (VEV) of the inflaton obeys $S>M$ and where $\overline G = G =0$. $V_0$ is completely flat in this direction. However, since $V_0=\kappa^2 M^4$, SUSY is broken and the mass degeneracy is lifted, such that the superfields $\widehat G$ and ${\widehat{\overline G}}$ encompass mass eigenstates of one fermion of mass $\kappa S$, and two pairs of scalars of mass squared $\kappa^2( S^2 \pm M^2)$ each. This induces the Coleman-Weinberg radiative correction [@CW; @DSS] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{VCW}
V_{\rm CW}=\frac{\kappa^4}{32\pi^2}\Big\{
(S^2 + M^2)^2 \ln \left(1+\frac{M^2}{S^2}\right)
+(S^2 - M^2)^2 \ln \left(1-\frac{M^2}{S^2}\right)
+2 M^4 \ln \frac{\kappa^2 S^2}{Q^2}
\Big\}
\,,\end{aligned}$$ where $Q$ is a renormalisation scale. For notational convenience, here and in the following it is always understood that we take the moduli of complex fields, for example $S\equiv |S|$, unless explicitly stated otherwise. Added to $V_0$, the Coleman-Weinberg correction lifts the flatness and forces $S$ to slowly roll towards zero. When the critical value $S=M$ is reached, the waterfall fields acquire a negative mass square term which forces them to assume the ${\rm U}(1)$-breaking VEV $G=\overline{G}=M$, while $S$ is driven to zero. For realistic scenarios, the ${\rm U}(1)$-group arises at an intermediate stage of the breaking of the GUT-symmetry down to the Standard model group $G_{\rm SM}={\rm SU}(3)_C \times {\rm SU}(2)_L \times {\rm U}(1)_Y$. Possible candidates are the baryon minus lepton symmetry $B-L$, the right-handed isospin or the groups ${\rm U}(1)_X$ and ${\rm U}(1)_Z$ from the embedding ${\rm SO}(10)\supset {\rm SU}(5)\times {\rm U}(1)_X \supset {\rm SU}(3)_C \times {\rm SU}(2)_L \times {\rm U}(1)_X \times {\rm U}(1)_Z \supset G_{\rm SM} \times{\rm Z}_2$, see for example ref. [@JeRoSa]. The spontaneous breakdown of any combination of these ${\rm U}(1)$-symmetries at the waterfall transition leads to the formation of local (gauged) cosmic strings.
Another interesting variant is $F_D$ inflation [@GaPi; @GaPaPi], where the matter of the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) is not charged under the broken ${\rm U}(1)$, giving rise to new long lived particles which may loosen the gravitino bound discussed below. Moreover, in this scenario the inflaton sector is tied to the MSSM-Higgs and to TeV-scale right-handed neutrinos. Note, however, that these additional couplings of the inflaton alter the “minimal” form of the Coleman-Weinberg potential (\[VCW\]). Nonetheless, the results presented here, in particular that the string network allows for a blue spectral index, are also qualitatively applicable to the $F_D$-model, and a quantitative study constraining the model parameters, which might also be accessible at collider experiments, can easily be performed using the methods applied here.
Assuming that supersymmetry is local, supergravity gives rise to corrections of the following form $$\label{V:SUGRA}
V_{\rm SUGRA} = c_H^2 H^2 S^2 +
32 \pi^2\kappa ^2 M^4 \frac{S^4}{m_{\rm pl}^4}
+\dots\,,$$ where $H^2= 8\pi \kappa^2 M^4 /(3 m_{\rm pl}^2)$ is the squared Hubble rate during inflation and $m_{\rm pl}=1.22 \times 10^{19} {\rm GeV}$ denotes the Planck mass. While the term $\propto S^4$ is uniquely determined when only allowing for renormalisable terms in the Kähler potential, the $c_H^2$-term can be present for a “non-minimal” Kähler potential. If $c_H^2$ is not imposed to be zero, for example by some symmetry [@cH2zero], it is expected to be of order one, which may incline the potential to an extent that it becomes unsuitable for slow-roll inflation; an observation which is known as the $\eta$-problem [@CLLSW; @DRT]. For this reason, the minimal SUGRA-case with $c_H^2=0$ is most often considered in the literature. For the studies in this paper, we use the potential (\[V:SUGRA\]), but note that also the term $\propto S^4$ gets a correction factor $(1+O(c_H^2))$, which in turn may again be modified by additional nonrenormalisable corrections which are theoretically undetermined. It has been pointed out recently that a careful choice of the parameter $c_H^2$ brings the scalar spectral index $n_s$ into accordance with its central value determined from the WMAP3 data [@BasShaKi] for models without cosmic strings. We shall return to this issue in section \[sec:nonmin\].
The curvature-induced correction for SUSY in de Sitter background can be derived to be [@Garbrecht:2006df] $$\label{V:R}
V_{R}=-\frac{3}{8\pi^2} H^2 \kappa^2 S^2 \ln \frac{\kappa^2 S^2}{Q^2}
\,.$$ Since supersymmetry is not protected by non-renormalisation theorems in curved space, the derivative of this contribution with respect to $S$ depends on the cutoff scale $Q^2$. However, it turns out that for reasonable choices of $Q$ between $\sqrt{\kappa} M$ and $m_{\rm Pl}$, the curvature correction may only be significant for large values of $\kappa$, where the contribution of strings to the power spectrum is too large to accord with observation.
Additional corrections from soft SUSY breaking turn out to be negligible, except for the tadpole term $$V_{\rm TP}=2 \kappa M^2 a_S{\rm Re}[S]\,,$$ where $a_S$ should be of TeV-scale. The precise value of this parameter is theoretically undetermined, and moreover, its effect also depends on the phase of $a_S S$. It turns out that it may become important only for low values, $\kappa \stackrel{<}{{}_\sim} 5 \times 10^{-4}$ [@sesh2; @GaPaPi].
Putting everything together, the full $F$-term inflationary potential is given by $$V=V_0+V_{\rm CW}+V_{\rm SUGRA}+V_R +V_{\rm TP}\,.$$ In the subsequent numerical analysis, we study various scenarios arising as special cases of this generic potential.
Some analytic understanding of the dependences between the parameters can be gained from the following approximation. We introduce the canonically normalised inflaton $\sigma$ by making the choice of phase $\sigma = \sqrt 2 {\rm Re}[S]$ and ${\rm Im}[S]=0$. A simple estimate for the spectral index $n_{s}$ can be obtained for large values $\kappa (\sim 10^{-2})$ by neglecting all corrections other than $$V=V_0+V_{\rm CW}=V_0+\frac{1}{8\pi^2} \kappa^4 M^4 \ln \frac{\kappa \sigma}{\sqrt 2 Q}\,.$$ The number of ${\rm e}$-foldings between the time $t_{\rm e}$ at the horizon exit of the scale $k=0.05\,{\rm Mpc}^{-1}$ and the end of inflation $t_{\rm c}$, where the inflaton reaches the critical value $\sigma_{\rm c}=\sqrt 2 M$, triggering the waterfall-phase transition, is given by $$N_{\rm e}=\int_{t_{\rm e}}^{t_{\rm c}} dt\,H
=\frac{8\pi}{m_{\rm pl}^2} \kappa^2 M^4
\int_{\sigma_{\rm c}}^{\sigma_{\rm e}} d\sigma \,
\left(\frac{\partial V}{\partial \sigma}\right)^{-1}
\approx \frac{32 \pi^3}{\kappa^2 m_{\rm pl}^2} \sigma_{\rm e}^2
\,,$$ where we have used the slow-roll approximation $3H \partial \sigma/\partial t=-\partial V/\partial \sigma$ and have neglected the lower boundary term of the integral. We then find the slow-roll parameter $$\eta\big|_{N_{\rm e}}= \frac{m_{\rm pl}^2}{8\pi}
\frac{V^{\prime\prime}}{V}\Big|_{N_{\rm e}}=-\frac{1}{2 N_{\rm e}}\,,$$ and consequently, when omitting the contribution from the slow roll parameter $\epsilon$, which is negligible in these models, $$\label{n_s:est}
n_s=1-2\eta=1-\frac{1}{N_{\rm e}} \approx 0.98
\,,$$ for $N_{\rm e}\approx 50$. Furthermore, the scale of inflation can now be determined by imposing the observed amplitude of the primordial power spectrum, $$\label{power}
\sqrt{P_{\cal R}(k)}
=\frac{2^\frac 72 \sqrt \pi}{\sqrt 3 m_{\rm pl}^3}
\frac{V^\frac 32 (\sigma)}{\partial V /\partial \sigma}
\Bigg|_{\sigma= \sigma_{\rm e}}
=\frac{32 \pi}{\sqrt 3}\sqrt N_{\rm e} \frac{M^2}{m_{\rm pl}^2}\approx 4.54 \times 10^{-5}
\,,$$ from which it follows that the symmetry breaking scale is close to the Grand Unified scale, $M\approx4\times 10^{15} {\rm GeV}$. For $P_{\cal R}(k)$, we have taken here the value determined by the standard six parameter fit (the basic set of four plus $\{ \log(10^{10}P_{\cal R}),n_{s} \}$), see section \[MCMC\].
We are considering the case where the gauge group is ${\rm U}(1)$ and therefore cosmic strings are expected to form during the waterfall transition. If the string network evolves towards a self-similar scaling regime as observed in simulations, then the initial conditions are unimportant and the only important parameter is the dimensionless string tension $G\mu$. This can be computed from the model parameters $\kappa$ and $M$ assuming that the strings do not have superconducting currents and results for the Abelian-Higgs model [@HHT] can be applied. In ref. [@JP1], it was suggested that one could use $$\label{nonBogol}
G\mu=2\pi\left({M\over m_{\rm pl}}\right)^2\epsilon(\beta)\,,$$ where $\beta=\kappa^2/(2g^2)$, $g$ is the gauge coupling assumed to be 0.7 based on Grand Unification and $\epsilon(\beta)=1.04\beta^{0.195}$ for $\beta>10^{-2}$ while $\epsilon(\beta)=2.4/\log(2/\beta)$ for $\beta<10^{-2}$.
In our subsequent analysis, we go beyond these simple estimates, which requires us to compute $n_{s}$ and $G\mu$ as functions of arbitrary $\kappa$ and $M$. We define $P_{\cal R}$ and $n_{s}$ at $k=0.05{\rm Mpc}^{-1}$.
We parameterize the number of e-foldings at the time when the scale $k=0.05{\rm Mpc}^{-1}$ crosses the horizon, $N_e$, using the unknown reheat temperature $T_{R}$ which is given by [@BasShaKi] $$N_{\rm e}\approx
50+\frac 13 \log \frac{T_{\rm R}}{10^9 {\rm GeV}}+
\frac 23 \log \frac{\sqrt \kappa M}{10^{15} {\rm GeV}}
\,.$$ This relation is obtained by assuming that inflation is followed by a matter dominated epoch of coherent oscillations, then a radiation dominated epoch with the initial reheat temperature $T_{\rm R}$, which lasts until matter-radiation equality, and eventually through matter domination until the present epoch.
The available constraints on $T_{\rm R}$ arise from the requirements that, within local supersymmetry, gravitinos must not be overproduced [@Gravitino] and that successful baryogenesis takes place. Avoiding the gravitino problem gives $10^{10}\,{\rm GeV}$ as a conservative upper bound for $T_{\rm R}$, but depending on the gravitino mass and its branching ratio into hadronic decays constraints on the temperature as low as $10^{6}\,{\rm GeV}$ may be in order. The bound on the reheat temperature may be relaxed, when heavy particles decay at late times and release entropy, a feature which is naturally invoked within the $F_D$-model [@GaPi; @GaPaPi]. Scenarios for leptogenesis require lower bounds of $T_{\rm R} \stackrel{>}{{}_\sim} 2\times10^9\,{\rm GeV}$ for non resonant thermal leptogenesis [@BuPeYa], $0.3\,{\rm TeV}$ for resonant thermal leptogenesis [@ResLep] or $3\times10^7\,{\rm GeV}$ when right handed neutrinos are generated directly through the decay of the inflaton [@sesh2]. Note that in the range $0.3\,{\rm TeV} \leq T_{\rm R} \leq 10^{10}\,{\rm GeV}$, the number of e-foldings varies just by two. In section \[sec:fterm\_res\], we also study the effect a variation of $T_{\rm R}$ within the above bounds has on our results and find it to be small. Throughout the rest of our analysis, we therefore choose the value $T_{\rm R}=10^9\,{\rm GeV}$, since lower reheat temperatures require unnaturally small couplings of the inflaton-waterfall sector to the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) matter.
Including the full potential and performing a numerical study for the minimal SUGRA-case $c_H^2=0$ and ignoring the contributions to the potential $V_{R}$ and $V_{\rm TP}$, it turns out that $0.98$ is just a lower bound for the spectral index. For large $\kappa$, the spectrum is turned blue due to the SUGRA-corrections, whereas for small $\kappa$, the inflaton evolves so slow that a quasi scale-invariant spectrum is generated [@BasShaKi; @GaPaPi; @sesh1; @sesh2; @JP1; @JP2]. This is illustrated in the Fig. \[figure:Mkappa\] for $T_{\rm R}=10^{9}{\rm GeV}$ and $g=0.7$. We note that we have used the full formula for $n_{s}$ in terms of the slow-roll parameters $\eta$ and $\epsilon$, although the contribution from $\epsilon$ turns out to be negligible. Moreover, we have computed the running of the spectral index, $n_{\rm run}$, and the tensor-to-scalar ratio, $r$; we found that $|n_{\rm run}|<10^{-3}$ and $r<10^{-4}$ for all the values of $\kappa$ and $M$ in Fig. \[figure:Mkappa\]. We already pointed out that we expect corrections at low $\kappa$, if we include $V_{\rm TP}$, which is illustrated in Fig. \[figure:TADCURV\] for $a_{S}=1{\rm TeV}$. As discussed above, the value of $a_S$ is not determined theoretically. Qualitatively, one expects that for lower $a_S$ the deviations from the $a_S=0$ case only become important for even lower values of $\kappa$. We have checked for example, that the minima of $P_{\cal R}$ in Fig. \[figure:TADCURV\] is moved about a factor of two further to the left when choosing $a_S=0.1\,{\rm TeV}.$ We have also included the curvature correction $V_R$, which has no significant impact since at large $\kappa$, where it might become important, as the potential is dominated by the minimal SUGRA correction.
$D$-term inflation {#Dterm}
------------------
The $D$-term model shares many features with $F$-term hybrid inflation. It is implemented by the superpotential [@DTerminf] $$W=\kappa \widehat S {\widehat{\overline G}} \widehat G\,,$$ and by the $D$-term $$D=\frac g2 \left(|G|^2 -|\overline G|^2 +m_{\rm FI}^2\right)\,,$$ where $m_{\rm FI}$ denotes the Fayet-Iliopoulos mass. These combine to give the tree-level scalar potential $$V=\kappa^2\bigg[|\overline G G|^2 +|S \overline G |^2 +|S G|^2\bigg]
+\frac 12 D^2\,.$$ Note that the $D$-term is also present in $F$-term models, but that it just imposes $|\overline G|= |G|$ since $m_{\rm FI}=0$, while in the present case, it is responsible for the spontaneous breakdown of the ${\rm U}(1)$-gauge symmetry after inflation which occurs at $S^2=S_{\rm c}^2=\frac{g^2}{4\kappa^2} m_{\rm FI}^2$. Above this value for $S$, $\overline G =G =0$, and since $V_0=\frac{g^2}{8}m_{\rm FI}^4$ is non-zero, SUSY and therefore the mass-degeneracy between bosons and fermions is broken. The mass eigenstates comprised in $\widehat G$ and ${\widehat{\overline G}}$ are one Dirac fermion of mass $\kappa s$ and two pairs of scalars with mass squared $\kappa^2 s^2 \pm \frac{g^2}{4} m_{\rm FI}^2$, which induce the the radiative correction $$\begin{aligned}
V_{\rm CW}=\frac{1}{32\pi^2}\Big\{
(\kappa^2 s^2 + \frac{g^2}{4} m_{\rm FI}^2)^2
\ln \left(1+\frac{g^2}{4 \kappa^2} \frac{m_{\rm FI}^2}{s^2}\right)
+(\kappa^2 s^2 - \frac{g^2}{4} m_{\rm FI}^2)^2
\ln \left(1-\frac{g^2}{4 \kappa^2}\frac{m_{\rm FI}^2}{s^2}\right)
+\frac{g^4}{8} m_{\rm FI}^4 \ln \frac{\kappa^2 s^2}{Q^2}
\Big\}
\,,\end{aligned}$$ where within minimal SUGRA $$s=S{\rm e}^{8\pi\frac{S^2}{m_{\rm Pl}^2}}\,.$$ Note that a corresponding correction also applies to the Coleman-Weinberg potential in the $F$-term model, but it is negligible when compared with the minimal SUGRA correction in that case. In turn, the minimal SUGRA correction and the possible $c_H^2$ term do not occur in the $D$-term model due to the vanishing of the $F$-terms. When ignoring SUGRA or assuming its absence, we can simply set $s=S$. One can then prove that the VEV of the inflaton at horizon exit $\sigma_{\rm e}$ is proportional to $g$. For a given $P_{\cal R}$, the induced values of $m_{\rm FI}$ and $n_{s}$ are then independent of $g$. Numerically, it turns out that the approximation $s=S$ and therefore the degeneracy in the parameter $g$ is good for $g\stackrel{<}{{}_\sim}0.1$ and where the parameter $\kappa$ is within the allowed range, see Fig. \[figure:dterm2\].
We note that a tadpole correction does not occur in the $D$-term model, but there is the curvature term (\[V:R\]). Since this only contributes significantly for large values of $\kappa$ where there is a large contribution of cosmic strings to the CMB-temperature fluctuations, we do not consider it any further here.
The dimensionless string tension in these models is given by $G\mu=2\pi(m_{\rm FI}/m_{\rm pl})^2$, since the strings satisfy the Bogomol’nyi bound. Moreover, the relationship between $N_{\rm e}$ and $T_{\rm R}$ is modified to $$N_{\rm e}\approx
50+\frac 13 \log \frac{T_{\rm R}}{10^9 {\rm GeV}}+
\frac 23 \log \frac{\sqrt g m_{\rm FI}}{10^{15} {\rm GeV}}
\,.$$
As in the $F$-term case we have computed the important observational quantities ignoring the $V_R$ term, and the results are presented in Fig. \[figure:dterm\] using $g=10^{-3}$, $T_{\rm R}=10^{9}{\rm GeV}$ and $s=S$. In accordance with the above discussion, these results are independent of the parameter $g$ if we ignore SUGRA, and are also a good approximation for the minimal SUGRA case when $g$ is small ($\stackrel{<}{{}_\sim} 0.1$).
Cosmic string power spectrum {#Sspec}
----------------------------
Work in the late 1990s led to strings being excluded as the primary source of cosmic fluctuations [@PST; @ABR; @Knox; @CHMa], since they cannot reproduce the observed peak structure of the power spectrum due to decoherence [@ACFMa], and the maximum of the spectrum is located at the multipole moment $\ell\approx 500$, since the fluctuations are created at the scale corresponding to the correlation length [@ACFMb]. More recent work has improved the accuracy of the string spectrum [@PV; @bevis; @Landriau], but since the string contribution to the power spectrum is at most 10%, substantially less accurate predictions are necessary than for the dominant adiabatic component.
We have used the model described in ref. [@PV] which is an adaptation of that first proposed in ref. [@ABR]. It models the string network in the radiation era as a set of line segments with a given length $\xi_{r}=0.26$ relative to the horizon and rms velocity $\langle v_{r}^2\rangle^\frac 12=0.65$, where the functional extrapolation from the radiation era to the matter era can be found in ref. [@MS]. The adaptation of ref. [@PV] also includes the effects of string “wiggles”[@carter; @vilenkin] via the parameter $\beta=\sqrt{\tilde\mu/\tilde T}$ where $\tilde\mu$ and $\tilde T$ are the mass per unit length and tension of the wiggly strings. The value of $\beta$ in the radiation and matter eras has been estimated to be $\beta_{r} \approx 1.9$ and $\beta_{m} \approx 1.5$. The interpolation between the two epochs is achieved using the function $\beta(\eta)=1+(\beta_{r}-1)a/(\eta \dot{a})$, where an overdot represents the derivative with respect to the conformal time $\eta$. In Fig. \[fig:stringspec\] we plot the angular power spectra for the temperature and polarization predicted by cosmic strings with $\beta_{r}=1.9$. This spectrum was computed by averaging over 400 string network realisations and using the WMAP best fit cosmological parameters $\Omega_{\rm b}h^2=0.0223$, $\Omega_{\rm m}h^2=0.127$, $h=0.73$ and $\tau_{R}=0.088$. $\Omega_{\rm b}$, $\Omega_{\rm c}$ and $\Omega_{\rm m}=\Omega_{\rm b}+\Omega_{\rm c}$ are the densities of baryons, cold dark matter and matter defined relative to critical, and $h=H_0/(100{\rm km}\,{\rm sec}^{-1}\,{\rm Mpc}^{-1})$. We also show the effect of changing the wiggliness parameter on the temperature power spectrum by plotting the ratio of the spectrum compared to $\beta_{r}=1.9$ for a variety of values of $\beta_r$. We see that if $1.3\le\beta_{r}\le 2.8$ the effect of changing $\beta_r$ is at most a 20% effect. We find similar size modifications for sensible variations in the other two parameters, $\xi_{r}$ and $\langle v^2\rangle_{r}^{1/2}$.
MCMC analysis {#MCMC}
-------------
Since computation of the string power spectrum takes $\approx 24$ hours for each set of cosmological parameters it is not feasible to do this at every step of a Markov-Chain-Monte-Carlo (MCMC) analysis. However, since the string power spectrum is likely to be only around 5% of the total, if the string spectrum varies by less than, say, 10-20% in the range of parameters allowed by the WMAP data assuming only adiabatic perturbations, the error introduced by assuming that the string spectrum is unchanged by any variation in the cosmological parameters is less than the 1% accuracy claimed by codes such as [CMBFAST]{} [@Seljak] and [CAMB]{} [@LC]. This would allow very fast MCMC analysis using a single extra parameter $G\mu$ which normalizes the string power spectrum.
In Fig. \[fig:ttcomp\] we present the ratio of the string spectra for parameters which are $3-\sigma$ away, as defined by the constraints on adiabatic models from WMAP, from the fiducial spectrum. We see that there is, at most, a 20% variation in the spectrum in each case. Therefore, assuming that the string model itself is correct, it appears safe to ignore the variation of cosmological parameters on the string spectrum.
The MCMC analysis used the May 2006 version of [COSMOMC]{} [@LB] in order to create chains which were used to estimate confidence limits on the cosmological parameters. The basic set of four parameters $\{ \Omega_{\rm b}h^2, \Omega_{\rm c}h^2, \tau_{\rm R}, \theta_{\rm A} \}$, where $\theta_{\rm A}$ is defined by the ratio of the sound horizon to the angular diameter distance at the redshift of recombination, were used in each case. In addition, we vary the set $\{ \log(10^{10}P_{\cal R}),n_{s}, G \mu \}$, or alternatively derive these parameters from an inflationary model of interest defined by $\{ M, \log \kappa, c_{H}^{2}, m_{\rm FI}, \log g, ..... \}$. In tables \[FTermSummary\] and \[DTermSummary\] of the appendix, there is, for comparison, a fit for the parameters $\{ \Omega_{\rm b}h^2, \Omega_{\rm c}h^2, \tau_{\rm R}, \theta_{\rm A},\log(10^{10}P_{\cal R}),n_{s} \}$; we refer to this as the standard six parameter fit, there and elsewhere in the text.
For the analysis of section \[sec:blue\] we use three parameters $\{\log(10^{10}P_{\cal R}),n_s,G\mu\}$ to describe the power spectrum. For the analyses of the $F$-term and $D$-term models, we first tried using the model parameters $\{M,\log \kappa\}$ or $\{m_{\rm FI},\log \kappa\}$ and computed $\{\log(10^{10}P_{\cal R}),n_s,G\mu\}$ from them. However, since the range of these parameters allowed by the data is a very narrow degenerate line, the acceptance rate for the Markov Chains was very low. As an alternative we found that using $\log(10^{10}P_{\cal R})$ and $\log \kappa$ as the parameters allowed for rapid convergence of the chains. The values of $M$ (or $m_{\rm FI}$), $G\mu$ were then computed as derived parameters. Note that this approach also corresponds to a six parameter fit. For the simplest models, one needs one further piece of information, $N_{\rm e}$ and this was parameterized by the reheat temperature, $T_{\rm R}$. In addition, where necessary $c_H^2$ and $\log g$ were used as additional parameters.
We use data from the 3rd year observations from WMAP [@Hinshaw; @Page] (WMAP3 and WMAP1 are used to refer to the 3rd year and 1st year data) and three experiments which observe at substantially higher resolution than possible using WMAP. These are the Cosmic Background Imager (CBI) [@Readhead], the ArCminute Bolometer ARray (ACBAR) [@Kuo] and BOOMERANG [@Piacentini; @Jones; @Montroy]. The intrinsic flat priors, listed in Table \[flatpriors\], were chosen to be sufficiently broad to incorporate the lines of degeneracy known to exist within the space of parameters.
Parameter Prior
------------------------------------- ---------------
$\Omega_{\rm b} h^2 $ (0.005, 0.1)
$\Omega_{\rm c} h^2 $ (0.01, 0.99)
$\theta_{\rm A} $ (0.5, 10)
$\tau_{\rm R} $ (0.01, 0.9)
$\log (10^{10} P_{\cal R})$ (2.7, 5.0)
$n_{s} $ (0.5, 1.5)
$\log \kappa$ (-5.0, -0.3)
$\log(T_{\rm R} /10^{9} {\rm GeV})$ (-6.0, 1.0)
$c_H^{2}$ (-0.25, 0.03)
$\log g$ (-2.0, 0.0)
: \[flatpriors\] Table of flat priors. The notation $(a,b)$ for a particular parameter gives the lower and upper bounds allowed in the fit.
Results
=======
In this section, we present the results of the likelihood analyses for various scenarios. The standard six parameter fit extended by the string tension $G\mu$ is discussed in \[sec:blue\], the $F$-term models with minimal SUGRA in \[sec:fterm\_res\], $D$-term inflation in \[sec:dterm\_res\] and finally $F$-term inflation with non-minimal SUGRA in \[sec:nonmin\]. All results of this section are summarized in tables \[FTermSummary\] and \[DTermSummary\] in the appendix, so that they can easily be compared.
Inclusion of strings allows blue power spectra {#sec:blue}
----------------------------------------------
It was pointed out by the WMAP team [@wmap] that the tight constraint on $n_{s}=0.951_{-0.019}^{+0.015}$ only applies to $r=0$, and that larger values are allowed for non-zero $r$. The SUSY hybrid inflation models under consideration here give rise to $r<10^{-4}$, but the string contribution to the power spectrum is similar in many ways to that for tensors and our investigation of this effect was first motivated by the possibility that there is a degeneracy between $n_{s}$ and $G\mu$ which would allow $n_{s}\approx 0.98$ to be accommodated more comfortably.
The results of performing a 7-parameter fit (the basic set of four plus $\{ \log(10^{10}P_{\cal R}),n_{s}, G \mu \}$) are presented in Fig. \[fig:7param\]. There is a $2-\sigma$ upper bound on $G\mu<3.0\times 10^{-7}$ (marginalized) which is compatible with previous estimates [@pog; @bevis; @slosel]. It can be seen clearly that for $G\mu<10^{-7}$ lower values of $n_{s}=0.94-0.98$ are preferred, whereas for $G\mu>10^{-7}$ values as large as $n_{s}=1.02$ are within the $2-\sigma$ contour. Larger values of $n_{s}$ also require larger values of $\Omega_{\rm b}h^2$; if we fix $n_{s}=0.98$ and perform a 6 parameter fit then $G\mu=2.5 \times 10^{-7}$ is the best fitting value and $\Omega_{\rm b}h^2\approx 0.025$. This analysis appears to compatible with the intuition described above and suggests that a more detailed analysis of the more restricted parameter space for the $F$- and $D$-term models is warranted.
The computed value of $-2\log{\cal L}=11302.8$ for the likelihood of the 7 parameter fit compares to 11305.5 for a 6 parameter fit which corresponds to a $\Delta\chi^2\approx 2.7$. It is clear from this that any sensible Bayesian model selection criterion would not favour the 7 parameter model over that with 6 parameters. If we fix $n_{s}=0.98$ and fit for $G\mu$ as the sixth parameter, then we find that $-2\log{\cal L}=11303.0$ suggesting that this 6 parameter model gives an equally good fit.
If we impose $\Omega_{\rm b}h^2=0.020\pm 0.002$ as suggested by Big Bang Nucleosynthesis we find that $G\mu<2.2\times 10^{-7}$ (marginalized) and $n_{s}=0.953 \pm 0.015$.
Minimal $F$-term models {#sec:fterm_res}
-----------------------
The results of an analysis of minimal $F$-term models in which we have varied $\kappa$ and $\log(10^{10}P_{\cal R})$ with $T_{\rm R}=10^9{\rm GeV}$ and $g=0.7$ including the string contribution (with $n_s$, $G\mu$, $M$ and $N_e$ as derived parameters) are presented in Fig. \[figure:FTERMres\]. We find that $\log\kappa=-2.34\pm 0.38$ and $M=(0.518\pm 0.059)\times 10^{16}{\rm GeV}$, although there is a strong correlation between the two. The best fitting model has $-2\log{\cal L}=11303.3$, which is close to that of the standard 6 parameter fit. The best fit value for the string tension is $G\mu=2.6\times 10^{-7}$, which corresponds to $6\%$ of the power spectrum amplitude at $\ell=10$. We find that $n_s= 0.985 \pm 0.004 $, $G \mu = (2.5 \pm 0.6) \times 10^{-7} $ and $\Omega_{\rm b}h^2 = 0.0255 \pm 0.0009$.
We have performed the same analysis but have left out the string contribution to the power spectrum. The results of this analysis are also presented in Fig. \[figure:FTERMres\]. The range of values in the $\kappa-M$ plane which are allowed in this (incorrect) analysis are much larger and for the best fit, $-2\log{\cal L}=11308.4$ which is significantly worse than that with strings included. If strings are included, large values of $\kappa$ are disallowed since they give rise to an excess string component, $G\mu>3\times 10^{-7}$.
We have also performed an analysis with $T_{\rm R}$ allowed to vary between $1\,{\rm TeV}$ and $10^{10}{\rm GeV}$. The results are not changed significantly, which is what should be expected; $T_{\rm R}$ only modifies $N_{\rm e}$ logarithmically, and the important quantities, $n_{s}$ and $P_{\cal R}$, are only changed by a few percent. The effect of varying $T_{\rm R}$ is illustrated in Fig. \[figure:FTERMres2\].
In addition, we have performed an analysis where the tadpole (with $a_S= 1\, {\rm TeV}$) and curvature (with $Q=m_{\rm Pl}/\sqrt{8\pi}$) corrections to the potential are included. These results are illustrated in Fig. \[figure:FTERMres3\] and show a bimodal likelihood surface in the $\kappa-M$ plane. There is an additional allowed region for small $\kappa$, which is absent in the case without the tadpole contribution. This is due to the fact, that for small $\kappa$, the parameter $M$ and, hence, also the string tension increase again, allowing for $n_{s}$ to be close to one.
Constraints on the model parameters for hybrid inflation have been investigated previously by a number of authors. The most straightforward approach is to calculate the value of $M$ for a given $\kappa$ in accordance with the observed value for $P_{\cal R}$. The string contribution to the temperature fluctuations is proportional to the string tension, which is by (\[nonBogol\]) a function of $\kappa$ and $M$. Imposing the reported results (for example, ref. [@pog]) for an upper bound on the string contribution therefore allows one to constrain the parameter $\kappa$. The above approach is valid, since $P_{\cal R}$ is tightly constrained, and for a given $\kappa$, $M$ may only vary in a small range. Rocher and Sakellariadou [@RoSa] obtain $\kappa \stackrel{<}{{}_\sim} 9 \times 10^{-5}$ as an upper bound. However, Jeannerot and Postma [@JP1; @JP2] point out that taking account of the corrections (\[nonBogol\]) due to deviations from the Bogomol’nyi limit leads to the significant relaxation to $\kappa \stackrel{<}{{}_\sim} 5 \times 10^{-2}$, under the assumption that strings contribute less than 10% to the power spectrum at $\ell=4$; a result which is in accordance with our analysis. These approaches do not render a precision determination of the allowed range for the parameter $\kappa$ due to the uncertainty in the upper bound on the string contribution, a shortcoming which we resolve here. More important, unlike the approach of refs. [@RoSa; @JP1; @JP2], the methods presented here fully address the impact of the presence of the string network on the preferred values of the other cosmological parameters, in particular $n_{s}$. We note that [@RoSa; @JP1; @JP2] appeared before the WMAP3 data, which makes high precision constraints on $n_{s}$ possible, became available.
We also note the work by Fraisse [@fraisse05; @fraisse06], who has performed a fit for the standard six parameters and the relative contribution of topological defects as the seventh, comparable to our analysis in section \[sec:blue\]. While the paper based on the WMAP1 data [@fraisse05] contains plots indicating qualitatively the same dependence of $\Omega_{\rm b}$ and $n_{s}$ on the defect contribution as we present in Fig. \[fig:7param\], such a presentation is not given in the discussion of the analysis of the WMAP3 data [@fraisse06] where it is more relevant. Fraisse’s study does not, however, exploit the relation between $\kappa$ and the spectral index $n_{s}$ and therefore comes short of giving a precision determination of the parameter $\kappa$. Moreover, the deviation from the Bogomol’nyi limit is not taken into account, leading to a far too tight constraint on $\kappa$.
$D$-term models {#sec:dterm_res}
---------------
We have also investigated constraints on $\kappa$ and $m_{\rm FI}$ for $D$-term inflation models, which are quantitatively different from those for $F$-term inflation. We initially fix $g=10^{-3}$ and $T_{\rm R}=10^9{\rm GeV}$. The results including the string component and, for comparison, artificially excluding it are presented in Fig. \[figure:DTERMres\].
For the scenario with strings, we find for the parameters $\log\kappa= -4.24 \pm 0.19 $, $m_{\rm FI}= (0.24 \pm 0.03)\,{\rm GeV} $ and the likelihood $-2\log{\cal L}=11305.0$ for the best fit model. When compared to the $F$-term model, significantly lower values for $\kappa$ are preferred, which in turn also induces lower preferred values for $m_{\rm FI}$ in comparison to $M$. The reason for this can be seen when the strings are not included – a wide range of values for $\kappa$ are allowed by the data, but those with $\kappa>10^{-4}$ correspond to string tensions which are excluded. Since the strings satisfy the Bogomol’nyi limit in this case, the string bound is much more restrictive than in the $F$-term model. When the string contribution to the power spectrum is ignored, we find for the likelihood function of the best-fit model $-2\log{\cal L}=11307.9$.
Following our discussion in section \[Dterm\], the results for $g=10^{-3}$ also apply for all values $g \stackrel{<}{{}_\sim} 0.1$. This degeneracy can be seen from Fig \[figure:dterm2\]. For larger values of $g$, the degeneracy is broken, but these points in parameter space are ruled out due to the violation of slow-roll conditions. The $2-\sigma$ upper bound on $g<0.092$ when strings are included and $g<0.44$ when strings are not included; see Fig. \[figure:DTERMres2\].
$F$-term inflation with non-minimal SUGRA {#sec:nonmin}
-----------------------------------------
Here, we study the $F$-term model with a non-zero parameter $c_H^2$ for the SUGRA contribution (\[V:SUGRA\]) and we treat $c_{H}^{2}$ as an additional free parameter in the MCMC analysis. The results as presented in Figs. \[figure:FTERMCH2str\] and \[figure:FTERMCH2nonstr\] show that negative values for $c_H^2$ lead to an enhancement of the red-tilt of the spectral index, which is why this parameter originally was considered [@BasShaKi]. When strings are included, it can be seen from Fig. \[figure:FTERMCH2str\] that there is a region for the parameter $\kappa$ where a non-zero $c_H^2$ is not required. We find the best fit values for the parameters $\log \kappa=-1.87 \pm 0.66$, $M=(0.417 \pm 0.093)\times 10^{16}{\rm GeV}$, $c_H^2=-0.030\pm0.035$ and the overall likelihood $-2\log {\cal L}=11302.6$. For comparison, we also show in Fig. \[figure:FTERMCH2nonstr\] the results for the model without including strings, where indeed negative values for $c_H^2$ are favoured over the allowed range for $\kappa$. It is worth pointing out that the allowed range for $\kappa$ reaches up to values $\kappa\approx 0.4$, whereas in the models with $c_H^2=0$, we find $\kappa \stackrel{<}{{}_\sim} 0.08$. This is because the minimal SUGRA correction, which induces a blue tilt of the spectral index, can to some extent be balanced by negative values for $c_H^2$. However, for such large values of $\kappa \stackrel{>}{{}_\sim} 0.1$, $c_H^2$ has to be tuned rather strongly. The poor convergence of the Markov Chains in that region is apparent by inspecting Figs. \[figure:FTERMCH2str\] and \[figure:FTERMCH2nonstr\].
Discussion and conclusions
==========================
We have computed up-to-date precision constraints on the parameters $\kappa$ and $M$ for $F$-term inflation, and $\kappa$ and $m_{\rm FI}$ for $D$-term inflation. Assuming that the data is correct and that one of these minimal SUSY hybrid inflation models is correct, we have shown that one can measure accurately parameters of supersymmetric models at Grand Unified scales. In particular, we have shown that the inclusion of the effects of strings is crucial to establish correct constraints. For comparison, we have performed most analyses also for the case where the string contribution is artificially excluded. Throughout our discussion we have also highlighted potential corrections to the constraints for the most minimal models, in particular we investigated the effect of the leading non-minimal SUGRA correction and of the tadpole induced by soft SUSY breaking.
Without taking account of strings, one may infer from the WMAP3 data [@wmap] that the minimal $F$ term models, which predict $n_{s} \approx 0.98$, are in tension with the data at $2-\sigma$ level and that the small coupling domain of hybrid inflation, where $n_{s} \approx 1$ is ruled out at $3-\sigma$ level [@PrecCon; @JP3]. The latter constraint would in fact rule out $D$-term inflation, which requires the parameter $\kappa$ to be small in order not to have an excess contribution of strings to the perturbation spectrum. However, the self-consistent analysis performed here reveals that $D$-term inflation is not yet ruled out and, moreover, that the minimal six parameter $F$-term models with strings fit the data as well as the standard six parameter model.
There are also some theoretical modelling uncertainties associated with establishing the cosmic string spectrum. We have shown that if $1.3\le\beta_r\le 2.8$ then the effect on the string power spectrum is around $20\%$, which is $\sim 1\%$ on the total. Sensible variations of $\xi_{r}$ and $\langle v^2\rangle_{r}^{1/2}$ also induce variations of $<20\%$. It appears that further refinement of the string power spectrum beyond this level of understanding is unnecessary for obtaining accurate constraints on hybrid inflation models.
In addition to theoretical uncertainties there are a number of other issues associated with the use of the data which need to be carefully assessed: the discrepancy between the data and a SUSY hybrid inflation model with no strings and $n_{s}\approx 0.98$ is only around $2-\sigma$ (95% confidence level). Chief amongst the uncertainties is how the polarized foregrounds are extracted and how line-of-sight effects such as gravitational lensing [@CL] and the Sunyaev-Zeldovich (SZ) effect are dealt with. For example in the analysis performed by the WMAP team an SZ contribution was included in the analysis with an amplitude which was marginalized over. Since this contribution to the power spectrum will be increasing with $\ell$, such an analysis will tend to lower the best fit value of $n_{s}$. Conversely, taking into account the gravitational lensing effect will have a tendency to increase the value of $n_{s}$. We have included neither in our analysis, presuming that they will cancel each other out. Once even higher precision data is available, from for example the PLANCK satellite, these effects may come to dominate the systematics.
There is an important observational signature of these models which may be in reach in the near future. Inflationary models with non-zero $r$ predict that there will be $B$-mode polarization on large scales peaking around $\ell\approx 100$, but as we have already noted the SUSY hybrid inflation models predict $r<10^{-4}$ and a signal this weak is unlikely to ever be detected. However, as we have already pointed out the anisotropies created by cosmic strings create $B$-mode polarization since they do not distinguish between scalar, vector and tensor anisotropies. Fig. \[figure:bmode\] shows both the adiabatic and cosmic string components to the temperature anisotropies and polarization for a model with an artificially large value of $r=0.1$ at $k=0.05{\rm Mpc}^{-1}$. It can be seen that there is a $B$-mode polarization signal due to the cosmic string component, which has an amplitude of $\approx 0.3\mu{\rm K}$ at around $\ell\approx 1000$. This has very different characteristics to that due to adiabatic tensor perturbations and is of similar amplitude to the contribution expected due to the conversion of $E$-mode polarization into $B$-mode by gravitational lensing. In ref. [@Seljak:2006hi] it was pointed out that string tensions of as low as $G\mu\approx 10^{-9}$ might be detectable in future CMB polarization missions if one is able to “clean” the lensing contribution using high resolution observations.
Finally we should point out that a network of cosmic strings with $G\mu\sim 10^{-7}$ will lead to a number of other potentially observable effects. In particular, the decay of cosmic string loops could create a stochastic background of gravitational waves (see ref. [@Caldwell:1996en] and references therein) if the dominant decay channel for the strings is gravitation. Such a background is constrained by the lack of timing residuals in the observations of pulsars; the most recent constraint being that $\Omega_{\rm g}h^2<2\times 10^{-9}$ at frequencies of $f\approx 2\times 10^{-9}{\rm Hz}$ [@pulsar]. If we assume that the absolute lower bound on the string spectrum is given by the “red-noise” spectrum generated by the decay of string loops in the radiation era, then one can use various parameters measured by string network simulations [@BB; @AS] and the measured value of $\Omega_{\rm m}$ to compute a bound on $G\mu$ as a function of the loop production size relative to the horizon, $\alpha$. The results of doing this are presented in Fig. \[figure:pulsar\]. We see that for small $\alpha$ there is a plateau with $G\mu<1.4\times 10^{-7}$ and for larger values of $\alpha$ (which are probably less likely) more tight constraints are possible. These results are considerably more stringent than those presented in ref. [@Caldwell:1996en] since at that time the limit $\Omega_{\rm g}h^2<9\times 10^{-8}$ was used.
Taken at face value these results appear to further constrain, but do not yet rule out, the $F$-term scenarios under consideration here to a narrow range of $\log\kappa\approx -3$ and $M\approx 4\times 10^{15}{\rm GeV}$, with a qualitatively similar situation in the $D$-term case. There are, however, numerous uncertainties, particularly in the details of string evolution which could substantially change the conclusions and therefore at this stage we feel that it would not be sensible to include these observations in our likelihood analysis. We have already noted that the anisotropy power spectrum that we would observe in the CMB is not that sensitive to the details of string evolution since it is sub-dominant and therefore it is unlikely that one would be able to unequivocally rule in or out these models on the basis of CMB measurements. Hence, it appears that improved observations of pulsar timing and a significantly better understanding of string network evolution, directed towards the pulsar bound, would be the best way of constraining these scenarios further.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
We are grateful to Mark Hindmarsh and Apostolos Pilaftsis for helpful comments.
Note added in proof {#note-added-in-proof .unnumbered}
===================
Ref. [@Jenet] appeared recently claiming that in fact the pulsar constraint is $\Omega_{\rm g}h^2 < 2 \times 10^{-8}$. If this is the case, the constraint on $G\mu$ is reduced by a factor of 10 as illustrated by the dashed line in Fig. \[figure:pulsar\].
Summary of results\[App:Summary\]
=================================
We summarize here the best-fit parameters together with the $1-\sigma$ confidence intervals for the various $F$-term scenarios in table \[FTermSummary\] and for the $D$-term model in table \[DTermSummary\]. For comparison, we have included in each table the results for the standard six parameter fit and for the seven parameter fit including strings.
------------------------------------- --------------------- --------------------- --------------------- --------------------- --------------------- --------------------- --------------------- --------------------- ---------------------
Parameter I(s) I(ns) II (s) II(ns) III(s) III(ns) IV (s) V(s) V(ns)
$\Omega_{\rm b}$ $0.0237 \pm 0.0015$ $0.0225 \pm 0.0007$ $0.0255 \pm 0.0009$ $0.0235 \pm 0.0005$ $0.0256 \pm 0.0009$ $0.0234 \pm 0.0004$ $0.0257 \pm 0.0010$ $0.0242 \pm 0.0014$ $0.0225 \pm 0.0007$
$\Omega_{\rm c}$ $0.103 \pm 0.007$ $0.106 \pm 0.007$ $0.100 \pm 0.007$ $0.102 \pm 0.007$ $0.100 \pm 0.007$ $0.101 \pm 0.006$ $0.100 \pm 0.007$ $0.103 \pm 0.007$ $0.105 \pm 0.007$
$\theta_{\rm A}$ $1.044 \pm 0.004$ $1.042 \pm 0.003$ $1.048 \pm 0.003$ $1.045 \pm 0.003$ $1.048 \pm 0.003$ $1.044 \pm 0.002$ $1.049 \pm 0.003$ $1.045 \pm 0.004$ $1.042 \pm 0.003$
$\tau_{\rm R}$ $0.097 \pm 0.032$ $0.092 \pm 0.029$ $0.113 \pm 0.029$ $0.123 \pm 0.028$ $0.112 \pm 0.026$ $0.123 \pm 0.024$ $0.115 \pm 0.029$ $0.095 \pm 0.030$ $0.090 \pm 0.030$
$\log (10^{10} P_{\cal R})$ $3.00 \pm 0.07$ $3.03 \pm 0.06$ $3.00 \pm 0.07$ $3.09 \pm 0.05$ $3.00 \pm 0.06$ $3.09 \pm 0.05$ $3.00 \pm 0.07$ $2.98 \pm 0.06$ $3.02 \pm 0.06$
$n_{s} $ $0.964 \pm 0.019$ $0.956 \pm 0.016$ $0.985 \pm 0.004$ $0.987 \pm 0.006$ $0.984 \pm 0.003$ $0.986 \pm 0.006$ $0.987 \pm 0.006$ $0.964 \pm 0.016$ $0.956 \pm 0.016$
$\log \kappa$ - - $-2.34 \pm 0.38$ $-2.40 \pm 0.88$ $-2.32 \pm 0.35$ $-2.28 \pm 0.78$ $-2.58 \pm 0.76$ $-1.87 \pm 0.66$ $-1.82 \pm 0.72$
$\log(T_{\rm R} /10^{9} {\rm GeV})$ - - 0.0 0.0 $-2.5 \pm 2.0$ $-2.6 \pm 2.0$ 0.0 0.0 0.0
$M /10^{16} {\rm GeV}$ - - $0.518 \pm 0.059$ $0.495 \pm 0.139$ $0.525 \pm 0.054$ $0.518 \pm 0.122$ $0.549 \pm 0.079$ $0.417 \pm 0.093$ $0.373 \pm 0.102$
$c_H^{2}$ - - - - - - - $-0.030 \pm 0.035 $ $-0.038 \pm 0.038 $
$G \mu /10^{-7}$ $ <3.0 $ - $2.50 \pm 0.65$ $2.81 \pm 1.61$ $2.56 \pm 0.61$ $3.02 \pm 1.51$ $2.54 \pm 0.60$ $2.07 \pm 0.72$ $1.85 \pm 1.12$
$N_{\rm e}$ - - $49.1 \pm 0.5$ $49.0 \pm 0.9$ $47.2 \pm 1.6$ $47.1 \pm 1.7$ $48.9 \pm 0.5$ $49.3 \pm 0.5$ $49.2 \pm 0.6$
$\Omega_{\rm m} $ $0.217 \pm 0.033$ $0.237 \pm 0.031$ $0.191 \pm 0.023$ $0.211 \pm 0.026$ $0.191 \pm 0.023$ $0.209 \pm 0.025$ $0.190 \pm 0.024$ $0.214 \pm 0.031$ $0.236 \pm 0.030$
$\Omega_{\rm \Lambda} $ $0.783 \pm 0.033$ $0.763 \pm 0.031$ $0.809 \pm 0.023$ $0.789 \pm 0.026$ $0.809 \pm 0.023$ $0.791 \pm 0.025$ $0.810 \pm 0.024$ $0.786 \pm 0.031$ $0.764 \pm 0.030$
$t_{0}/{\rm Gyr}$ $13.44 \pm 0.26$ $13.66 \pm 0.15 $ $13.12 \pm 0.15$ $13.42 \pm 0.10$ $13.11 \pm 0.15$ $13.45 \pm 0.09$ $13.10 \pm 0.16$ $13.37 \pm 0.25$ $13.66 \pm 0.15$
$z_{\rm re} $ $11.2 \pm 2.5$ $11.3 \pm 2.5$ $12.0 \pm 2.2$ $13.4 \pm 2.1$ $11.9 \pm 1.9$ $13.4 \pm 1.8$ $12.0 \pm 2.2$ $10.9 \pm 2.3$ $11.1 \pm 2.5$
$h $ $0.77 \pm 0.04$ $0.74 \pm 0.03$ $0.81 \pm 0.03$ $0.77 \pm 0.03$ $0.81 \pm 0.03$ $0.77 \pm 0.03$ $0.82 \pm 0.03$ $0.78 \pm 0.04$ $0.74 \pm 0.03$
$-2 \log \mathcal{L}$ 11302.8 11305.5 11303.3 11308.4 11303.2 11308.0 11303.2 11302.6 11305.5
------------------------------------- --------------------- --------------------- --------------------- --------------------- --------------------- --------------------- --------------------- --------------------- ---------------------
------------------------------------- --------------------- --------------------- --------------------- --------------------- --------------------- ---------------------
Parameter I(s) I(ns) VI (s) VI(ns) VII(s) VII(ns)
$\Omega_{\rm b}$ $0.0237 \pm 0.0015$ $0.0225 \pm 0.0007$ $0.0261 \pm 0.0011$ $0.0234 \pm 0.0005$ $0.0263 \pm 0.0011$ $0.0234 \pm 0.0004$
$\Omega_{\rm c}$ $0.103 \pm 0.007$ $0.106 \pm 0.007$ $0.098 \pm 0.007$ $0.102 \pm 0.007$ $0.098 \pm 0.007$ $0.102 \pm 0.007$
$\theta_{\rm A}$ $1.044 \pm 0.004$ $1.042 \pm 0.003$ $1.050 \pm 0.003$ $1.045 \pm 0.003$ $1.050 \pm 0.003$ $1.045 \pm 0.003$
$\tau_{\rm R}$ $0.097 \pm 0.032$ $0.092 \pm 0.029$ $0.131 \pm 0.028$ $0.119 \pm 0.029$ $0.131 \pm 0.029$ $0.118 \pm 0.028$
$\log (10^{10} P_{\cal R})$ $3.00 \pm 0.07$ $3.03 \pm 0.06$ $3.04 \pm 0.07$ $3.08 \pm 0.06$ $3.03 \pm 0.07$ $3.08 \pm 0.05$
$n_{s} $ $0.964 \pm 0.019$ $0.956 \pm 0.016$ $0.9993 \pm 0.0003$ $0.984 \pm 0.006$ $1.000 \pm 0.001$ $0.985 \pm 0.006$
$\log \kappa$ - - $-4.24 \pm 0.19$ $-2.10 \pm 0.89$ $-4.24 \pm 0.20$ $-1.97 \pm 0.76$
$\log(T_{\rm R} /10^{9} {\rm GeV})$ - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
$m_{\rm FI} /10^{16} {\rm GeV}$ - - $0.245 \pm 0.031$ $0.730 \pm 0.171$ $0.249 \pm 0.029$ $0.754 \pm 0.135$
$\log(g)$ - - -3.0 -3.0 $<-1.0$ $<-0.36$
$G \mu /10^{-7}$ $ <3.0 $ - $2.56 \pm 0.61$ $23.7 \pm 8.1$ $2.65 \pm 0.57$ $24.7 \pm 6.7$
$N_{\rm e}$ - - $47.7 \pm 0.1$ $48.4 \pm 0.3$ $48.9 \pm 0.3$ $49.9 \pm 0.4$
$\Omega_{\rm m} $ $0.217 \pm 0.033$ $0.237 \pm 0.031$ $0.181 \pm 0.022$ $0.213 \pm 0.026$ $0.179 \pm 0.022$ $0.213 \pm 0.026$
$\Omega_{\rm \Lambda} $ $0.783 \pm 0.033$ $0.763 \pm 0.031$ $0.819 \pm 0.022$ $0.787 \pm 0.026$ $0.821 \pm 0.022$ $0.787 \pm 0.026$
$t_{0}/{\rm Gyr}$ $13.44 \pm 0.26$ $13.66 \pm 0.15 $ $13.00 \pm 0.17$ $13.45 \pm 0.10$ $12.97 \pm 0.18$ $13.45 \pm 0.10$
$z_{\rm re} $ $11.2 \pm 2.5$ $11.3 \pm 2.5$ $13.0 \pm 2.0$ $13.1 \pm 2.2$ $13.0 \pm 2.0$ $13.1 \pm 2.1$
$h $ $0.77 \pm 0.04$ $0.74 \pm 0.03$ $0.83 \pm 0.03$ $0.77 \pm 0.03$ $0.84 \pm 0.03$ $0.77 \pm 0.03$
$-2 \log \mathcal{L}$ 11302.8 11305.5 11305.0 11307.9 11305.0 11308.0
------------------------------------- --------------------- --------------------- --------------------- --------------------- --------------------- ---------------------
[99]{}
D. N. Spergel [*et al.*]{}, “Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) three year results: Implications for cosmology,” arXiv:astro-ph/0603449. L. Alabidi and D. H. Lyth, “Inflation models after WMAP year three,” arXiv:astro-ph/0603539; W. H. Kinney, E. W. Kolb, A. Melchiorri and A. Riotto, “Inflation model constraints from the Wilkinson microwave anisotropy probe three-year data,” arXiv:astro-ph/0605338. V. F. Mukhanov and G. V. Chibisov, “Quantum Fluctuation And ’Nonsingular’ Universe. (In Russian),” JETP Lett. [**33**]{} (1981) 532 \[Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. [**33**]{} (1981) 549\]; A. A. Starobinsky, “Dynamics Of Phase Transition In The New Inflationary Universe Scenario And Generation Of Perturbations,” Phys. Lett. B [**117**]{} (1982) 175; S. W. Hawking, “The Development Of Irregularities In A Single Bubble Inflationary Universe,” Phys. Lett. B [**115**]{} (1982) 295; A. H. Guth and S. Y. Pi, “Fluctuations In The New Inflationary Universe,” Phys. Rev. Lett. [**49**]{} (1982) 1110; J. M. Bardeen, P. J. Steinhardt and M. S. Turner, “Spontaneous Creation Of Almost Scale - Free Density Perturbations In An Inflationary Universe,” Phys. Rev. D [**28**]{} (1983) 679. A. D. Linde, Phys. Rev. D [**49**]{} (1994) 748 \[arXiv:astro-ph/9307002\]. E. J. Copeland, A. R. Liddle, D. H. Lyth, E. D. Stewart and D. Wands, “False vacuum inflation with Einstein gravity,” Phys. Rev. D [**49**]{} (1994) 6410 \[arXiv:astro-ph/9401011\]; G. R. Dvali, Q. Shafi and R. K. Schaefer, “Large scale structure and supersymmetric inflation without fine tuning,” Phys. Rev. Lett. [**73**]{} (1994) 1886 \[arXiv:hep-ph/9406319\]. P. Binetruy and G. R. Dvali, “$D$-term inflation,” Phys. Lett. B [**388**]{} (1996) 241 \[arXiv:hep-ph/9606342\]; E. Halyo, “Hybrid inflation from supergravity $D$-terms,” Phys. Lett. B [**387**]{} (1996) 43 \[arXiv:hep-ph/9606423\]. R. Jeannerot, “Inflation in supersymmetric unified theories,” Phys. Rev. D [**56**]{} (1997) 6205 \[arXiv:hep-ph/9706391\]; R. Jeannerot, “A Supersymmetric SO(10) Model with Inflation and Cosmic Strings,” Phys. Rev. D [**53**]{} (1996) 5426 \[arXiv:hep-ph/9509365\]. R. A. Battye and J. Weller, “Cosmic structure formation in hybrid inflation models,” Phys. Rev. D [**61**]{} (2000) 043501 \[arXiv:astro-ph/9810203\]. C. Contaldi, M. Hindmarsh and J. Magueijo, “The power spectra of CMB and density fluctuations seeded by local cosmic strings,” Phys. Rev. Lett. [**82**]{} (1999) 679 \[arXiv:astro-ph/9808201\]. A. A. Fraisse, “Constraints on topological defects energy density from first year WMAP results,” arXiv:astro-ph/0503402. A. A. Fraisse, “Limits on SUSY GUTs and defects formation in hybrid inflationary models with three-year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations,” arXiv:astro-ph/0603589. M. Wyman, L. Pogosian and I. Wasserman, “Bounds on cosmic strings from WMAP and SDSS,” Phys. Rev. D [**72**]{} (2005) 023513 \[Erratum-ibid. D [**73**]{} (2006) 089905\] \[arXiv:astro-ph/0503364\]. U. Seljak, A. Slosar and P. McDonald, “Cosmological parameters from combining the Lyman-alpha forest with CMB, galaxy clustering and SN constraints,” arXiv:astro-ph/0604335. N. Bevis, M. Hindmarsh, M. Kunz and J. Urrestilla, “CMB power spectrum contribution from cosmic strings using field-evolution simulations of the Abelian Higgs model,” arXiv:astro-ph/0605018. N. Bevis, M. Hindmarsh and M. Kunz, “WMAP constraints on inflationary models with global defects,” Phys. Rev. D [**70**]{} (2004) 043508 \[arXiv:astro-ph/0403029\]. S. R. Coleman and E. Weinberg, “Radiative corrections as the origin of spontaneous symmetry breaking,” Phys. Rev. D [**7**]{} (1973) 1888. R. Jeannerot, J. Rocher and M. Sakellariadou, “How generic is cosmic string formation in SUSY GUTs,” Phys. Rev. D [**68**]{} (2003) 103514 \[arXiv:hep-ph/0308134\]. B. Garbrecht and A. Pilaftsis, “$F_D$-term hybrid inflation with electroweak-scale lepton number violation,” arXiv:hep-ph/0601080. B. Garbrecht, C. Pallis and A. Pilaftsis, “Anatomy of F(D)-term hybrid inflation,” arXiv:hep-ph/0605264. P. Binetruy and M. K. Gaillard, “Noncompact Symmetries And Scalar Masses In Superstring - Inspired Models,” Phys. Lett. B [**195**]{} (1987) 382; M. K. Gaillard, H. Murayama and K. A. Olive, “Preserving flat directions during inflation,” Phys. Lett. B [**355**]{} (1995) 71 \[arXiv:hep-ph/9504307\]; M. Bastero-Gil and S. F. King, “F-term hybrid inflation in effective supergravity theories,” Nucl. Phys. B [**549**]{} (1999) 391 \[arXiv:hep-ph/9806477\]. M. Dine, L. Randall and S. D. Thomas, “Supersymmetry breaking in the early universe,” Phys. Rev. Lett. [**75**]{} (1995) 398 \[arXiv:hep-ph/9503303\]. M. Bastero-Gil, S. F. King and Q. Shafi, “Supersymmetric hybrid inflation with non-minimal Kaehler potential,” arXiv:hep-ph/0604198. B. Garbrecht, “Ultraviolet regularisation in de Sitter space,” arXiv:hep-th/0604166.
V. N. Senoguz and Q. Shafi, “Reheat temperature in supersymmetric hybrid inflation models,” Phys. Rev. D [**71**]{} (2005) 043514 \[arXiv:hep-ph/0412102\]. C. T. Hill, H. M. Hodges and M. S. Turner, “Bosonic superconducting cosmic strings,” Phys. Rev. D [**37**]{} (1988) 263. R. Jeannerot and M. Postma, “Confronting hybrid inflation in supergravity with CMB data,” JHEP [**0505**]{} (2005) 071 \[arXiv:hep-ph/0503146\]. M. Kawasaki, K. Kohri and T. Moroi, “Hadronic decay of late-decaying particles and big-bang nucleosynthesis,” Phys. Lett. B [**625**]{} (2005) 7 \[arXiv:astro-ph/0402490\]; M. Kawasaki, K. Kohri and T. Moroi, “Big-bang nucleosynthesis and hadronic decay of long-lived massive particles,” Phys. Rev. D [**71**]{} (2005) 083502 \[arXiv:astro-ph/0408426\].
W. Buchmuller, R. D. Peccei and T. Yanagida, “Leptogenesis as the origin of matter,” Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. [**55**]{} (2005) 311 \[arXiv:hep-ph/0502169\]. A. Pilaftsis, “CP violation and baryogenesis due to heavy Majorana neutrinos,” Phys. Rev. D [**56**]{} (1997) 5431 \[arXiv:hep-ph/9707235\]; A. Pilaftsis and T. E. J. Underwood, “Resonant leptogenesis,” Nucl. Phys. B [**692**]{} (2004) 303 \[arXiv:hep-ph/0309342\]; A. Pilaftsis and T. E. J. Underwood, “Electroweak-scale resonant leptogenesis,” Phys. Rev. D [**72**]{} (2005) 113001 \[arXiv:hep-ph/0506107\].
V. N. Senoguz and Q. Shafi, “Testing supersymmetric grand unified models of inflation,” Phys. Lett. B [**567**]{} (2003) 79 \[arXiv:hep-ph/0305089\]. R. Jeannerot and M. Postma, “Leptogenesis from reheating after inflation and cosmic string decay,” JCAP [**0512**]{} (2005) 006 \[arXiv:hep-ph/0507162\]. U. L. Pen, U. Seljak and N. Turok, “Power spectra in global defect theories of cosmic structure formation,” Phys. Rev. Lett. [**79**]{} (1997) 1611 \[arXiv:astro-ph/9704165\]. B. Allen, R. R. Caldwell, S. Dodelson, L. Knox, E. P. S. Shellard and A. Stebbins, “CMB anisotropy induced by cosmic strings on angular scales $>$ approx. 15’,” Phys. Rev. Lett. [**79**]{} (1997) 2624 \[arXiv:astro-ph/9704160\]. A. Albrecht, R. A. Battye and J. Robinson, “The case against scaling defect models of cosmic structure formation,” Phys. Rev. Lett. [**79**]{} (1997) 4736 \[arXiv:astro-ph/9707129\]; R. A. Battye, J. Robinson and A. Albrecht, “Structure formation by cosmic strings with a cosmological constant,” Phys. Rev. Lett. [**80**]{} (1998) 4847 \[arXiv:astro-ph/9711336\]; A. Albrecht, R. A. Battye and J. Robinson, “A detailed study of defect models for cosmic structure formation,” Phys. Rev. D [**59**]{} (1999) 023508 \[arXiv:astro-ph/9711121\]. C. Contaldi, M. Hindmarsh and J. Magueijo, “CMB and density fluctuations from strings plus inflation,” Phys. Rev. Lett. [**82**]{} (1999) 2034 \[arXiv:astro-ph/9809053\]. A. Albrecht, D. Coulson, P. Ferreira and J. Magueijo, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**76**]{} (1996) 1413 \[arXiv:astro-ph/9505030\]. J. Magueijo, A. Albrecht, D. Coulson and P. Ferreira, “Doppler peaks from active perturbations,” Phys. Rev. Lett. [**76**]{} (1996) 2617 \[arXiv:astro-ph/9511042\]. M. Landriau and E. P. S. Shellard, “Fluctuations in the CMB induced by cosmic strings: Methods and formalism,” Phys. Rev. D [**67**]{} (2003) 103512 \[arXiv:astro-ph/0208540\]. M. Landriau and E. P. S. Shellard, “Large angle CMB fluctuations from cosmic strings with a comological constant,” Phys. Rev. D [**69**]{} (2004) 023003 \[arXiv:astro-ph/0302166\]. L. Pogosian and T. Vachaspati, “Cosmic microwave background anisotropy from wiggly strings,” Phys. Rev. D [**60**]{} (1999) 083504 \[arXiv:astro-ph/9903361\]. C. J. A. P. Martins and E. P. S. Shellard, “Quantitative String Evolution,” Phys. Rev. D [**54**]{} (1996) 2535 \[arXiv:hep-ph/9602271\]. B. Carter, “Integrable equation of state for noisy cosmic string,” Phys. Rev. D [**41**]{} (1990) 3869. A. Vilenkin, “Effect of small scale structure on the dynamics of cosmic strings,” Phys. Rev. D [**41**]{} (1990) 3038. U. Seljak and M. Zaldarriaga, “A Line of Sight Approach to Cosmic Microwave Background Anisotropies,” Ap. J [**469**]{} (1996) 437 \[arXiv:astro-ph/9603033\]. A. Lewis, A. Challinor and A. Lasenby, “Efficient Computation of [CMB]{} anisotropies in closed [FRW]{} models,” Ap. J [**538**]{} (2000) 473 \[arXiv:astro-ph/9911177\]. A. Lewis and S. Bridle, “Cosmological parameters from CMB and other data: a Monte-Carlo approach,” Phys. Rev. D [**66**]{} (2002) 103511. \[arXiv:astro-ph/0205436\]. G. Hinshaw [*et al.*]{}, “Three-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Temperature Analysis,” arXix:astro-ph/0603451. L. Page [*et al.*]{}, “Three Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Polarization Analysis,” arXix:astro-ph/0603450. A. C. S. Readhead [*et al.*]{}, “Extended Mosaic Observations with the Cosmic Background Imager,” Ap. J [**609**]{} (2004) 498 \[arXiv:astro-ph/0402359\]. Chao-lin Kuo [*et al.*]{}, “High Resolution Observations of the CMB Power Spectrum with ACBAR,” Ap. J [**600**]{} (2004) 32 \[arXiv:astro-ph/0212289\].
F. Piacentini [*et al.*]{}, “A measurement of the polarization-temperature angular cross power spectrum of the Cosmic Microwave Background from the 2003 flight of BOOMERANG,” arXix:astro-ph/0507507. W. C. Jones [*et al.*]{}, “A Measurement of the Angular Power Spectrum of the CMB Temperature Anisotropy from the 2003 Flight of Boomerang,” arXix:astro-ph/0507494.
T. .E. Montroy [*et al.*]{}, “A Measurement of the CMB EE Spectrum from the 2003 Flight of BOOMERANG,” arXix:astro-ph/0507514. J. Rocher and M. Sakellariadou, “Supersymmetric grand unified theories and cosmology,” JCAP [**0503**]{} (2005) 004 \[arXiv:hep-ph/0406120\]. R. Jeannerot and M. Postma, “Enlarging the parameter space of standard hybrid inflation,” \[arXiv:hep-th/0604216\]. A. Challinor and A. Lewis, “Weak gravitational lensing of the CMB,” Phys. Rept. [**429**]{} (2006) 1 \[arXiv:astro-ph/0605594\].
U. Seljak and A. Slosar, “B polarization of cosmic microwave background as a tracer of strings,” arXiv:astro-ph/0604143. R. R. Caldwell, R. A. Battye and E. P. S. Shellard, “Relic gravitational waves from cosmic strings: Updated constraints and opportunities for detection,” Phys. Rev. D [**54**]{} (1996) 7146 \[arXiv:astro-ph/9607130\]. A. N. Lommen, “New limits on gravitational radiation using pulsars”, arXiv:astro-ph/0208572.
D. Bennett and F. Bouchet, “High resolution simulations of cosmic string evolution: network evolution”, Phys. Rev. D [**41**]{} (1990) 2408.
B. Allen and E. P. S. Shellard, “Cosmic string evolution - a numerical simulation”, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**64**]{} (1990) 119.
F. A. Jenet [*et al.*]{}, “Upper bounds on the low-frequency stochastic gravitational wave background from pulsar timing observations: Current limits and future prospects,” arXiv:astro-ph/0609013.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Identification of input data points relevant for the classifier (i.e. serve as the support vector) has recently spurred the interest of researchers for both interpretability as well as dataset debugging. This paper presents an in-depth analysis of the methods which attempt to identify the influence of these data points on the resulting classifier. To quantify the quality of the influence, we curated a set of experiments where we debugged and pruned the dataset based on the influence information obtained from different methods. To do so, we provided the classifier with mislabeled examples that hampered the overall performance. Since the classifier is a combination of both the data and the model, therefore, it is essential to also analyze these influences for the interpretability of deep learning models. Analysis of the results shows that some interpretability methods can detect mislabels better than using a random approach, however, contrary to the claim of these methods, the sample selection based on the training loss showed a superior performance.'
author:
-
bibliography:
- 'bibliography.bib'
title: |
Interpreting Deep Models\
through the Lens of Data
---
Deep Learning, Convolutional Neural Networks, Time-Series Analysis, Data Analysis, Data Influence.
[^1]
Introduction
============
Deep learning methods are currently at the forefront of technology and have been employed in many diverse domains such as image classification [@cirecsan2012multi], object segmentation [@noh2015learning], text classification [@zhang2015character], speech recognition [@hinton2012deep], and activity recognition [@yang2015deep]. Deep learning is a subset of representation learning methods and therefore, it can automatically discover the relevant features for any given task. These methods rely on a large amount of data to achieve generalization and since the features are extracted from the data itself, this also raises implications on the quality of the dataset. As both the model and the data are important to create a good classifier, and an analysis of the influential data-points in addition to the commonly analyzed influence of the architecture [@tsviz] is essential.
In this paper, we explore this direction (i.e., using influence functions [@koh2017understanding] and representer points [@yeh2018representer]) as a way of interpreting a classifier and shade light on the underlying structure. In particular, we analyze the robustness properties of the classifier concerning the influential training points. Also, the analysis of results provides insights concerning the generalization capabilities of the classifiers. Finally, our experiments highlight the focus/attention of the classifiers by comparing the influence of the different training samples.
Related Work
============
Nowadays many datasets are publicly available but these datasets vary in their size and quality. They are most times used without any inspection because the manual inspection is not always feasible due to effort. Unfortunately, in some domains, it is crucial to have a very high-quality dataset as its a part of the model. Particularly, safety-critical application areas require explainable and reliable systems. This explainability needs to be fulfilled for the complete model including not only the prediction but furthermore the internal computations, structure decisions, and the data. Especially, most explainability papers focus to explain only the network and exclude the data. However, high-quality data is essential and there exist two categories of approaches for dataset debugging, namely traditional statistical methods and recently introduced interpretability methods.
Traditional statistical dataset debugging
-----------------------------------------
To improve the dataset quality Zhu et al. [@zhu2003eliminating] presented a rule-based approach to identify mislabeled instances in large datasets. Their approach partitions the data into smaller subsets and applies a rule set to evaluate the dataset and get information about the samples. Based on the above-mentioned approach, Guan et al. [@guan2014detecting] evaluated the use of a multiple voting scheme, instead of the previously used single voting scheme, for mislabeling correction. In contrast to the rule-based approach, Sturm [@sturm2012analysis] investigated the mislabel correction task by using a Bayesian classifier to correct the training data by predicting the probabilities for all data points belonging to all considered class labels. Another approach detecting data samples that are likely to be mislabeled was proposed by Akusok et al. [@akusok2015md] assuming that the generalization error of a model decreases if a mislabeled sample is changed to the correct label. Facing the problem from a different perspective, Frénay and Verleysen [@frenay2013classification] explain how to deal with label noise highlighting the importance of the problem, types of label noise, and different dataset cleansing methods. Finally, Patrini et al. [@patrini2017making] presented an approach to correct the loss of a network concerning the probability of a label to be flipped using stochastic methods to compute the probability.
Interpretability based dataset debugging
----------------------------------------
In contrast to the traditional statistical approaches Koh and Liang [@koh2017understanding] and Yeh et al. [@yeh2018representer] utilized the power of interpretability methods to identify possible mislabels. Therefore, Koh and Liang propose influence functions computed using the gradients to trace the influence of the samples for a given prediction enabling the separation into helpful and harmful samples used during dataset debugging. Precisely, they efficiently compute the influence by up-weighting a sample using the hessian. Conversely, Yeh et al. proposed to decompose the pre-activations resulting in a linear combination of activations of the training samples used as weights explaining the influence of the samples. To do so, they used the pre-activaitons and fed them to a solver using a self-defined loss.
Datasets
========
**Dataset** **Train** **Validation** **Test** **Length** **Channels** **Classes**
----------------------------- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ------------ -------------- -------------
Synthetic Anomaly Detection 45000 5000 10000 50 3 2
Character Trajectories 1383 606 869 206 3 20
FordB 2520 1091 810 500 1 2
: Dataset Properties.[]{data-label="tab:datasets"}
Subjectivity and cherry-picking are two major challenges for explainability methods. To provide evidence for the methods and prove the correctness of the experiments it is important to conduct experiments using different datasets. Therefore, we used three different publicly available datasets including point anomaly, sequence anomaly, and a classification task. Precisely, we used the character trajectories and FordB dataset from the UCR Time Series Classification Repository[^2] and a synthetic anomaly detection dataset [@tsviz]. Furthermore, these datasets cover both binary and multi-class classification tasks and come with different sequence lengths and a different number of channels to achieve the largest possible variation of properties.
Analysis and Discussion
=======================
During our analyses, we conducted different experiments to shed light on several aspects concerning debugging rates, accuracy, time consumption, and interpretability. Besides a random selection used as a baseline and the network loss representing a direct measure, we used two well-known network interpretability methods that claim to improve mislabel correction namely influence functions [@koh2017understanding] and representer points [@yeh2018representer]. Finally, we compare the used methods and list their advantages and drawbacks. To create the datasets for the debugging, we flipped some labels within the dataset original datasets.
Mislabel correction approaches
------------------------------
In order to understand the debugging priority, we explain the ranking mechanisms excluding the random and loss approach as they are intuitive. Firstly, we used the influence functions [@koh2017understanding] providing negative and positive values to highlight harmful and helpful samples. Therefore, we can inspect the most harmful, most helpful, and most influencing samples. In addition, we can compute the influence scores for each class individually (classwise) or over the complete set. Secondly, we use the representer values [@yeh2018representer] that only provide information about inhibitory (low) and excitatory (high) samples.
Experiment 1: Mislabel correction performance
---------------------------------------------
-- -- -- ----- ------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ ------------ ------------ -------------- --------- ---------- ------------ --------
**classwise low** **classwise high** **classwise absolute** **low** **high** **absolute** **low** **high**
10% 14.34% 82.6% 84.37% 12.48% 82.65% 79.57% 11.74% 10.4% **94.11%** 9.4%
25% 14.54% 84.74% 97.34% 13.17% 85.88% 97.25% 26.2% 24.65% **99.25%** 24.8%
50% 14.74% 85.25% 97.54% 13.45% 86.54% 98.0% 50.71% 49.28% **99.6%** 49.91%
10% 15.92% 35.25% 34.44% 5.82% 30.52% 22.76% 11.04% 9.72% **39.29%** 4.54%
25% 16.06% 83.39% 90.04% 5.98% 86.84% 81.42% 25.4% 25.13% **96.89%** 13.06%
50% 16.32% 83.68% **99.45%** 6.27% 93.72% 93.93% 50.6% 49.39% 99.42% 37.04%
10% 16.53% 3.35% 3.35% 3.2% **16.71%** 3.35% 9.87% 9.86% 3.35% 10.13%
25% 41.55% 8.3% 8.3% 8.28% **41.68%** 8.3% 24.94% 24.78% 8.3% 25.25%
50% **83.06%** 16.93% 16.93% 16.93% **83.06%** 16.93% 50.08% 49.91% 16.93% 50.02%
10% 33.33% 33.33% 81.15% 29.71% 40.57% 52.17% 2.17% 38.4% **87.68%** 8.69%
25% 35.50% 57.24% 97.1% 33.33% 61.59% 86.95% 6.52% 57.97% **97.82%** 23.91%
50% 36.95% 63.04% **100.0%** 33.33% 66.66% 96.37% 19.56% 80.43% 99.27% 57.97%
10% 30.14% 14.2% 33.33% 28.69% 13.04% 19.13% 9.85% 7.85% **39.42%** 8.98%
25% 39.13% 35.36% 70.72% 37.97% 34.78% 44.05% 26.66% 20.0% **95.36%** 27.24%
50% 46.08% 53.91% 98.26% 43.47% 56.52% 83.76% 53.62% 46.37% **100.0%** 52.17%
10% **19.97%** 0.57% 11.57% **19.97%** 0.14% 8.24% 11.43% 6.94% **19.97%** 10.56%
25% **49.63%** 1.44% 29.66% 49.49% 1.59% 16.06% 28.94% 19.82% **49.63%** 25.03%
50% 91.17% 8.82% 57.88% 89.86% 10.13% 35.89% 56.0% 43.99% **95.8%** 49.92%
10% 45.66% 9.44% 29.13% 45.66% 9.05% 30.31% 6.29% 9.44% **70.86%** 11.41%
25% 48.03% 40.94% 64.96% 48.03% 40.55% 57.87% 17.71% 26.77% **92.51%** 25.19%
50% 48.42% 51.57% 99.6% 48.42% 51.57% **99.6%** 46.85% 53.14% 99.21% 48.42%
10% 19.49% 27.98% 19.81% 18.86% 28.93% 28.93% 9.9% 7.23% **38.52%** 9.43%
25% 35.53% 46.38% 51.41% 33.01% 46.38% 58.17% 22.64% 22.48% **75.31%** 22.95%
50% 47.32% 52.67% 93.86% 46.22% 53.77% 78.93% 49.05% 50.78% **95.44%** 49.84%
10% 5.34% **14.15%** **14.15%** **14.15%** 5.34% **14.15%** 10.22% 9.11% 13.6% 9.74%
25% 18.94% 30.42% 30.42% **30.5%** 19.1% **30.5%** 25.39% 24.92% 29.71% 25.23%
50% 48.5% **51.41%** 50.7% **51.41%** 48.5% 50.7% 50.07% 49.84% 51.33% 49.84%
-- -- -- ----- ------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ ------------ ------------ -------------- --------- ---------- ------------ --------
Although the process of finding possible mislabeled data can be automated, it is essential to achieve good accuracy when searching for mislabels as they have to be validated manually. Table \[tab:correction\] shows the correction ratio assuming that we manually inspected a subset of the data selected according to a ranking of the corresponding debugging approach. The best correction rates are highlighted showing that with the increasing amount of mislabeled data the model performance decreases up to a point where the model is not able to learn the concept anymore and collapses. Intuitively, a model that does not learn the concept should be rather meaningless for the approaches that try to cover the debugging task as they operate directly on the model using the learned concept.
Surprisingly, by looking at the second-last column the loss-based approach achieved really good correction accuracies, except for the two models that did not learn the concept correctly. One would expect that the more complex methods, using the model to draw detailed conclusions, outperform the loss as they have additional access to more complex computations. Therefore, these results emphasize the use of the training loss for mislabel correction. Against the expectations, the influence-based measurements outperformed the loss, representer, and random method when the model was not able to learn the concept indicating that the influence-based approach does not strongly rely on that. Overall the loss seems to be a good approach concerning the correction ratio but the best correction accuracy does not necessarily lead to the best performance. The mislabels can have more or less impact and it is mandatory to focus on those with the most impact.
Experiment 2: Influence of the inspection ratio
-----------------------------------------------
We further analyzed the impact of the inspection rate and found out that the gain of a higher inspection rate heavily decreases after a certain point as shown in Figure \[fig:ratio\]. The horizontal axis provides the ratio of inspected data after ranking the samples according to the corresponding debugging approach and the vertical axis shows the accuracy of corrected mislabels. In Figure \[fig:ratio10\] at 10% inspected data the correction accuracy should be equal to 0.1 for the random correction and should increase linearly. Both figures do not show all measurements but rather visualize the most successful approaches. The scores in Figure \[fig:ratio10\] provide information about the saddle point for the different methods. Also, for the two measurements considering to inspect the most helpful samples, the overall accuracy of the mislabel correction is much lower compared to the other selected methods. Furthermore, the loss outperformed the other methods at any inspection rate.
In general, Figure \[fig:ratio25\] refines the previous results on a different dataset quality. It has to be mentioned that the loss-based method keeps the superior performance. An evaluation of the 50% mislabeled dataset could not provide meaningful results because the concept was not learned correctly by the model. For a complete analysis and to avoid that the previous finding is related to the properties of the anomaly dataset, the same figures were created for the character dataset because of the diversity of the data and the classification task. In addition, Figure \[fig:ratio\] shows the correction accuracies for the character trajectory datasets which reflects that the behavior for the approaches is similar to the results presented for the anomaly dataset.
Experiment 3: Analyzing the score of the correction approaches
--------------------------------------------------------------
![Normalized distribution of the different correction approaches for the anomaly dataset (Quality: 10% mislabeled.[]{data-label="fig:sampleDistribution"}](images/anomaly_new_distribution_new.png){width="1.0\linewidth"}
To understand the performance differences a more detailed look into the distribution and the computed values is mandatory. In Figure \[fig:sampleDistribution\] the distribution of these values shows that for some methods the distribution highlights the two classes. E.g. the loss-based values show a clear separation of the correct labels and the mislabels. In contrast to that, the representer-based values do not separate the data in such a manner. The same holds for the ’influence absolute’ values. Besides those two methods, all other methods provide a very good separation of the data in the distribution plot. Although these plots of the distribution provide a rough understanding of the values more detailed inspection is provided in the following paragraph.
To better align the findings of the distribution plot we visualized the scores for each sample in the anomaly datasets (Quality: 10% mislabeled) in Figure \[fig:sampleRanking\]. The right column shows the sorted scores which were used for the experiments and provide a better overview of the separation of the labels.
Figure \[fig:sampleRanking\_classwise\] shows the scores for the classwise measurement in an unsorted (left) and sorted (right) manner indicating that selecting the lowest or highest scores can lead to a good mislabel correction. The high values correspond to the helpful whereas the low are harmful samples and it is possible to improve the quality of those. Figure \[fig:sampleRanking\_classwise-absolute\] shows the absolute values of this measurement and therefore it is not possible to differentiate between helpful and harmful resulting in a single influence value indicating only the importance concerning the classification.
The approaches shown in Figure \[fig:sampleRanking\_influence\] and Figure \[fig:sampleRanking\_influence-absolute\] do not compute the influence separate for each class. This can change the scores for some samples. Especially, if samples are more important for a specific class this measurement does not capture this property.
In Figure \[fig:sampleRanking\_loss\] an almost perfect separation provided by the loss-based approach is shown. The loss value for the mislabels is very high compared to the correct-labeled samples and selecting the samples with a high loss indicates to be a very good measurement when the learned concept is meaningful.
Finally, Figure \[fig:sampleRanking\_representer\] shows the representer values. The plot on the left side maybe leads to the conclusion that the mislabels have lower scores but inspecting the sorted values proves that this is not the case.
Experiment 4: Identification differences – sample ranking
---------------------------------------------------------
-- -- -- ------------ ------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ --------- ---------- -------------- --------- ---------- ---
**classwise low** **classwise high** **classwise absolute** **low** **high** **absolute** **low** **high**
94.11% - - - - - - - - X
**94.25%** X - - - - - - - X
94.22% - - - X - - - - X
94.11% - - - - - - X X X
96.89% - - - - - - - - X
**96.94%** X - - - X - - - X
96.89% - - - X X - - - X
96.89% - - - - - - X X X
**83.06%** - - - - X - - - -
83.06% - - - - X - - - X
83.06% - - - - X - - X -
83.06% X - - - - - - - X
87.68% - - - - - - - - X
**89.85%** X - - - - - - - X
89.85% - - X - - X - X X
88.4% - - - X - - - - X
95.36% - - - - - - - - X
**96.81%** X - - - - - - - X
96.23% - - - X - - - - X
95.36% - - - - - - X X X
95.8% - - - - - - - - X
**96.52%** X - - - - - - - X
96.09% X X - - - - - - X
95.8% - - - - - - X X X
-- -- -- ------------ ------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ --------- ---------- -------------- --------- ---------- ---
Although we showed that some methods separate the data better, we decided to have a more detailed look at the samples that are not detected and the samples that are only detected by a specific method because not every sample has the same weight towards the classification accuracy. This is especially of interest when it comes to the classification performance rather than the correction accuracy. In theory, it is a good practice to aim for the highest mislabel correction rate but this does not mandatory result in the best possible classifier. Therefore, a more detailed inspection of the different detected samples followed by an accuracy evaluation can provide a better understanding of the results as this could favor the influence functions [@koh2017understanding] and representer point [@yeh2018representer] performances.
As shown in Figure \[fig:sampleSlice\] the approaches detect different mislabels and a combination of the approaches could provide better correction results. For example, the representer method only detects two out of the 13 mislabels but one of these is not detected by any other methods. Especially, the loss-based method which detects 11 out of the 13 shown label flips was not able to detect this sample.
![First 100 samples of the anomaly dataset (Quality: 10% mislabeled). Dots indicate detected and crosses undetected mislabels.[]{data-label="fig:sampleSlice"}](images/anomaly_new_comparison_imporances.png){width="0.9\linewidth"}
Experiment 5: Combining correction approaches
---------------------------------------------
Concerning previous findings, a combination of the approaches could lead to even better results. To combine the methods, we normalized the ranking scores to make it possible to compare them linearly. Although this combination approach is very simple the results show the capabilities of a combination.
Table \[tab:correction\_combined\] presents the results for some selected combinations. The results refine the findings that the loss, as a baseline, is really good, and only in the case where the model did not learn the concept, the loss is significantly worse than the other approaches. Also, it shows that the combined methods can reach a very stable performance for the 50% mislabeled anomaly dataset. The results for the character trajectories dataset are similar to those of the anomaly dataset. Besides, the combinations with the loss perform well even for the 50% mislabel due to the correctly learned concept.
Furthermore, these experiments emphasize that a combination can improve the correction accuracy and improve the robustness compared to the use of a single measurement. Nevertheless, drawbacks exist addressing the computational effort and the robustness as shown in Table \[tab:correction\]. Some methods are not as reliable as the results of the loss and using them can decrease the performance as well.
Experiment 6: Additional time consumption
-----------------------------------------
![Additional computation time excluding any measurement that can be done during the evaluation process.[]{data-label="fig:time"}](images/time_consumed.png){width="0.9\linewidth"}
In contrast to the loss-based approach, the others need additional computation time. The training loss can be collected during the evaluation process without a significant slowdown. The influence function [@koh2017understanding] needs an already trained model and the execution of this method is extremely time-consuming. Especially, the computation of the classwise measurement requires a lot of time. The same holds for the representer-based method [@yeh2018representer]. This method needs additional training to learn the representation to compute the representer value based on the pre-softmax activations. In contrast to the influence-based methods, this additional training is class independent and depends on representation size.
The time consumption is visualized in Figure \[fig:time\] and the loss is excluded. As for the other approaches, the representer method has very low computational extra time. The computational effort for the influence strongly depends on the dataset size. Also, the computational effort for the classwise measurement suffers from the number of different classes. A comparison of the datasets showed that for the anomaly and FordB dataset the computation time for the classwise measurement increased about 40% for the FordB dataset and 50% for the anomaly dataset as both have two classes. The Character trajectories dataset has 20 classes and therefore the increase in additional time is much higher.
Experiment 7: Detailed sample analysis
--------------------------------------
![Three selected samples for the loss based correction. All samples are anomalies within the ground truth but their labels were flipped during the training. Only sample 100 was successfully identified as a mislabel.[]{data-label="fig:sampleSet"}](images/anomaly_new_loss_sample_set_23_56_100.png){width="1.0\linewidth"}
There are two important questions during the dataset debugging: Why are some samples harder to identify compared to the majority of samples? How do these samples look like and do they provide any information concerning the learned concept? Answering these questions or inspecting these samples can help to interpret the model.
According, to our previous findings that not all samples are similarly easy to find we investigated the difficulty and properties of the samples. It has to be highlighted, that these results are visualized for the anomaly dataset due to the easier interpretability of the problem but could be visualized for the other datasets as well.
In Figure \[fig:sampleSet\] three samples of the previously mentioned slice for the loss-based approach are shown. These samples were selected to emphasize the specific properties of the approach. The label shows the correct label whereas one corresponds to the anomaly and zero to the non-anomaly class. Therefore, all samples are classified as anomalies within the ground truth. Only the last sample (second row) was found by inspecting 10% of the data as this includes the ranks 31500 to 35000 for the training dataset. The rank reflects the position in the dataset sorted according to a specific measurement e.g. loss. Furthermore, the second example (first row, right) was close to the threshold, and increasing the amount of inspected data to 12% would be sufficient to find this mislabel. Finally, for the first example (first row, left), there is an ambiguity concerning its ground-truth label as it could either be a true mislabel or the model was not able to capture the precise concept of point anomaly concerning the less dominant peak.
According to the dataset creation process, the sample has the correct ground-truth label highlighting that when it comes to the interpretation and explainability of the model this sample shows that the concept was not precisely learned. With this information, it is possible to include samples related to the missing concept parts or weight these kinds of samples to adjust the learned concept to cover the complete task.
This means, that based on the ranking we can try to understand the learned concept and the dataset quality. Both can help to provide an understanding of the model to improve it. Also, the corresponding influence score ranks the ambiguous sample at position 25556. This information states that the sample is not relevant to the classifier. This assumption is further validated by Figure \[fig:sampleRanking\] where the influence of the sample is zero. Therefore, it is not helping or harming the classifier’s performance. The same result is given by the classwise influence score which has rank 23197 and following the same procedure results show that this sample does not contribute much to the classifier. Finally, to provide the complete information for that sample, the score for the representer which ranks the sample at rank 4079 was checked and refines the assumption as well.
Using the information above it is now possible to understand the mislabel as this sample was not important for the classifier. To adjust the classifier to detect peaks like that it is mandatory to increase the importance of these kinds of samples.
After the first conclusions based on the ambiguous sample, we decided to further analyze this direction. Therefore, Figure \[fig:SamplesLowHigh\] provides information about the importance of the samples with the highest and lowest scores. Starting with Figure \[fig:lossLow\] the two samples with the lowest loss are shown. These samples visualize two pretty good samples for the anomaly detection task. Their loss highlights the learned concept. In contrast to that, Figure \[fig:lossHigh\] shows the samples with the highest loss. Important for these two samples is that they were mislabeled. Both had the anomaly label and as the figure shows they should be classified as no anomaly samples. Therefore, their high loss shows that the model correctly learned the concept of anomaly detection. The same plots for the influence are shown in Figure \[fig:influencePos\] for the positive influencing samples, Figure \[fig:influenceNeg\] for the negative influencing samples and Figure \[fig:influenceNeu\] for the least influencing samples. The negative influencing plots show that the classifier works correctly as both are mislabeled samples and the positive influencing and neutral ones are correctly labeled. Finally, Figure \[fig:representerLow\] shows the samples with a low representer value and Figure \[fig:representerHigh\] the ones with high values. These samples do not include any mislabel. The combination of these insights again emphasizes that including the data and additional debugging methods it is possible to not only detect the mislabeled samples but further show that the concept of the classifier is learned correctly.
As mentioned early on, the approaches detect different samples. Figure \[fig:lossInfluenceComparison\] shows some samples that are found either by the loss based or the influence based method [@koh2017understanding]. For example, the loss-based measurement provides be best mislabel correction rate if the model has a vague understanding of the problem but it does not rank the samples according to their influence. Therefore, it could be that a significant lower mislabel correction accuracy results in superior classification accuracy. Contrary, the influence-based method provides information on how helpful and harmful the samples are but does not maximize the mislabel correction accuracy.
Experiment 8: Model accuracy comparison
---------------------------------------
![Accuracies of the different models for the anomaly dataset (Quality 10% and 20% mislabeled) for the correction task.[]{data-label="fig:accuracy"}](images/anomaly_new_accuracies_subset.png){width="0.9\linewidth"}
To complete the comparison of the methods we present the change in the accuracy for some representative experiments for the anomaly detection dataset. In Figure \[fig:accuracy\] it is shown that the accuracy over ten runs for the 10% mislabeled dataset and the 20% mislabeled dataset is much better for some approaches and that the variance between the runs is very small concerning the data quality.
Another aspect that is related to the previous analysis is the deletion of a subset based on the measurements. The suggested samples are deleted from the dataset instead of the manual correction which needs time and additional effort. Therefore, the deletion of samples can be executed without human inspection and if the measurement is good it should remove mislabeled data as well as other samples that harm the performance of the classifier. This results in a smaller dataset with improved data quality.
Figure \[fig:accuracy\_removed\] shows the performances for the mislabel correction compared to the deletion without inspection. In Figure \[fig:accuracy\_removed\_10\] the deletion performed better for the ’classwise absolute’ influence computation removing the most influencing samples. Further, the scores for the influence computatio [@koh2017understanding] show that the deletion of samples with low scores improved the accuracy and the deletion of samples with high scores decreased the accuracy reflecting the influence score concerning its definition of helpful and harmful samples. For the loss, we can see that the accuracy drops if we delete the samples. This is especially the case because for the loss-based procedure the correction accuracy is really good and the deletion of the samples just shrinks the data. The results show that except for the loss the accuracies dropped compared to the mislabeled dataset. If a manual inspection is not a valid solution, the deletion of the samples based on the scores do not improve the quality of the data either.
Approach comparison
-------------------
When it comes to a stable, robust, and effective method to debug mislabels the loss-based approach outperforms the other methods in accuracy and time consumption significantly. The only drawback is that there is no information about the influence of the detected samples as this approach is not used for interpretability. The influence functions have shown to achieve nearly comparable results. Especially, when using the absolute values to check both the harmful and helpful samples the correction rate is stable providing additional influence information. The only drawback is the additional time, especially when the classwise evaluation is used. The representer point was outperformed by a large margin making it not possible to compare it to the superior methods.
Conclusion
==========
We performed a comprehensive evaluation concerning the topic of automatic mislabel detection and correction. Therefore, we examined multiple experiments and evaluated the performance of two well-known existing methods in the domain of model interpretability. In contrast to the expectations, the loss-based method can handle the mislabel detection task better even though it is a direct measurement and the two already existing methods provide a much deeper understanding of the model. Also, we showed that a combination of the methods can be more robust and lead to even better results. Furthermore, it has to be mentioned that the dataset debugging was only a subtask of the influence and representer approach. Therefore, we presented results that help to interpret the model from a data-based perspective and used different measurements to provide an overview of the models’ behavior. We identified the most important samples for the model concerning the different approaches. Finally, we found that the deletion of the suggested mislabeled data does not work better than keeping the mislabeled data.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
This work was supported by the BMBF projects DeFuseNN (Grant 01IW17002) and the ExplAINN (BMBF Grant 01IS19074). We thank all members of the Deep Learning Competence Center at the DFKI for their comments and support.
[^1]: ©2020 IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in other works.
[^2]: http://www.timeseriesclassification.com/
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'A new mechanism of tunnelling at macroscopic distances is proposed for a wave packet localized in one-dimensional disordered potential with mirror symmetry, $V(-x)=V(x)$. Unlike quantum tunnelling through a regular potential barrier, which occurs only at the energies lower then the barrier height, the proposed mechanism of tunnelling exists even for weak white-noise-like scattering potentials. It also exists in classical circuits of resonant contours with random resonant frequencies. The latter property may be used as a new method of secure communication, which does not require coding and decoding of the transmitting signal.'
address:
- '$^1$Departamento de F[í]{}sica Fundamental, Universidad de Salamanca, E-37008 Salamanca, Spain'
- '$^2$Instituto de F[í]{}sica, Universidad Autónoma de Puebla, Apartado Postal J-48, Puebla, 72570 Mexico'
- '$^3$Department of Physics, University of North Texas, P.O. Box 311427, Denton, TX 76203'
author:
- 'E. Diez$^{1}$, F. Izrailev$^{2}$, A.A. Krokhin$^{3}$, A. Rodriguez$^{1}$'
date:
-
-
title: 'Symmetry-Induced Tunnelling in One-Dimensional Disordered Potentials'
---
It is well-known that all quantum states in one-dimensional white-noise potential are strongly localized and quantum transport is limited by the distances not exceeding the localization length $l(E)$. At longer distances the destructive interference between direct and backscattered waves suppresses exponentially the amplitude of a wave packet. Statistical correlations in the disordered potential may change the interference pattern and may give rise to a discrete set \[\] or to a continuum of delocalized states \[\] for short- or long-range correlation respectively. Correlations is a manifestation of the local properties of a random potential. The symmetry is a global property, therefore its effect on the transport may be even stronger.
In this Letter we propose a symmetry-driven mechanism of tunnelling, which is specific for the random potentials only. Usually, the symmetry is considered to be an irrelevant property in disordered systems since the wave functions are localized at the (local) scales, which are much smaller than the (global) scales, where the symmetry is manifested. However, the symmetry of the potential, $V(-x)=V(x)$, leads to definite parity of the wave functions. Either parity (even or odd) of an eigenfunction means that there are [*two*]{} equal peaks with half-width $\sim l(E)$ centered at the symmetric points. A symmetry-induced correlation between these peaks gives rise to the mechanism of tunnelling of a wave packet (or excitation), independently how far apart the peaks are. Due to this mechanism a wave packet tunnels at macroscopic distances – a process which does not exist for the random potential without the symmetry. Natural disorder usually does not exhibit the mirror symmetry. Nevertheless, the proposed mechanism of tunnelling is not of pure academic interest, since it may be observed also in a classical system – a random electrical circuit, where the symmetry can be easily introduced. In what follows we propose a new method of secure communications based on the symmetry-induced mechanism of tunnelling. The merit of this method is that it does not require a coding-decoding procedure.
To demonstrate the main idea of the symmetry-induced tunnelling we consider the tight-binding Anderson model \[\]. For one-dimensional lattice a stationary solution for the eigenstate with energy $E$ is obtained from the equation $$\label{tight} \psi _{n+1}+\psi _{n-1}=(E+\epsilon _n)\,\psi _n \,,$$ where $\epsilon _n$ is on-site energy. The energies $E$ and $\epsilon _n$ are measured in units of the hopping amplitude $t$, which in the case of diagonal disorder is independent on the site index $n$.
Discrete Schrodinger equation (\[tight\]) gives [*exact*]{} description of the electrical circuit of classical impedances $Z_n$ and $z_n$ shown in Fig. [\[fig1\]]{}. Application of Kirchhoff’s Loop Rule to three successive unit cells of the circuit leads to the following linear relation between the currents circulating in the $(n-1)$-th, $n$-th and $(n+1)$-th cells $$\label{imped} z_nI_{n+1} + z_{n-1}I_{n-1} = (Z_n + z_n +
z_{n+1})I_n \,.$$ If the vertical impedances are all the same, $z_n = z_0$, this equation is reduced to the tight-binding model with diagonal disorder, Eq. (\[tight\]), with $\epsilon_n = \delta_n/z_0$ and $E = 2 + Z_0/z_0$. Here the random value of the impedance $Z_n$ is split into its mean value $Z_0 = \langle Z_n \rangle$ and the fluctuating part $\delta_n = Z_n - Z_0$.
This exact correspondence allows testing of quantum effects of Anderson localization using classical electrical circuits with random elements. In fact, during the last decade chaotic resonant cavities have been successfully used for testing the predictions of quantum chaos \[\].
It is worth mentioning that electrical circuits of passive elements have been widely used for modelling different physical phenomena. The first application of the method of equivalent circuit probably goes back to Lord Kelvin who used a discrete $RC$ chain to study a signal transmission through a transatlantic cable. Many bright examples of electrical circuits that model quantum mechanical behavior for simple but fundamental systems are given in the book by Pippard \[\]. Recently it was proposed that electromagnetic waveguide can be used to model as exotic effect as Hawking black hole radiation \[\]. Some effects of correlated disorder have been studied in the experiments with microwave propagation through disordered waveguides \[\] and sub-terahertz response of superconducting multilayers \[\]. Experimental realization of a system with desirable correlations and observation of the localized and extended states are much easier in electromagnetic devices \[\] than in heterostructures with intentionally introduced disorder \[\].
If the potential in Eq. (\[tight\]) is an even function, $\epsilon_n = \epsilon_{-n}$, the eigenfunctions ${\Psi}^{\alpha}_n$ are either even or odd functions of $n$. If an eigenfunction ${\Psi}^{\alpha}_n$ is localized near a site $n_0$, the amplitude of this state at the origin is exponentially suppressed, $\Psi^{\alpha}_{n=0} \propto \exp(-\mid n_0
\mid/l(E_{\alpha}))$, provided $\mid n_0 \mid \gg l(E_{\alpha})$. However, due to definite parity of the wave function, another peak appears at the symmetric point $n=-n_0$. Strong localization of any excitation in random potential is a result of [*destructive*]{} interference between propagating and backscattered wave. The appearance of the symmetric peak can be explained as a result of [*constructive*]{} interference. It leads to exponential increase of the amplitude of the wave, i.e. to [*antilocalization*]{} \[\].
In Fig. [\[fig2\]]{} we show two quasi-degenerate eigenstates calculated for the symmetric potential of 1000 sites (i.e. only 500 of these sites are random).
The inverse localization length (the Lyapunov exponent) can be estimated from the formula \[\] $$\label{loclength} l^{-1}(E)= l_0^{-1}(E)\varphi(\mu),\,\,
\varphi(\mu )=1+2\sum\limits_{k=1}^\infty \xi (k)\,\cos \,(2\mu
\,k).$$ Here $l^{-1}_0 (E)= \epsilon _0^2/ (8\sin^2\mu )$ is the Thouless \[\] result for the white noise disorder, the function $\varphi(\mu)$ accounts for the contribution of correlations with correlation function $\langle\epsilon_n
\epsilon_{n+k}\rangle = \epsilon_0^2 \xi(k)$, and the dispersion relation is $E=2\cos\mu$. The results shown in Fig. [\[fig2\]]{} are obtained not for white-noise but for slightly correlated disorder with correlator $\xi(1) = -1/2$ and $\xi(k>1)=0$. These short-range correlations are introduced in order to compensate the smooth energy dependence of $l_0(E)$. It is easy to see that the contribution of the term with $k=1$ in Eq. (\[loclength\]) provides a flat dependence $l^{-1}(E)=\epsilon_0^2/4=const$. Insert (b) in Fig. \[fig2\] shows the numerical values of $l(E)$, which fluctuate around $40$ – the value obtained from Eq. (\[loclength\]). In agrement with this estimate, the half-width of the peaks in Fig. \[fig2\] is approximately $40$ sites.
The energy spectrum of Eq. (\[tight\]) with symmetric random potential is similar to the spectrum of a double-well potential. It consists of discrete levels, most of them lying within the interval $-2<E<2$. The energy levels are arranged in doublets of states with different parity. The energy $\delta (E)$ between the centers of the doublets scales with the length of the system $N$ as $1/N$. The energy splitting $\Delta E $ in the doublet is exponentially small, $\Delta (E) \propto \exp[-4\mid n_0
\mid/l(E)]$, i.e. the states are quasi-degenerate. Both, $\delta
(E)$ and $\Delta(E)$ fluctuate with energy because of statistical fluctuations of the density of states, $n_0(E)$, and $l(E)$.
The symmetry-induced tunnelling can be observed in the dynamics of an excitation. Let a perturbation is applied at one of the sites of the symmetric random sequence. In the simplest case the perturbation is a $\delta$-excitation at the site $n_0$, $\psi_n(t=0) = \delta_{nn_0}$. Since this excitation is not an eigenfunction of the system, its temporal evolution is represented as a superposition, $$\label{initial} \psi_n(t)=\sum_{\alpha} C^{\alpha}_{n_0}
\Psi_n^{\alpha}\exp(-iE_{\alpha}t).$$ The sum in Eq. (\[initial\]) runs over the eigenstates, which are all localized. The eigenstates centered closer to the initial excitation contribute more because the coefficient $C^{\alpha}_{n_0} = \langle \Psi_n^{\alpha}|\psi_n(t=0)
\rangle = \Psi_{n_0}^{\alpha}$ is the overlapping integral between the initial excitation and the eigenstate $\Psi_n^{\alpha}$. Let the eigenstates with maximum overlapping be $\Psi_A$ and $\Psi_S$. They form a doublet with the central energy $\bar E =(E_A+E_S)/2$ and splitting $\Delta E = E_A - E_S$. Taking into account only these two terms in Eq. (\[initial\]), the following approximate result for the evolution of the initial excitation can be easily obtained $$\label{evolution} \psi_n(t) \approx \frac{e^{{-i{\bar
E}t}}}{\sqrt{l(\bar{E})}} \left[ \cos\left(\frac{\Delta E
}{2}t\right) \Psi_+(n) + i \sin\left(\frac{\Delta E }{2}t\right)
\Psi_-(n) \right] .$$ Here $\Psi_{\pm }(n)=(\Psi_S {\pm} \Psi_A)/\sqrt 2$. Each of these linear combinations is a single-peak function. The peak of $\Psi_+$ is always close to the point of initial excitation. For the eigenfunctions shown in Fig. [\[fig2\]]{} the peak $\Psi_+$ is localized in the region of negative $n$.
At the early stage of evolution the initial $\delta$-peak at $n_0$ quickly spreads over the region of width $2l(\bar{E})$. Further spreading is suppressed by Anderson localization. Eq. (\[evolution\]) is not valid at this transient stage. This equation describes steady and “slow" harmonic oscillations of the initial excitation between the two symmetrical points. The period of oscillations of the density $\mid \psi_n(t) \mid^2$ is $T=2\pi/\Delta E$. If the distance $2\mid n_0 \mid$ between the peaks exceeds the localization length, the amplitude of the wave function at the origin is exponentially small $\sim \exp(-\mid n_0
\mid/l(\bar{E}))$. It, however, grows exponentially towards the symmetrical point $-n_0$. This increase is a manifestation of the tunnelling induced by the symmetry. The dynamics of penetration of the initial excitation to the symmetrical point is very similar to the tunnelling through a potential barrier, although there is no real barrier. Exponential decrease (increase) of the wave functions is due to multiple scattering events with predominant destructive (constructive) interference. One can speak about an effective double-well potential which produces the same discrete energy spectrum. Calculation of the parameters of this effective potential is a challenging inverse-scattering problem. Tunnelling processes without a real barrier are known in dynamical systems, where quantum transitions occur either between strongly localized states \[\] or between classically separated regions in phase space \[\]. It is worth mentioning that regular Bloch-like oscillations in a potential with correlated disorder may occur also due to the presence of two mobility edges in the energy spectrum \[\].
Eq. (\[evolution\]) takes into account interaction of the initial excitation with the nearest doublet. If there are more eigenstates in Eq. (\[initial\]), whose wave functions extend to the point $n_0$, they also contribute to the evolution of the initial excitation. In this case the oscillations between the peaks at $n_0$ and $-n_0$ are not harmonic any more but a superposition of harmonics with different periods. In the numerical study of evolution of the excitation we take into account its interaction with the eigenfunctions which have amplitude $> 10^{-3}$ at the site $n_0= -153$. There are 540 such eigenfunctions out of total 1000. These eigenfunctions produce the oscillatory pattern in Fig. \[fig3\]. Although the site $n_0=-153$ is the position of the maximum for the eigenstates $\Psi_A$ and $\Psi_S$ in Fig. [\[fig2\]]{}, other states give a noticeable contribution. Since the levels splittings in different doublets are random and incommensurate, the evolution of the wave packet is not periodic but it keeps the main features predicted by Eq. (\[evolution\]). In the case of stronger localization of the eigenstates the dependence $\mid \psi_{n_0}(t) \mid^2$ approaches the harmonic dependence Eq.(\[evolution\]) as it is seen in the insert in Fig. \[fig3\].
Spreading and tunnelling of the initial excitation is shown in Fig. [\[fig4\]]{}. At the transient stage the excitation broadens up to the size of $2l(\bar E)\approx 80$, Fig. \[fig4\]a. The initial stage is followed by the long-lasting stage of tunnelling at the macroscopic distance $2\mid n_0 \mid$. The tunnelling gives rise to the secondary peak at $-n_0$, which “slowly” grows and reaches its maximum at $t \approx T/2$, Fig. \[fig4\]c. The amplitude of the secondary peak in Figs. [\[fig3\]]{} and \[fig4\]c does not exceed $5\%$ of the initial peak, but at $t
\approx T/2$ the both peaks have approximately the same amplitude.
The amplitude of the peaks can be obtained from the normalization condition and it is determined by $l(E)$ as it follows from Eq. (\[evolution\]). This amplitude is much larger then the amplitude at the origin $n=0$, as it can be clearly seen from Fig. \[fig4\]. The amplitude of the peaks at the points $\pm n_0$ increases with $\epsilon_0$. Simultaneously the wave function at the origin decreases exponentially and can be easily controlled by the disorder.
Application of the proposed ideas to random electrical circuits is straightforward. In what follows we demonstrate the evolution of the signal in a circuit shown in Fig. [\[fig1\]]{} with vertical impedances being equal solenoids with $z_n= -i\omega L_0$ and horizontal impedances being capacitors with $Z_n = \frac{i}{\omega
C_n} \approx \frac{i}{\omega C_0}\left(1- \frac{\delta C_n}{C_0}
\right) $. Here $\delta C_n$ is the fluctuating part of the capacitance, which is an even function of $n$, $\delta C_n =
\delta C_{-n}$. Propagation of an excitation in this circuit follows the wave equation $$\label{waveeq} C_{n+1}\ddot{V}_{n+1} + C_{n-1}\ddot{V}_{n-1} -2C_n
\ddot{V}_n = V_n/L_0,$$ where $V_n$ is voltage drop at the $n$-th capacitor. This equation requires two initial conditions. Let the voltage drop $V_0$ is applied at $t=0$ to the capacitor $C_{n_0}$, inducing the initial current $I_0=C_{n_0}\dot V_0$. Stationary solutions ($V_n \propto
\exp (-i\omega t)$) are either even or odd functions and the spectrum of eigenfrequencies consists of a set of doublets. For an infinite chain the majority of the eigenfrequencies occupy an interval $[\omega_0/2,\infty]$, where $\omega_0=\left(L_0C_0
\right)^{-1/2}$. Assuming that the initial perturbation excites only the closest to the site $n_0$ pair of eigenstates ($V_A$ and $V_S)$, the solution of Eq. (\[waveeq\]) can be written in the form similar to Eq. (\[evolution\]), $$\begin{aligned}
\label{evolutioncir} V_n(t) \approx \sqrt{\frac{1}{C_0
l(\bar\omega)}} \left\{\left[C_{n_0} V_0 \sin(\bar{\omega}t)-
\frac{I_0}{\bar{\omega}} \cos(\bar{\omega}t) \right]\sin\left(
\frac{\Delta \omega}{2}t\right) V_-(n) \right.\nonumber \\
%\sqrt{\frac{2}{C_0 l(\bar \omega)}}
+\left. \left[C_{n_0} V_0 \cos(\bar{\omega}t)+
\frac{I_0}{\bar{\omega}} \sin(\bar{\omega}t) \right] \cos\left(
\frac{\Delta \omega}{2}t\right) V_+(n) \right\}.\end{aligned}$$ Here $\bar \omega$ is the center of the doublet, and $\Delta
\omega$ is the frequency splitting. Single-peak functions $V_{\pm}(n)= (V_S \pm V_A)/\sqrt2$ play the same role as $\Psi_{\pm}$ do in Eq. (\[evolution\]). Eq. (\[evolutioncir\]) shows that the evolution of the initial signal in a random (symmetric) electrical circuit is similar to the wave packet evolution obtained from the tight-binding model. There is an obvious symmetry-induced tunnelling of the initial signal at macroscopic distances.
The effect of tunnelling can be used for secure communications. Instead of coding and decoding a signal, we propose to suppress the transmitted signal by a circuit with random elements and then to restore it, using a symmetric counterpart of the random circuit. The signal can be suppressed to the noise level and safely transmitted to the receiver over a transmitting line. The symmetric counterpart of the random circuit restores only the signal, (not noise) since constructive interference occurs only for the coherent part, which has passed trough the suppressing circuit of the emitter. The non-coherent part (noise or any irrelevant signal) will be exponentially suppressed by the receiving random circuit. The two identical random circuits may be fabricated as microchips, which are installed (or replaced) simultaneously at the emitter and receiver. In the absence of dissipation and asymmetry between the two random elements, the proposed method guarantees a robust restoration of the signal. Inevitable Joule losses should be compensated by an amplifier, which does not destroy the coherency of the signal.
In conclusion, we demonstrate that in a symmetric random potential the localized quantum states have two peaks as it is required by the parity. Fast spreading of the initial $\delta$-excitation within localization length is followed by slow growth due to tunnelling at the symmetrical point. This effect opens a new possibility for secure communications that does not require coding and decoding of the transmitting signal. The random circuits may operate in a wide range of radio-frequencies, using commercial capacitors and inductors. They also can be fabricated and operated in the infrared and optical region using the concept of plasmonic nanoelements proposed in Ref.\[\].
This work is supported by the US DOE grant $\#$ DE-FG02-06ER46312, MMA (Spain) grant $\#$ A106/2007 , MEC (Spain) grant $\#$ FIS2006-00716, and by CONACyT (Mexico) grant $\#$ 43730. E.D acknowledges support from Ramón y Cajal fellowship.
[99]{}
J.C. Flores, J.Phys. Condens. Matter [**1**]{}, 8471 (1989); D.H. Dunlap, H.-L. Wu, and P.W. Phillips, , 88 (1990); P. Phillips and H.-L. Wu, Science [**252**]{}, 1805 (1991); E. Lazo and M.E. Onell, Physica B 299 [**173**]{}, 179 (2001); W. Zhang and S.E. Ulloa , 153203 (2004); M. Titov and H. Schomerus, , 126602 (2005).
J.M. Luck, , 5834 (1989); F. A. B. F. de Moura and M. L. Lyra, , 3735 (1998); J. W. Kantelhardt, [*et al.*]{}, , 198 (2000).
F. M. Izrailev and A. A. Krokhin, , 4062 (1999); F. M. Izrailev, A. A. Krokhin, and S. E. Ulloa, , 041102(R) (2001); F.M.Izrailev and N.M. Makarov, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. [**38**]{}, 10613 (2005).
P. Anderson, Phys. Rev. [**109**]{}, 1492 (1958).
H.-J. Stöckmann, [*Quantum Chaos - An Introduction*]{}, (Cambridge University Press, 1999).
A.B. Pippard, [*The Physics of Vibrations*]{}, (Cambridge University Press, 2007).
R. Schützhold and W.G. Unruh, , 031301 (2005).
U. Kuhl, [*et al.*]{}, , 633 (2000).
V. A. Yampol’skii, [*et al.*]{}, , 014527 (2007).
V. Bellani, [*et al.*]{}, 2159 (1999).
In a symmetric random potential the correlations always exist for the symmetric points, $\langle\epsilon_n
\epsilon_{-n} \rangle=\epsilon_0^2$. At the same time the nearest sites may be uncorrelated. Because of this property the correlation function is not stationary. But it is stationary if the both sites are on the same side from the origin, $\langle\epsilon_n \epsilon_{n^{\prime}} \rangle= \epsilon_0^2
\xi(n-n^{\prime})$, if $nn^{\prime}>0$.
D.J. Thouless, 2141 (1988).
G. Casati, [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Lett. A [**190**]{}, 59 (1994).
V. A. Podolskiy and E. E. Narimanov, , 263601 (2003).
F. Dom[í]{}nguez-Adame, [*et al.*]{}, , 197402 (2003); F. A. B. F. de Moura, [*et al.*]{}, , 104303 (2005).
N. Engheta, A. Salandrino, and A. Alú, , 095504 (2005).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
In this paper we focus on qualitative properties of solutions to a nonlocal nonlinear partial integro-differential equation (PIDE). Using the theory of abstract semilinear parabolic equations we prove existence and uniqueness of a solution in the scale of Bessel potential spaces. Our aim is to generalize known existence results for a wide class of Lévy measures including with a strong singular kernel.
As an application we consider a class of PIDEs arising in the financial mathematics. The classical linear Black-Scholes model relies on several restrictive assumptions such as liquidity and completeness of the market. Relaxing the complete market hypothesis and assuming a Lévy stochastic process dynamics for the underlying stock price process we obtain a model for pricing options by means of a PIDE. We investigate a model for pricing call and put options on underlying assets following a Lévy stochastic process with jumps. We prove existence and uniqueness of solutions to the penalized PIDE representing approximation of the linear complementarity problem arising in pricing American style of options under Lévy stochastic processes. We also present numerical results and comparison of option prices for various Lévy stochastic processes modelling underlying asset dynamics.
author:
-
bibliography:
- 'paper.bib'
title: 'On solutions of a partial integro-differential equation in Bessel potential spaces with applications in option pricing models'
---
Partial integro-differential equation, sectorial operator, analytic semigroup, Bessel potential space, option pricing under Lévy stochastic process, Lévy measure
Introduction
============
In this paper, we analyze solutions to the semilinear parabolic partial integro-differential equation (PIDE) of the form: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial u}{\partial \tau}(\tau,x) &=& \frac{\sigma^2}{2}\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x^2}(\tau,x) + \omega \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(\tau,x) + g(\tau, u(\tau,x))
\nonumber
\\
&& + \int_{\mathbb{R}}\left[ u(\tau, x+z)-u(\tau, x)- (e^z-1) \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(\tau, x)\, \right] \nu({\mathrm{d}}z),
\label{PDE-u}
\\
&&u(0,x)=u_0(x),
\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ $x\in \mathbb{R}, \tau\in(0,T)$, where $g$ is Hölder continuous in the $\tau$ variable and it is Lipschitz continuous in the $u$ variable. Here $\nu $ is a positive Radon measure on $\mathbb{R}$ such that $\int_{\mathbb{R}} \min(z^2,1) \nu ({\mathrm{d}}z)<\infty$.
Our purpose is to prove existence and uniqueness of a solution to (\[PDE-u\]) in the framework of Bessel potential spaces. These functional spaces represent a nested scale $\{X^\gamma\}_{\gamma\ge0}$ of Banach spaces such that $$X^1\equiv D(A) \hookrightarrow X^{\gamma_1} \hookrightarrow X^{\gamma_2} \hookrightarrow X^0\equiv X,$$ for any $0\le \gamma_2\le \gamma_1\le 1$ where $A$ is a sectorial operator in the Banach space $X$ with a dense domain $D(A)\subset X$. For example, if $A=-\Delta$ is the Laplacian operator in ${\mathbb{R}}^n$ with the domain $D(A)\equiv W^{2,p}({\mathbb{R}}^n)\subset X\equiv L^p({\mathbb{R}}^n)$ then $X^\gamma$ is embedded in the Sobolev-Slobodecki space $W^{2\gamma,p}({\mathbb{R}}^n)$ consisting of all functions having $2\gamma$-fractional derivative belonging to the Lebesgue space $L^p({\mathbb{R}}^n)$ of $p$-integrable functions (cf. [@Henry1981]). In this paper, our goal is to prove existence and uniqueness of solutions to (\[PDE-u\]) for a general class of the so-called admissible activity Lévy measures $\nu$ satisfying suitable growth conditions at $\pm\infty$ and the origin.
A motivation for studying solutions of the PIDE (\[PDE-u\]) arises from financial modeling. In the last four decades, the Black-Scholes model and its various generalizations become popular in the financial industry because of their simplicity and possibility to price options by means of explicit analytic formulas. However, practical application of the classical linear Black-Scholes equation has serious drawbacks, e.g. evidence from the stock market indicating that this model is less realistic as it assumes that the market is liquid, complete and without transaction costs. Moreover, sample paths of a Brownian motion are continuous, but stock prices of a typical company usually suffer from sudden jumps on an intra-day scale, making the price trajectories discontinuous. In the classical Black-Scholes model, the logarithm of the price process has a normal distribution. However, the empirical distribution of stock returns exhibits fat tails. Furthermore, if we calibrate theoretical prices to the market prices, we realize that the implied volatility is neither constant as a function of strike nor as a function of time to maturity, contradicting thus assumptions of the Black-Scholes model. Several alternatives have been proposed in the literature for generalization of this model. The models with jumps can, at least in part, solve problems inherent to the Black-Scholes model. Jump–diffusion models also have an important role in derivative markets. In the classical Black-Scholes model the market is assumed to be complete, implying that every pay-off can be perfectly replicated. On the other hand, in jump–diffusion models there is no perfect hedge and this way options are not redundant.
taking into account jumps in the underlying asset process, the price $V(t,S)$ of an option on the underlying asset with a price $S$ and time $t\in[0,T]$ is a solution to the following nonlocal nonlinear partial integro-differential equation: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial V}{\partial t} &+&\frac{\sigma^2}{2} S^2 \frac{\partial^2 V}{\partial S^2} + r S \frac{\partial V}{\partial S}-rV \nonumber
\\
&+& \int_{\mathbb{R}}\left[ V(t,Se^z)-V(t,S)-(e^z-1) S \frac{\partial V}{\partial S}(t,S) \right] \nu({\mathrm{d}}z)=0,
\label{V-eq}\end{aligned}$$ $S>0, t\in (0,T)$. Here $\sigma>0$ is the volatility of the underlying asset process $\{S_t\}_{t\ge0}$, $r\ge 0$ is the risk-less interest rate and $\nu$ is a Lévy measure. A solution $V$ is subject to the terminal condition $V(S,T)=\Phi(S)$ where $\Phi$ represents the pay-off diagram of a plain vanilla option, i.e. $\Phi(S)= (S-K)^+$ for a call option, or $\Phi(S)= (K-S)^+$ for a put option, $K>0$ is the strike price.
In the case when the Lévy measure $\nu$ is defined through the Dirac function, i.e. $ \nu({\mathrm{d}}z) =\delta(z) {\mathrm{d}}z$ or $\nu\equiv0$ the aforementioned nonlocal PIDE reduces to the classical linear Black-Scholes linear PDE: $$\frac{\partial V}{\partial t} +\frac{\sigma^2}{2} S^2 \frac{\partial^2 V}{\partial S^2} + r S \frac{\partial V}{\partial S}-rV =0.$$
In the past years, existence results of PIDE (\[PDE-u\]) have been intensively studied in the literature. In [@BL82] A. Bensoussan and J.-L. Lions (see Theorem 3.3 and Theorem 8.1) and also M. G. Garroni and J. L. Menaldi (see [@GarrMenal2002]) investigated the existence and uniqueness of classical solutions for the case $\sigma>0$. In [@RMikuPraga93] Mikulevicius and Pragarauskas extended these results for the case $\sigma=0$. Furthermore, in [@RMikuPraga2014],[@RMikuPraga14] they investigated existence and uniqueness of classical solutions in Hölder and Sobolev spaces of the Cauchy problem to the partial-integro-differential equation of the order of kernel singularity up to the second order. Qualitative results using the notion of viscosity solutions were provided by M. Crandall and P.-L. Lions in [@CL92]. They were generalized to PIDEs by Awatif [@Sayahf2007] and Soner [@Soner1986] for the first order operators and by Alvarez and Tourin [@OlivierAgnes1996], Barles [*et al.*]{} [@GuyBarles1997], and Pham [@Huyen1998] for the second order operators. In [@Maria11],[@Maria12] Mariani and SenGupta proved existence of weak solutions of a generalized integro-differential equation using the Schaefer fixed point theorem. On other hand, in [@Amster12], Amster [*et al.*]{} proved the existence of solutions using the method of upper and lower solutions in a general domain in the case of several assets and for the regime-switching jump-diffusion model in [@Ionut2012]. In [@NBS15],[@NBS17] Arregui et al. applied the theory of abstract parabolic equations in Banach spaces (cf. [@Henry1981]) for the proof of existence and uniqueness of solutions of a system of nonlinear PDEs for pricing of XVA derivatives. In the recent paper Cruz and Ševčovič [@NBS19] investigated a nonlinear extension of the option pricing PIDE model (\[V-eq\]) from numerical point of view.
As a motivation we consider a model for pricing vanilla call and put options on underlying assets following Lévy stochastic processes. Using the theory of abstract semilinear parabolic equations we prove existence and uniqueness of solutions in the Bessel potential space representing a fractional power space of the space of Lebesgue $p$-integrable functions with respect to the second order Laplace differential operator. We generalize known existence results for a wider class of Lévy measures having strong singular kernel with the third order of singularity. We also prove existence and uniqueness of solutions to the penalized PIDE representing approximation of the linear complementarity problem for a PIDE arising in pricing American style of options.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we recall typical examples of Lévy measures arising in the financial modelling of stochastic processes with random jumps. We introduce a notion of an admissible activity Lévy measure. We show that this class of Lévy measures includes jump-diffusion finite activity measures present in e.g. Merton’s or Kou’s double exponential models as well as infinite activity Lévy measure appearing in e.g. Variance Gamma, Normal Inverse Gaussian or the so-called CGMY models. Section 3 is devoted to the proof of the main result on existence and uniqueness of solution to the PIDE (\[PDE-u\]) in the framework of the Bessel potential spaces $X^\gamma$ representing the fractional power spaces of the Lebesgue space $L^{p}({\mathbb{R}})$ with respect to the second order Laplacian operator. We follow the methodology of abstract semilinear parabolic equations developed by Henry in [@Henry1981]. First, we provide sufficient conditions guaranteeing existence and uniqueness of a solution to the PIDE (\[PDE-u\]) in Bessel potential spaces. In Section 4 we investigate qualitative properties of solutions to a PIDE of the Black-Scholes type arising in pricing derivative securities on underlying assets following Lévy processes. Section 5 is focused on application of the results for the nonlinear extension of the Black-Scholes PIDE for pricing American style of put options by the penalization method. Finally, in Section 6 we present results of a numerical solution to PIDE Variance Gamma and Merton’s models.
Preliminaries, definitions and motivation
==========================================
A stochastic process $\{X_{t}, t\ge 0\}$ is called a Lévy stochastic process if its characteristic function has the following Lévy-Khintchine representation $\mathbb{E}\left[e^{i y X_{t}}\right]=e^{t\phi(y)}$ with $$\phi(y)=-\frac{\sigma^{2}}{2}y^{2}+i\omega y+\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \left(e^{i y z}-1-i y z1_{|z| \leq 1}\right) \nu ({\mathrm{d}}z),$$ where $\sigma \geq 0$, $\omega \in \mathbb{R}$, and $\nu $ is a positive Radon measure on $\mathbb{R} \setminus \left\{0\right\}$ satisfying: $$\int_{\mathbb{R}} \min(z^2,1) \nu ({\mathrm{d}}z)<\infty,
\label{condinttwo}$$ (cf. [@Sato99],[@ConTan03],[@App04]).
\[def-admissiblemeasure\] A Lévy measure $\nu$ is called an admissible activity Lévy measure if there exists a nonnegative measurable function $h$ such that $\nu({\mathrm{d}}z) = h(z) {\mathrm{d}}z$ such that $$0 \le h(z)\le C_0 |z|^{-\alpha}\left(e^{D^{-}z}1_{z\geq 0}+e^{D^{+}z}1_{z< 0}\right)e^{-\mu z^{2}},
\label{growth_measure}$$ for any $z\in{\mathbb{R}}$ and the shape parameters $\alpha\geq 0$, $D^{\pm}\in\mathbb{R}$ and $\mu\geq 0$. Here $C_0>0$ is a constant.
The condition (\[condinttwo\]) is satisfied for any measure $\nu$ belonging to the class of admissible activity Lévy measures with shape parameters $0\le \alpha<3$, and either $\mu>0$ or $\mu=0$ and $D^-<0<D^+$.
Examples of admissible Lévy measures arising in the financial modelling
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The class of admissible activity Lévy measures includes various measures often used in financial modelling of underlying stock dynamics with jumps. For example, in the context of financial modelling the first jump-diffusion model was proposed by Merton in [@Merton76]. Its Lévy measure is given by: $$\nu({\mathrm{d}}z)=\lambda \frac{1}{\delta\sqrt{2\pi}}e^{-\frac{(z-m)^2}{2\delta^2}}{\mathrm{d}}z\,,
\label{merton-density}$$ where $m\in{\mathbb{R}}, \lambda, \delta>0,$ are given parameters.
Another popular model is the so-called double exponential model introduced by Kou in [@Kou2002]. In this model, the Lévy measure $\nu$ is given by $$\nu ({\mathrm{d}}z)=\lambda \left( \theta \lambda^{+} e^{- \lambda^{+} z}1_{z\ge 0}+ (1-\theta) \lambda^{-} e^{\lambda^{-} z}1_{z<0}\right){\mathrm{d}}z,
\label{double-density}$$ where $\lambda>0$ is the intensity of jumps, $\theta$ is the probability of occurrence of positive jumps and the parameters $\lambda^\pm> 0$ correspond to the level of the decay of distribution of positive and negative jumps. It implies that the distribution of jumps is asymmetric and the tails of the distribution of returns are semi-heavy. Both Merton’s as well as Kou’s measure $\nu$ belong to the class of the so-called finite activity Lévy measures, i.e. $\nu(\mathbb{R})=\int_{\mathbb{R}}\nu({\mathrm{d}}z)<\infty$ having a finite variation $\int_{|z|\leq 1}|z|\nu({\mathrm{d}}z)<\infty$.
As an example of infinite activity Lévy processes we can consider the Variance Gamma (see [@DPE98]), Normal Inverse Gaussian (NIG) and CGMY processes (see [@BARNIE01]). The Variance Gamma process is a process with infinite activity, $\nu(\mathbb{R})=\int_{\mathbb{R}}\nu({\mathrm{d}}z)=\infty$ and finite variation, $\int_{|z|\leq 1}|z|\nu({\mathrm{d}}z)<\infty$ where $$\nu ({\mathrm{d}}z)= C_0 |z|^{-1}e^{Az-B|z|}{\mathrm{d}}z.
\label{vargamma-density}$$ Here the parameters $A,B>0$ depend on the volatility and drift of the Brownian motion, $C_0>0$, and the variance of a subordinator (the Gamma process) (see [@ConTan03]). The measure $\nu$ is an admissible activity Lévy measure with shape parameters $\mu=0$, $D^{+}=A+B>0$, $D^{-}=A-B<0$, and $\alpha=1$. The NIG process is a process of infinite activity and infinite variation with the following Lévy measure: $$\nu({\mathrm{d}}z)=C |z|^{-1} e^{A z}K_{1}\left(B |z|\right){\mathrm{d}}z,
\label{nig-density}$$ where $A,B>0$ have the same meaning as in the Variance Gamma process. Here $K_1$ is the modified Bessel function of the second kind (see [@ConTan03]). Since $K_{1}(x)\sim \sqrt{\pi/2} x^{-1/2} e^{-x}$ as $x\rightarrow \infty$ and $K_{1}(x)\sim x^{-1}$ as $x\rightarrow 0$ (see [@Abramowitz]) the measure $\nu$ is an admissible activity Lévy measure with the shape parameters $\mu=0$, $D^{+}=A+B>0$, $D^{-}=A-B<0$, $\alpha=2$. The Variance Gamma and NIG processes are special cases of generalized hyperbolic models.
Finally, the so-called CGMY distribution process introduced by Carr [*et al.*]{} in [@CGMY98],[@PD99] has four parameters $C,G,M$ and $Y$ with the the Lévy measure given by: $$\nu( {\mathrm{d}}z)= C_0 |z|^{-1-Y} \left( e^{G z} 1_{z<0}+e^{-M z} 1_{z>0}\right) {\mathrm{d}}z,
\label{CGMY-density}$$ where $C,G,M>0$ and $Y<2$. The parameter $C$ measures the overall level of activity. The parameters $G$ and $M$ are the left and right tail decay parameters, respectively. When $G=M$ the distribution is symmetric. The process has infinite activity and finite variation when $Y\in (0,1)$ and infinite variation for $Y\in[1,2)$. The measure $\nu$ is an admissible activity Lévy measure with the shape parameters $\mu=0, \alpha=1+Y<3$, and $D^{+}=G>0, D^{-}=-M<0$.
Existence and uniqueness results
================================
The goal of this section is to prove the main result of the paper regarding existence and uniqueness of a solution to the linear and nonlinear PIDE for a wide class of admissible activity Lévy measures. We can rewrite the PIDE (\[PDE-u\]) in the abstract form as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
&&\frac{\partial u}{\partial \tau} + A u =
\omega \frac{\partial u}{\partial x} + f[u] + g(\tau, u), \quad x\in \mathbb{R}, \tau\in(0,T),
\label{problem_transformed}
\\
&&u(0,x)=u_0(x), x\in \mathbb{R},
\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where the linear operators $A$ and $f$ are defined by: $$\begin{aligned}
A u &=& - \frac{\sigma^2}{2}\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x^2},
\label{Au_def}
\\
f[u](x) &=&
\int_{\mathbb{R}}\left[ u(x+z)-u(x)- (e^z-1) \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x)\, \right] \nu({\mathrm{d}}z),
\label{functional_f_def}\end{aligned}$$ and $g$ is a Hölder continuous mapping in the $\tau$ variable and it is Lipschitz continuous in the $u$ variable.
As a motivation for studying PIDE (\[problem\_transformed\]) we consider a model for pricing vanilla call and put options on underlying assets following Lévy stochastic processes. The classical linear Black-Scholes equation can be transformed into equation v(\[problem\_transformed\]) where $f\equiv 0, g\equiv 0$. A nontrivial integral part $f[u]$ arises from a generalization of the Black-Scholes model to the case when the underlying asset price follows a stochastic Lévy process with jumps (see Section 4). In Section 5 we will investigate equation (\[problem\_transformed\]) with a nontrivial integral part $f[u]$ and a nonlinearity $g$ corresponding to the penalization function. The resulting PIDE of the form (\[problem\_transformed\]) represents an approximation of a solution to the partial integro-differential variational inequality arising in pricing American style of options.
In order to prove existence, continuation and uniqueness of a solution to the problem (\[problem\_transformed\]) we follow the qualitative theory of semilinear abstract parabolic equations developed by Henry in [@Henry1981]. First, we recall the concept of an analytic semigroup of linear operators and a sectorial operator in a Banach space.
[@Henry1981] A family of bounded linear operators $\left\{S(t), t\geq 0\right\}$ in a Banach space $X$ is called an analytic semigroup if it satisfies the following conditions:
- $S(0)=I, S(t)S(s)=S(s)S(t)=S(t+s)$, for all $t,s\geq 0$;
- $S(t) u\rightarrow u$ when $t\rightarrow 0^{+}$ for all $u\in X$;
- $t\rightarrow S(t) u$ is a real analytic function on $0< t< \infty$ for each $u\in X$.
The associated infinitesimal generator $A$ is defined as follows: $A u = \lim_{t\rightarrow 0^{+}} \frac{1}{t} (S(t)u-u)$ and its domain $D(A)\subseteq X$ consists of those elements $u\in X$ for which the limit exists in the space $X$.
[@Henry1981] Let $S_{a,\phi}=\left\{\lambda \in \mathbb{C}: \phi\leq \arg(\lambda-a)\leq 2\pi-\phi \right\}$ be a sector of complex numbers. A closed densely defined linear operator $A: D(A)\subset X \rightarrow X$ is called a sectorial operator if there exists a constant $M\geq 0$ such that $\Vert(A-\lambda )^{-1}\Vert\leq M/|\lambda -a|$ for all $\lambda\in S_{a,\phi} \subset \mathbb{C}\setminus\sigma(A)$.
In what follows, we shall investigate the partial-integral differential equation (\[problem\_transformed\]) in the framework of the so-called Bessel potential spaces. These spaces represent natural extension of the classical Sobolev spaces $W^{k,p}(\mathbb{R})$ where the order $k$ may attain the discrete values only, i.e. the distributional derivatives up to the order $k$ belong to the Lebesgue space $L^p(\mathbb{R})$. Bessel potential spaces represent a continuous scale of fractional powers, and allow for a finer formulation of results in comparison to the classical Sobolev spaces $W^{k,p}(\mathbb{R}), k\in\mathbb{N}$.
It is well known that that if $A$ is a sectorial operator then $-A$ is an infinitesimal generator of an analytic semigroup $S(t)=\left\{e^{-A t}, t\geq 0\right\}$ (cf. [@Henry1981]). If $X$ is a Banach space then we can define a scale of fractional power spaces $\{X^{\gamma}\}_{\gamma\ge 0}$ in the following way: $$X^{\gamma}= D(A^{\gamma})= Range(A^{-\gamma})=\left\{u\in X:\ \exists \varphi\in X, u=A^{-\gamma}\varphi\right\},$$ where, for any $\gamma >0$, the operator $A^{-\gamma}$ is defined by virtue of the Gamma function, i.e. $A^{-\gamma}=\frac{1}{\Gamma(\gamma)}\int_{0}^{\infty} \xi^{\gamma-1}e^{-A \xi} {\mathrm{d}}\xi$. The norm is defined as $\Vert u\Vert_{X^\gamma}=\Vert A^{\gamma}u\Vert_X=\Vert \varphi\Vert_X$. Note that $X^0=X$, $X^1=D(A)$, and $X^1\equiv D(A) \hookrightarrow X^{\gamma_1} \hookrightarrow X^{\gamma_2} \hookrightarrow X^0\equiv X$, for any $0\le \gamma_2\le \gamma_1\le 1$.
In what follows, by $G*\varphi$ we shall denote the convolution operator defined by $(G*\varphi)(x)=\int_{\mathbb{R}^n} G(x-y)\varphi(y){\mathrm{d}}{y}$.
[@Henry1981 Section 1.6], [@Stein1970 Chapter 5] \[A-sectorial\] The Laplace operator $-\Delta $ is sectorial in the Banach space $X=L^{p}(\mathbb{R}^{n})$ of Lebesgue $p$-integrable functions for any $p\ge 1$ and $n\ge 1$. Its domain $D(A)$ is embedded into the Sobolev space $W^{2,p}(\mathbb{R}^{n})$. The fractional power space $X^\gamma, \gamma>0,$ is the space of Bessel potentials: $X^\gamma={\mathscr L}^p_{2\gamma}(\mathbb{R}^n):=\{ G_{2\gamma}*\varphi, \ \varphi\in L^p({\mathbb{R}}^n)\}$ where $$G_{2\gamma}(x) = \frac{(4\pi)^{-n/2}}{\Gamma(\gamma)}\int_0^\infty \xi^{-1+(2\gamma-n)/2} e^{-(\xi +\Vert x\Vert^2/(4\xi))}{\mathrm{d}}\xi$$ is the Bessel potential function. The norm of $u=G_{2\gamma}*\varphi$ is given by $\Vert u\Vert_{X^\gamma}=\Vert \varphi\Vert_{L^p}$. The fractional power space $X^\gamma$ is continuously embedded into the fractional Sobolev-Slobodeckii space $W^{2\gamma,p}({\mathbb{R}}^n)$.
Lemma \[A-sectorial\] was proven in [@Henry1981 Section 1.6], [@Stein1970 Chapter 5]. The idea of the proof of sectoriality of the Laplace operator $-\Delta $ in the Banach space $X=L^p(\mathbb{R}^n)$ is based on estimation of the resolvent operator $(\lambda -\Delta)^{-1}$ in the $L^p$ norm. The rest of the proof of Lemma \[A-sectorial\] is based on the analysis of the Fourier transform of the equation $(\lambda-\Delta)u=f$. The Fourier transform $\hat u$ of its solution is given by $\hat u(\xi) = (\lambda +|\xi|^2)^{-1}\hat f(\xi)$. The function $G_\alpha$ is then constructed by means of the inverse Fourier transform of $\hat G_\alpha(\xi) = (1+|\xi|^2)^{-\alpha/2}$, and $G_\alpha$ is given as in Lemma \[A-sectorial\]. For further details we refer the reader to Section 1.6 of [@Henry1981] and [@Stein1970 Chapter 5].
\[lemma-f\] Assume $\nu$ is an admissible activity Lévy measure with shape parameters $\alpha, D^\pm$, and $\mu$ where $\alpha<3$ and either $\mu>0, D^\pm\in\mathbb{R}$, or $\mu=0, D^- + 1<0<D^+$. Suppose that $\gamma\ge 1/2$ and $\gamma>(\alpha-1)/2$. Then, for the mapping $f$ defined by (\[functional\_f\_def\]), there exists a constant $C>0$ such that, for any $u$ satisfying $\partial_x u \in X^{\gamma-1/2}$, the following estimate holds: $$\Vert f[u]\Vert_{L^p} \le C \Vert \partial_x u\Vert_{X^{\gamma-1/2}}.$$ In particular, if $u\in X^\gamma$ we have $\Vert f[u]\Vert_{L^p} \le C \Vert u\Vert_{X^\gamma}$ and the mapping $f$ is a bounded linear operator from the fractional power space $X^\gamma$ into $X=L^p({\mathbb{R}})$.
Proof. The mapping $f$ can be split as follows: $f[u]=\tilde f[u] + \tilde\omega \partial_x u$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\tilde f[u](x) &=& \int_{\mathbb{R}}\left(u(x+z) - u(x) - z \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x) \right) \nu({\mathrm{d}}{z}),\end{aligned}$$ and $\tilde\omega=\int_{\mathbb{R}}\left(z - e^z+1 \right) \nu({\mathrm{d}}{z})$. Since $z - e^z+1=O(z^2)$ as $z\to0$, and $$0\le \nu({\mathrm{d}}{z}) = h(z) {\mathrm{d}}{z} \le |z|^{-\alpha} \tilde h(z) {\mathrm{d}}{z},
\ \
\text{where}
\ \
\tilde h(z) = C_0 e^{-\mu z^2} \left(e^{D^-z} 1_{z\ge0} + e^{D^+z} 1_{z<0} \right),$$ we have $\tilde\omega\in{\mathbb{R}}$ provided that $0\le \alpha<3$, and, either $\mu>0, D^\pm\in{\mathbb{R}}$, or $\mu=0$ and $D^- +1<0<D^+$.
First, we consider the case when $\gamma>1/2$. We shall prove boundedness of the second linear operator $\tilde f$. If $u$ is such that $\partial_xu\in X^{\gamma-1/2}$ then there exists $\varphi\in X=L^p({\mathbb{R}})$ such that $\partial_x u = A^{-(2\gamma-1)/2}\varphi = G_{2\gamma-1} * \varphi$ and $$\Vert \partial_x u\Vert_{X^{\gamma-1/2}} = \Vert \varphi\Vert_X= \Vert \varphi\Vert_{L^p}.$$ Hence, for any $x, \theta$, and $z$ we have $$\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x+\theta z)- \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x)
= \left(G_{2\gamma-1}(x+\theta z - \cdot) - G_{2\gamma-1}(x - \cdot) \right)* \varphi(\cdot).$$ Recall the following inequality for the convolution operator: $$\Vert G*\varphi\Vert_{L^p}\le \Vert G\Vert_{L^q} \Vert \varphi\Vert_{L^r},$$ where $p,q,r\ge 1$ and $1/p + 1 = 1/q + 1/r$ (see [@Henry1981 Section 1.6]). In the special case when $q=1$ we have $\Vert G*\varphi\Vert_{L^p}\le \Vert G\Vert_{L^1} \Vert \varphi\Vert_{L^p}$. According to [@Stein1970 Chapter 5.4, Proposition 7] we know that the modulus of continuity of the Bessel kernel function $G_{2\gamma-1}$ satisfies the estimate: $$\Vert G_{2\gamma-1}(\cdot + h) - G_{2\gamma-1}(\cdot) \Vert_{L^1}
\le C_1 |h|^{2\gamma-1},$$ for any $h$ where $C_1>0$ is a constant. Therefore, for any $\theta, z\in{\mathbb{R}}$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
&&\int_{\mathbb{R}}\left|\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x+\theta z) - \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x)\right|^p{\mathrm{d}}{x}
= \Vert\left( G_{2\gamma-1}(\cdot + \theta z) - G_{2\gamma-1}(\cdot)\right)*\varphi\Vert_{L^p}^p
\\
&& \le \Vert G_{2\gamma-1}(\cdot + \theta z) - G_{2\gamma-1}(\cdot)\Vert_{L^1}^p\Vert\varphi\Vert_{L^p}^p
\le C_1^p |\theta z|^{(2\gamma-1)p} \Vert \partial_x u\Vert_{X^{\gamma-1/2}}^p.\end{aligned}$$ The latter inequality formally holds true also for the case $\gamma=1/2$ because $$\int_{\mathbb{R}}\left|\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x+\theta z) - \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x)\right|^p{\mathrm{d}}{x}
\le 2^p \Vert \partial_x u\Vert_{L^p}^p = 2^p \Vert \partial_x u\Vert_{X^0}^p .$$ The rest of the proof of boundedness of the mapping $f$ holds for $\gamma> 1/2$ as well as $\gamma=1/2$. As $u(x+z) - u(x) - z \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x)
=z\int_0^1 \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x+\theta z)- \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x){\mathrm{d}}{\theta}$, we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
&& \int_{\mathbb{R}}|u(x+z) - u(x) - z \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x)|^p{\mathrm{d}}{x}
=|z|^p \int_{\mathbb{R}}\left| \int_0^1 \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x+\theta z)- \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x){\mathrm{d}}{\theta} \right|^p {\mathrm{d}}{x}
\\
&& \le |z|^p \int_0^1 \int_{\mathbb{R}}\left| \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x+\theta z)- \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x)\right|^p {\mathrm{d}}{x} {\mathrm{d}}{\theta}
\le C_1^p |z|^{2\gamma p} \Vert \partial_x u\Vert_{X^{\gamma-1/2}}^p.\end{aligned}$$ Now, as $0\le \nu({\mathrm{d}}{z}) = h(z){\mathrm{d}}{z} \le |z|^{-\alpha} \tilde h(z) {\mathrm{d}}{z}=
(|z|^{-\beta} \tilde h(z)^\frac12 )\cdot (|z|^{\beta-\alpha} \tilde h(z)^\frac12 ) {\mathrm{d}}{z}$, using the Hölder inequality with exponents $p,q$ such that $1/p+1/q=1$ we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\Vert \tilde f[u]\Vert_{L^p}^p
&=& \int_{\mathbb{R}}\left| \int_{\mathbb{R}}u(x+z) - u(x) - z \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x)\nu({\mathrm{d}}{z})\right |^p{\mathrm{d}}{x}
\\
&\le& \int_{\mathbb{R}}\left|\int_{\mathbb{R}}\left| u(x+z) - u(x) - z \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x)\right| h(z){\mathrm{d}}{z} \right|^p{\mathrm{d}}{x}
\\
&\le& \int_{\mathbb{R}}\int_{\mathbb{R}}\left| u(x+z) - u(x) - z \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x)\right|^p |z|^{-\beta p} \tilde h(z)^{p/2} {\mathrm{d}}{z}
\\
&& \quad\times \left(\int_{\mathbb{R}}|z|^{(\beta-\alpha) q} \tilde h(z)^{q/2} {\mathrm{d}}{z}\right)^{p/q} {\mathrm{d}}{x}
\\
&=& \int_{\mathbb{R}}\left(\int_{\mathbb{R}}\left| u(x+z) - u(x) - z \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x)\right|^p {\mathrm{d}}{x}\right) |z|^{-\beta p} \tilde h(z)^{p/2} {\mathrm{d}}{z}
\\
&& \quad\times \left(\int_{\mathbb{R}}|z|^{(\beta-\alpha) q} \tilde h(z)^{q/2} {\mathrm{d}}{z}\right)^{p/q}
\\
&\le &
C_1^p \Vert \partial_x u\Vert_{X^{\gamma-1/2}}^p
\int_{\mathbb{R}}|z|^{(2\gamma-\beta) p} \tilde h(z)^{p/2} {\mathrm{d}}{z} \left(\int_{\mathbb{R}}|z|^{(\beta-\alpha) q} \tilde h(z)^{q/2} {\mathrm{d}}{z}\right)^{p/q}.\end{aligned}$$ The integrals $C_2=\int_{\mathbb{R}}|z|^{(2\gamma-\beta) p} \tilde h(z)^{p/2} {\mathrm{d}}{z}$ and $C_3=\int_{\mathbb{R}}|z|^{(\beta-\alpha) q} \tilde h(z)^{q/2} {\mathrm{d}}{z}$ are finite provided that $$(2\gamma-\beta) p > -1, \qquad (\beta-\alpha) q = (\beta-\alpha) \frac{p}{p-1} >-1,$$ and $\mu>0, D^\pm\in\mathbb{R}$, or $\mu=0$ and $D^-<0<D^+$. The later inequalities are satisfied if there exists a parameter $\beta$ such that $$\alpha-1+1/p < \beta < 2\gamma+1/p.$$ Such a choice of $\beta$ is possible because we assumed $\gamma>(\alpha-1)/2$. Hence there exists a constant $C>0$ such that $\Vert \tilde f[u]\Vert_{L^p} \le C \Vert \partial_x u\Vert_{X^{\gamma-1/2}}$ for any $u$ satisfying $\partial_x u\in X^{\gamma-1/2}$, as claimed. Due to the continuity of the embedding $X^{\gamma-1/2} \hookrightarrow X$ we have $\Vert f[u]\Vert_{L^p} = \Vert \tilde f[u] + \tilde\omega \partial_x u \Vert_{L^p} \le C \Vert \partial_x u\Vert_{X^{\gamma-1/2}} = C \Vert u\Vert_{X^\gamma}$ for any $u\in X^\gamma$ and $f$ is a bounded linear operator from $X^\gamma$ into $X=L^p$. $\diamondsuit$
Let us denote by $C([0,T],X^{\gamma})$ the Banach space of all continuous functions from the interval $[0,T]$ to $X^\gamma$ with the maximum norm $\Vert U(\cdot)\Vert_{C([0,T],X^{\gamma})}=\sup_{\tau\in[0,T]} \Vert U(\tau)\Vert_{X^\gamma}$. We recall the well known result on existence and uniqueness of a solution to abstract parabolic equations in Banach spaces due to Henry [@Henry1981].
[@Henry1981 Section 1] \[semilinear\_general\_existence\_result\] Suppose that a densely defined closed linear operator $-A$ is a generator of an analytic semigroup $\left\{e^{-At},t\geq 0\right\}$ in a Banach space $X$, $U_{0}\in X^{\gamma}$ where $0\leq \gamma <1$. Assume $F:[0,T]\times X^{\gamma}\to X$ and $h:(0,T]\to X$ are Hölder continuous mappings in the $\tau$ variable, $\int_0^T \Vert h(\tau)\Vert_X {\mathrm{d}}x <\infty$, and $F$ is a Lipschitz continuous mapping in the $U$ variable. Then, there exists the unique solution $U\in C([0,T],X^{\gamma})$ of the following abstract semilinear evolution equation: $$\frac{\partial U}{\partial \tau}+A U=F(\tau, U) +h(\tau), \qquad U(0)=U_{0}.
\label{semilinear_problem}$$ Moreover, $\partial_\tau U(\tau) \in X, U(\tau)\in D(A)$ for any $\tau\in (0,T)$.
By a solution to (\[semilinear\_problem\]) we mean a function $U\in C([0,T],X^{\gamma})$ satisfying (\[semilinear\_problem\]) in the integral (mild) sense, i.e. $$U(\tau) = e^{-A \tau} U_0 + \int_0^\tau e^{-A (\tau-s)} (F(s, U(s)) + h(s) ) {\mathrm{d}}{s} \ \hbox{for any}\ \tau\in[0,T].$$ Recall that the key idea of the proof of Proposition \[semilinear\_general\_existence\_result\] is based on the Banach fixed point argument combined with the decay estimate $\Vert e^{-A t}\Vert_{X^\gamma} = \Vert A^\gamma e^{-A t}\Vert_{X} \le M t^{-\gamma} e^{-at}$ of the norm of the semigroup $e^{-At}$ for any $t>0$.
As a direct consequence of Proposition \[semilinear\_general\_existence\_result\] and Lemma \[lemma-f\] we deduce the following result:
\[semilinear\_existence\_result\] Assume $\nu$ is an admissible activity Lévy measure with the shape parameters $\alpha, D^\pm$ and $\mu$ where $\alpha<3$ and either $\mu>0, D^\pm\in\mathbb{R}$, or $\mu=0, D^- + 1<0<D^+$. Assume $\gamma\ge 1/2$ and $\gamma>(\alpha-1)/2$. Suppose that the function $g(\tau,u)$ is Hölder continuous in the $\tau$ variable and Lipschitz continuous in the $u$ variable. Then for any $u_0\in X^\gamma$ and $T>0$ there exists the unique solution $u\in C([0,T],X^{\gamma})$ to PIDE (\[PDE-u\]).
The Black-Scholes PIDE model
============================
In this section, our purpose is to investigate properties of solutions to a PIDE generalizing the Black-Scholes model. An important definition concerning this generalization is definition of a Lévy measure of a given process $X_t$. The measure $\nu(A)$ of a Borel set $A\subseteq {\mathbb{R}}$ is defined by: $$\nu\left(A\right)=\mathbb{E}\left[\# \left\{t \in \left[0,1\right]:\Delta X_{t} \in A \right\}\right]=
\frac{1}{T}\mathbb{E}\left[\# \left\{t \in \left[0,T\right]:\Delta X_{t} \in A \right\}\right].
\label{eq:measuredef}$$ It gives the mean number, per unit of time, of jumps of $X_t, t\ge0,$ whose amplitude belongs to the set $A$ (see [@ConTan03]).
For the underlying asset price dynamics we will suppose that $S_t, t\ge 0,$follows the geometric Lévy proces, i.e. $S_t=e^{X_t}$ where $X_t,t\ge0,$ is a Lévy process. Then it is well known (cf. [@ConTan03],[@NBS19]) that the price of a contingent claim in the presence of jumps is given by a solution $V(t,S)$ of the following partial integro-differential equation: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial V}{\partial t} &+&\frac{\sigma^2}{2} S^2 \frac{\partial^2 V}{\partial S^2} + r S \frac{\partial V}{\partial S}-rV \nonumber
\\
&+&\int_{\mathbb{R}}\left[ V(t,Se^z)-V(t,S)-(e^z-1) S \frac{\partial V}{\partial S}(t,S) \right] \nu({\mathrm{d}}z)=0,
\label{PDE-S}
\\
&&V(T,S)=\Phi(S), \quad S>0, t\in[0,T).
\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ Here $\Phi$ is the pay-off diagram of a plain vanilla option. For example, $\Phi(S)=(S-K)^+$ for a call option, or $\Phi(S)=(K-S)^+$ for a put option where $K>0$ is the strike price. Here and after we shall denote by $a^+=\max(a,0)$ and $a^-=\min(a,0)$ the positive and negative parts of a real number $a$, respectively.
If we consider the following change of variables $V(t,S)=e^{-r\tau}u(\tau,x)$ where $\tau=T-t$, $x=\ln(\frac{S}{K})$ then we obtain the following PIDE for the function $u(\tau,x)$:
$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial u}{\partial \tau}
&=&\frac{\sigma^2}{2} \frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x^2}
+ \left(r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2\right)\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}
\label{PDE-u-BS}
\\
&& + \int_{\mathbb{R}} \left[
u(\tau,x+z)-u(\tau,x)-\left(e^{z}-1\right)\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(\tau,x)
\right]\nu({\mathrm{d}}z),
\nonumber
\\
u(0,x)&=&\Phi(K e^{x}), \quad x\in \mathbb{R}, \tau\in(0,T).
\nonumber\end{aligned}$$
Unfortunately, the initial condition $u(0,x)= \Phi(Ke^x)$ does not belong to the Banach space $X$ for both call and put option pay-off diagrams $\Phi$, i.e. $\Phi(S)=(S-K)^+$ and $\Phi(S)=(K-S)^+$. The idea how to formulate existence and uniqueness of a solution to the PIDE (\[PDE-u-BS\]) is based on the idea of shifting the solution $u$ by $u_{BS}$ where the function $u_{BS}(\tau,x) =e^{r\tau} V_{BS}(T-\tau, Ke^x)$ corresponds to transformation of the classical solution $V_{BS}$ to the linear Black-Scholes equation without PIDE part, i.e. $$\begin{aligned}
&&\frac{\partial V_{BS}}{\partial t} +\frac{\sigma^2}{2} S^2 \frac{\partial^2 V_{BS}}{\partial S^2} + r S \frac{\partial V_{BS}}{\partial S}-rV_{BS} =0,
\\
&&V_{BS}(T,S)=\Phi(S).
\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ Recall that the solution $V_{BS}$ for a call or put option can be expressed explicitly: $$\begin{aligned}
V^{call}_{BS}(t,S) &=& S N(d_1) - K e^{-r(T-t)} N(d_2),
\\
V^{put}_{BS}(t,S) &=& K e^{-r(T-t)} N(-d_2) - S N(-d_1), \end{aligned}$$ where $$d_{1,2} = \frac{\ln(S/K) + (r\pm\sigma^2/2)(T-t)}{\sigma\sqrt{T-t}},
\ \ \hbox{and} \ \ N(d)=\int_{-\infty}^d \frac{e^{-\xi^2/2}}{\sqrt{2\pi}} {\mathrm{d}}\xi$$ is the cumulative distribution function of the normal distribution (cf. [@NBS5]). Furthermore, the transformed function $u_{BS}$ is a solution to the linear parabolic PDE: $$\begin{aligned}
&& \frac{\partial u_{BS}}{\partial \tau}
=\frac{\sigma^2}{2} \frac{\partial^2 u_{BS}}{\partial x^2}
+ \left(r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2\right)\frac{\partial u_{BS}}{\partial x},
\label{PDE-uBS}
\\
&&u_{BS}(0,x)=\Phi(K e^{x}), \quad \tau\in(0,T), x\in \mathbb{R},
\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where $\Phi(Ke^x)=K(e^x-1)^+$ for the call option and $\Phi(Ke^x)=K(1-e^x)^+$ for the put option.
In what follows, we shall provide important estimates for the function $f[u_{BS}]$.
\[lemmafuBS\] Suppose that $\nu$ is an admissible activity Lévy measure $\nu$ with the shape parameters $\alpha, D^\pm$, and $\mu$ where $\alpha<3$ and either $\mu>0, D^\pm\in\mathbb{R}$, or $\mu=0, D^- +1<0<D^+$. Suppose that $\frac12 \le \gamma<1$ and $\frac{\alpha-1}{2}<\gamma < \frac{p+1}{2p}\le1$. Then there exists a constant $C_0>0$ depending on the parameters $p,\sigma,r,T,K$ only, and such that the function $f[u_{BS}(\tau, \cdot)]$ satisfies the following estimates: $$\begin{aligned}
&&\Vert f[u_{BS}(\tau, \cdot)] \Vert_{L^p}
\le C_0 \tau^{-(2\gamma-1)\left(\frac{1}{2} - \frac{1}{2p}\right)},\qquad 0<\tau\le T,
\\
&&\Vert f[\partial_\tau u_{BS}(\tau, \cdot)] \Vert_{L^p}
\le C_0 \tau^{-\gamma-\frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{2p}}, \qquad 0<\tau\le T,
\\
&&\Vert f[u_{BS}(\tau_1, \cdot)] - f[u_{BS}(\tau_2, \cdot)] \Vert_{L^p}
\le C_0 |\tau_1-\tau_2|^{-\gamma +\frac{p+1}{2p} }, \qquad 0<\tau_1,\tau_2\le T.\end{aligned}$$
Proof. First, we consider the case of a call option, i.e. $u_{BS}=u^{call}_{BS}$ with $u_{BS}(0,x)=\Phi(K e^x) = K (e^x - 1)^+$. It is important to emphasize that $f[e^x]=0$. Hence $$f[u_{BS}] = f[u_{BS} - K e^{r\tau+x}], \quad \hbox{and}\ \
\partial_\tau f[u_{BS}] = f[\partial_\tau(u_{BS} - K e^{r\tau+x})].$$ In what follows, we shall denote by $C_0$ any generic positive constant depending on the parameters $p,\sigma,r,T,K$ only. With regard to Lemma \[lemma-f\] we shall estimate the $X^{\gamma-1/2}$ norm of the function $v$: $$v(\tau,x)= \partial_x \left(u_{BS}(\tau,x) - K e^{r\tau+x}\right)
= K e^{r\tau+x}( N(d_1(\tau,x)) -1),
\label{vtaux}$$ where $d_1(\tau,x) = \left(x+(r+\sigma^2/2)\tau\right)/(\sigma\sqrt{\tau})$. In the case of a put option we have $$\partial_x u^{put}_{BS}(\tau,x) = -K e^{r\tau +x} N(-d_1(\tau,x))
= -K e^{r\tau +x} (1-N(d_1(\tau,x))) = v(\tau, x).$$ Hence the proof of the statement of lemma for the case of a put option is essentially the same as the following argument for a call option.
Using integration by parts and substitution $\xi=d_1(\tau,x)$, we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\Vert v(\tau,\cdot)\Vert_{L^p}^p
&=& K^p e^{p r \tau} \int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{p x} (1-N(d_1))^p {\mathrm{d}}x
\\
&\le&
K^p e^{p r \tau} \int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{p x} (1-N(d_1)) {\mathrm{d}}x
= K^p e^{p r \tau} \int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac{e^{p x}}{p} \frac{e^{-d_1^2/2}}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \frac{1}{\sigma\sqrt{\tau}} {\mathrm{d}}x
\\
&=&
K^p e^{p r \tau} \int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac{e^{p \sigma\sqrt{\tau}\xi - p(r+\sigma^2/2)\tau}}{p} \frac{e^{-\xi^2/2}}{\sqrt{2\pi}} {\mathrm{d}}\xi
= \frac{1}{p} K^p e^{p(p-1)\tau \sigma^2/2}.\end{aligned}$$ Thus $\Vert v(\tau,\cdot)\Vert_{L^p} \le p^{-1/p} K e^{(p-1) T \sigma^2/2}\equiv C_0$ for any $0<\tau\le T$.
As $\partial_x v = v + w$ where $$w = K e^{ r \tau+x} N'(d_1) \frac{1}{\sigma\sqrt{\tau}}
= K e^{ r \tau+x} \frac{e^{-d_1^2/2}}{\sigma\sqrt{2\pi\tau}}.$$ we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\Vert w(\tau,\cdot)d_1(\tau,\cdot)^k\Vert_{L^p}^p
&=& \frac{K^p e^{p r \tau}}{(\sigma\sqrt{2\pi\tau})^{p-1}} \int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{p x} \frac{e^{-p d_1^2/2} |d_1|^{p k}} {\sigma\sqrt{2\pi\tau}} {\mathrm{d}}x \nonumber
\\
&=&
\frac{K^p e^{p r \tau}}{(\sigma\sqrt{2\pi\tau})^{p-1}} \int_{-\infty}^\infty
e^{p \sigma\sqrt{\tau}\xi - p(r+\sigma^2/2)\tau} \frac{e^{-\xi^2/2} |\xi|^{p k}}{\sqrt{2\pi}} {\mathrm{d}}\xi
\label{wdineq}
\\
&\le& C_0^p \tau^{-\frac{p-1}{2}} \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ for $k=0,1,2$. Applying (\[wdineq\]) with $k=0$ we obtain $\Vert w(\tau,\cdot)\Vert_{L^p} \le C_0 \tau^{-\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{2p}}$. As a consequence, $\Vert v(\tau,\cdot)\Vert_{W^{1,p}} \le C_0 \tau^{-\frac{1}{2} +\frac{1}{2p}}$. Since the Bessel potential space ${\mathscr L}^p_{2\gamma-1}$ is an interpolation space between ${\mathscr L}^p_0=L^p$ and ${\mathscr L}^p_1=W^{1,p}$ using the Gagliardo-Nirenberg interpolation inequality $$\Vert v\Vert_{X^{\gamma-1/2} }
\equiv \Vert v\Vert_{{\mathscr L}^p_{2\gamma-1}}
\le C_0 \Vert v\Vert_{L^p}^\theta \Vert v\Vert_{W^{1,p}}^{1-\theta}, \quad \hbox{where}\
2\gamma-1 = 0\cdot\theta + 1\cdot (1-\theta),$$ (cf. [@Henry1981 Section 1.6]) and applying Lemma \[lemma-f\] we obtain $$\Vert f[u_{BS}(\tau, \cdot)] \Vert_{L^p}
\le C \Vert v(\tau,\cdot) \Vert_{X^{\gamma-1/2}}
\le C_0 \tau^{-(2\gamma-1)\left(\frac{1}{2} - \frac{1}{2p}\right)},\qquad 0<\tau\le T,$$ as claimed.
In order to prove the remaining estimates, let us estimate the norm $\Vert \partial_\tau v(\tau,\cdot)\Vert_{X^{\gamma-1/2}}$. As $\partial_\tau d_1 = - \tau^{-3/2} x/(2\sigma) + \tau^{-1/2}(r+\sigma^2/2)/(2\sigma)=- \tau^{-1} d_1/2 + \tau^{-1/2}(r+\sigma^2/2)/\sigma$ we have $$\partial_\tau v = r v + K e^{r\tau +x} N'(d_1)\partial_\tau d_1
=
r v + w ( -\tau^{-1/2} \sigma d_1/2 +r+\sigma^2/2 ).$$ Using estimate (\[wdineq\]) with $k=0,1$ we obtain $$\Vert \partial_\tau v(\tau,\cdot)\Vert_{L^p}
\le C_0 \tau^{-1 +\frac{1}{2p}},\qquad 0<\tau\le T.$$ To estimate the $W^{1,p}$ norm of $\partial_\tau v$ we recall that $\partial_x v = v + w$. Thus $$\begin{aligned}
\partial_x \partial_\tau v &=& \partial_\tau v + \partial_\tau w
=\partial_\tau v + r w
+ K e^{r\tau +x} \left( \frac{N''(d_1)}{\sigma\sqrt{\tau}}\partial_\tau d_1 -\frac{N'(d_1)}{2\sigma\tau^{3/2}} \right)
\\
&=&
\partial_\tau v + r w + w \left(-d_1 \partial_\tau d_1 - \tau^{-1}/2 \right)
\\
&=& \partial_\tau v + r w + w \left(d_1^2 \tau^{-1}/2 - \tau^{-1}/2
-\tau^{-1/2} d_1 (r+\sigma^2/2)/\sigma \right),\end{aligned}$$ as $N''(d_1)=-d_1 N'(d_1)$. Using estimate (\[wdineq\]) with $k=0,1,2$, we obtain $$\Vert \partial_\tau v(\tau,\cdot)\Vert_{W^{1,p}}
\le C_0 \tau^{-\frac{3}{2} +\frac{1}{2p}},\qquad 0<\tau\le T.$$ Again, using the Gagliardo-Nirenberg interpolation inequality $$\Vert \partial_\tau v\Vert_{X^{\gamma-1/2} }
\equiv \Vert \partial_\tau v\Vert_{{\mathscr L}^p_{2\gamma-1}}
\le C_0 \Vert \partial_\tau v\Vert_{L^p}^\theta \Vert \partial_\tau v\Vert_{W^{1,p}}^{1-\theta}, \quad \hbox{where}\
2\gamma-1 = 0\cdot\theta + 1\cdot (1-\theta)$$ and applying Lemma \[lemma-f\] we obtain $$\Vert \partial_\tau f[u_{BS}(\tau, \cdot)] \Vert_{L^p}
\le C \Vert \partial_\tau v(\tau,\cdot) \Vert_{X^{\gamma-1/2}}
\le C_0 \tau^{-\gamma-\frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{2p}},\qquad 0<\tau\le T,$$ as claimed in the second statement of lemma.
Finally, $$\begin{aligned}
&&\Vert f[u_{BS}(\tau_1, \cdot)] - f[u_{BS}(\tau_2, \cdot)] \Vert_{L^p}
=
\Vert \int_{\tau_1}^{\tau_2} \partial_\tau f[u_{BS}(\tau, \cdot)] d\tau \Vert_{L^p}
\\
&&\le \left|\int_{\tau_1}^{\tau_2} \Vert \partial_\tau f[u_{BS}(\tau, \cdot)] \Vert_{L^p} d\tau \right|
\le C_0 |\tau_1-\tau_2|^{-\gamma +\frac{p+1}{2p}}, \qquad 0<\tau_1,\tau_2\le T,\end{aligned}$$ and the function $f[u_{BS}(\tau,\cdot)]$ is Hölder continuous with the Hölder exponent $-\gamma +\frac{p+1}{2p}>0$. The proof of lemma follows. $\diamondsuit$
Combining the previous Lemmas \[lemma-f\], \[lemmafuBS\], sectoriality of the operator $A=-\partial^2_x$ in $X=L^p(\mathbb{R})$ (see Lemma \[A-sectorial\]), and Proposition \[semilinear\_existence\_result\] we obtain the following existence and uniqueness result for the linear PIDE (\[PDE-u-BS\]), and, consequently, for the linear option pricing model (\[PDE-S\]):
\[existence\_linear\_PIDE\] Assume $\nu$ is an admissible activity Lévy measure with the shape parameters $\alpha<3$ and either $\mu>0, D^\pm\in \mathbb{R}$, or $\mu=0$ and $D^- +1<0<D^+$. Let $X^\gamma={\mathscr L}^p_{2\gamma}(\mathbb{R})$ be the space of Bessel potentials where $\frac12 \le \gamma<1$ and $\frac{\alpha-1}{2}<\gamma < \frac{p+1}{2p}$.
Then, for any $T>0$, the linear PIDE (\[PDE-u-BS\]) has the unique solution $u$ such that the difference $U=u-u_{BS}$ satisfies $U\in C([0,T],X^{\gamma})$. Moreover, $U(\tau,\cdot)\in X^1 = {\mathscr L}^p_{2}(\mathbb{R})\subseteq W^{2,p}(\mathbb{R})$ and $\partial_\tau U(\tau, \cdot)\in X=L^p({\mathbb{R}})$ for any $\tau\in (0,T)$.
Proof. Since the Black-Scholes solution $u_{BS}$ solves the linear PDE (\[PDE-uBS\]) the difference $U=u-u_{BS}$ of a solution $u$ to (\[PDE-u-BS\]) and $u_{BS}$ satisfies the PIDE: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial U}{\partial \tau}
&=&\frac{\sigma^2}{2} \frac{\partial^2 U}{\partial x^2}
+ \left(r-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2\right)\frac{\partial U}{\partial x} + f[U] + f[u_{BS}],
\nonumber
\\
U(0,x)&=& 0, \quad x\in \mathbb{R}, \tau\in(0,T).
\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ This PIDE equation can be rewritten in the abstract form: $$\frac{\partial U}{\partial \tau} + A U = F(U) + h(\tau),
\quad U(0)=0,
\label{problem_transformed-shifted}$$ where the linear operators $A$ and $f$ were defined in (\[Au\_def\]) and (\[functional\_f\_def\]). The functions $F=F(U)$ and $h=h(\tau)$, $F:X^\gamma\to X$, $h:(0,T]\to X$ are defined as follows: $$F(U) = (r-\sigma^2/2)\frac{\partial U}{\partial x} + f[U],
\qquad h(\tau)=f[u_{BS}(\tau,\cdot)].$$ With regard to Lemma \[lemma-f\], $F$ is a bounded linear mapping, and, consequently Lipschitz continuous from the space $X^\gamma$ into $X$ provided that $\gamma\ge 1/2$ and $\gamma>(\alpha-1)/2$.
Taking into account Lemma \[lemmafuBS\] we obtain $$\Vert h(\tau_1) - h(\tau_2) \Vert_{L^p}
= \Vert f[u_{BS}(\tau_1, \cdot)] - f[u_{BS}(\tau_2, \cdot)] \Vert_{L^p}
\le C_0 |\tau_1-\tau_2|^{-\gamma +\frac{p+1}{2p}},$$ for any $0<\tau_1,\tau_2\le T$. Since $\gamma<\frac{p+1}{2p}$ the mapping $h:[0,T]\to X\equiv L^p(\mathbb{R})$ is Hölder continuous. Moreover, $$\int_0^T \Vert h(\tau) \Vert_{L^p} d\tau=
\int_0^T \Vert f[u_{BS}(\tau, \cdot)] \Vert_{L^p}d\tau
\le C_0 \int_0^T\tau^{-(2\gamma-1)\left(\frac{1}{2} - \frac{1}{2p}\right)}d\tau <\infty,$$ because $(2\gamma-1)\left(\frac{1}{2} - \frac{1}{2p}\right)<1$. The rest of the proof now follows from Theorem \[semilinear\_existence\_result\]. $\diamondsuit$
The following corollary is a consequence of embedding of the Bessel potential space into the space of Hölder continuous functions.
Suppose that an admissible activity Lévy measure $\nu$ fulfills assumptions of Theorem \[existence\_linear\_PIDE\]. Then, for any $T>0$, the linear PIDE (\[PDE-u-BS\]) has the unique solution $u\in C([0,T], C^\kappa_{loc}(\mathbb{R}))$, with the Hölder exponent $\kappa>0$ satisfying $\alpha-1-1/p < \kappa<1$.
Proof. Recall continuity of the embedding $$X^\gamma = {\mathscr L}^p_{2\gamma}(\mathbb{R}) \hookrightarrow C^\kappa_{loc}(\mathbb{R}),$$ where $\kappa= 2\gamma -1/p$ (cf. [@Henry1981 Section 1.6]), i.e. $\gamma=\kappa/2 + 1/(2p)$. Now, there exists $1/2\le \gamma<1$ such that $\frac{\alpha-1}{2}<\gamma < \frac{p+1}{2p}$ if and only if $\alpha-1-1/p < \kappa<1$, as claimed. Therefore $U=u-u_{BS}$ belongs to $C([0,T], C^\kappa_{loc}(\mathbb{R}))$.
The solution $u_{BS}=u_{BS}(\tau,x)$ is a real analytic function in the $\tau$ and $x$ variables for any $\tau>0$ and $x\in\mathbb{R}$. As $u_{BS}(0,x)$ represents the transformed call or put payoff diagram we have $u_{BS}=u_{BS}(0,x)$ is locally Lipschitz continuous in the $x$ variable. Hence $u_{BS}\in C([0,T], C^\kappa_{loc}(\mathbb{R}))$. Therefore the solution $u=U+u_{BS}$ to the linear PIDE (\[PDE-u-BS\]) belongs to $C([0,T], C^\kappa_{loc}(\mathbb{R}))$, as claimed. $\diamondsuit$
Our method of the proof of existence and uniqueness of solutions to PIDEs can be extended to the multidimensional case in which the underlying fractional power space is $X^\gamma = {\mathscr L}^p_{2\gamma}(\mathbb{R}^n), n>1$. Recently, SenGupta, Wilson and Nganje [@SenGupta2019] studied a two factor Barndorff-Nielsen and Shephard model ($n=2$) with stochastic volatility in which both the underlying asset price $S$ and the variance $\sigma^2$ follow two finite activity admissible activity Lévy procesess with a shape parameter $\alpha<3$. Their model can be applied for construction of an optimal hedging strategy for oil extraction that is benefiting from fracking technology.
The conditions $\frac12 \le \gamma<1$ and $\frac{\alpha-1}{2}<\gamma < \frac{p+1}{2p}$ are fulfilled for a power $p\ge 1$ provided that either $\alpha\in [0,2]$ and $p\ge1$, or $\alpha\in (2,3)$ and $1\le p < 1/(\alpha-2)$. It means that if the Lévy measure $\nu$ has a strong singularity of the order $\alpha\in(2,3)$ at the origin then we can find a solution in the framework of fractional power spaces of the Banach space $X=L^p({\mathbb{R}})$ where $p$ is limited by the order $\alpha$. The advantage of the choice of the Bessel potential space $X^\gamma = {\mathscr L}^p_{2\gamma}(\mathbb{R}), 1/2\le\gamma<1$, consists in the fact that we can prove existence and uniqueness of solutions in the phase space $X^\gamma$ for the case of stronger singularities with the order of singularity $\alpha$ up to $3$. The usual choice of the Sobolev space $X^{1/2}=W^{1,p}({\mathbb{R}})$ leads to the restriction of the order $\alpha$ of the singularity to $\alpha<2$.
Existence results for nonlinear PIDE option pricing models
==========================================================
In this section we present an application of the general existence and uniqueness result for the penalized version of the PIDE for solving the linear complementarity problem arising in pricing American style of a put option on an underlying asset following Lévy stochastic process.
In [@BL82] Bensoussan and Lions characterized price of a put option in terms of a solution of a system of partial-integro differential inequalities (see also [@Lamberton2007]). In [@Wang2006] and [@Wang2017] Wang [*et al.*]{} investigated a penalty method for solving a linear complementarity problem using a power penalty term for the case without jumps in the underlying asset dynamics. In [@Donny2015] Lesman and Wang proposed a power penalty method for solving the free boundary problem for pricing American options under transaction costs. Penalty methods for American option pricing under stochastic volatility models are studied in the paper [@Zvan1998] by Zvan, Forsyth and Vetzal. In [@Halluin2004] d’Halluin, Forsyth, and Labahn investigated a penalty method for American options on jump diffusion underlying processes.
Recall that American style options can be exercised anytime before the maturity time $T$. In the case of an American put option the state space $\{(t,S),\, t\in[0,T], S>0\}$ can be divided into the so-called early exercise region $\mathcal E$ and continuation region $\mathcal C$ where the put option should be exercised and hold, respectively. These regions are separated by the early exercise boundary defined by a function $t\mapsto S_f(t)$, such that $0<S_f(t)\le K$, and $${\mathcal E} = \{ (t,S),\, t\in[0,T], 0<S\le S_f(t)\},
\quad {\mathcal C} = \{ (t,S),\, t\in[0,T], S_f(t)< S\}.$$ We refer the reader to papers [@NBS5], [@SSC1999], [@LS2010], [@ZHU2006] for an overview of qualitative properties of the early exercise boundary for the case of pricing American style of put options for the Black-Scholes PDE with no integral part.
In the continuation region $\mathcal C$ the put option price is strictly greater than the pay-off diagram, i.e. $V(t,S)>\Phi(S)=(K-S)^+$ for $S_f(t)<S$. In the exercise region $\mathcal E$ the put option price is given by its pay-off diagram, i.e. $V(t,S) = \Phi(S)=(K-S)^+$. Moreover, the put option price $V(t,S)$ is a decreasing function in the $S$ variable. Hence in the exercise region where $0<S<S_f(t)\le K$, for the price $V(t,S)=K-S$ we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial V}{\partial t} + L^{S}[V]
&\equiv&
\frac{\partial V}{\partial t} +
\frac{\sigma^{2}}{2}S^{2}\frac{\partial^{2}V}{\partial S^{2}}
+ r S \frac{\partial V}{\partial S}-rV
\\
&& +\int_{\mathbb{R}}\left[V(t,Se^{y})-V(t,S)-S\left(e^{y}-1\right)
\frac{\partial V}{\partial S}(t,S) \right]\nu({\mathrm{d}}y)
\\
&=&
-r K +
\int_{-\infty}^0\left[V(t,Se^{y})-(K-S)- S\left(e^{y}-1\right)(-1) \right]\nu({\mathrm{d}}y)
\\
&& + \int_0^\infty\left[V(t,Se^{y})-(K-S)- S\left(e^{y}-1\right)(-1) \right]\nu({\mathrm{d}}y)
\\
&=&
-r K + \int_0^\infty\left[V(t,Se^{y})-(K-S) + S\left(e^{y}-1\right) \right]\nu({\mathrm{d}}y)
\\
&\le &
-r K + S \int_0^\infty\left(e^{y}-1\right)\nu({\mathrm{d}}y)\end{aligned}$$ because $S\mapsto V(t,S)$ is a decreasing function, and thus $V(t,Se^{y})\le V(t,S)= K-S$ for $y\ge 0$, and $V(t,Se^{y})= K-Se^{y}$ for $y\le 0$.
Let us assume that the admissible activity Lévy measure $\nu$ satisfies the inequality: $$\int_0^\infty\left(e^{y}-1\right)\nu({\mathrm{d}}y) \le r.
\label{nuassumption}$$ Then the price $V(t,S)$ of an American put option satisfies the inequality $\partial_t V(t,S) + L^{S}[V](t,S)\le 0$ for $0<S\le S_f(t)\le K$, i.e. for $(t,S)\in{\mathcal E}$. On the other hand, for $(t,S)\in{\mathcal C}$ the price $V(t,S)$ is obtained from the Black-Scholes PIDE equation $\partial_t V(t,S) + L^{S}[V](t,S)= 0$.
In summary, we have shown the following result.
\[varinequalityV\] Let $V(t,S)$ be the price of an American style put option on underlying asset $S$ following a geometric Lévy process with an admissible activity Lévy measure $\nu$ satisfying the structural inequality (\[nuassumption\]). Then $V$ is a solution to the linear complementarity problem: $$\begin{aligned}
&&\partial_t V(t,S) + L^{S}[V](t,S)\le 0, \qquad V(t,S)\ge \Phi(S),
\label{varineq}
\\
&&
\left(\partial_t V(t,S) + L^{S}[V](t,S)\right)\cdot \left( V(t,S)- \Phi(S) \right) =0,
\label{complentarity}\end{aligned}$$ for any $t\in[0,T), S>0$, and $V(T,S)=\Phi(S)=(K-S)^+$.
A standard method for solving the linear complementarity problem (\[varineq\])–(\[complentarity\]) is based on construction of an approximate solution by means of the penalty method. A nonnegative penalty function ${\mathcal G}_\varepsilon(t,V)$ penalizes negative values of the difference $ V(t,S) -\Phi(S)$. For example, one can consider the penalty function of the form: $${\mathcal G}_\varepsilon(t,V)(S) = \varepsilon^{-1} \min(S/K,\, 1) ( \Phi(S) - V(t,S))^+,$$ where $0<\varepsilon\ll 1$ is a small parameter. Clearly, ${\mathcal G}_\varepsilon(t,V)(S)=0$ if and only if $V(t,S)\ge \Phi(S)$. Then the penalized problem for the approximate solution $V=V_\varepsilon$ to (\[varineq\])–(\[complentarity\]) reads as follows:
$$\begin{aligned}
&&\partial_t V + L^{S}[V] + {\mathcal G}_\varepsilon(t,V)=0,
\quad S>0, t\in[0,T),
\label{Vpenalized}
\\
&&
V(T,S) = \Phi(S).
\nonumber\end{aligned}$$
In terms of the transformed function $u(\tau,x)=e^{r\tau} V(T-\tau, Ke^x)$ and the shifted function $U=u-u_{BS}$ the penalized PIDE problem (\[Vpenalized\]) can be rewritten as follows: $$\frac{\partial U}{\partial \tau} + A U = F(U) + h(\tau) + g_\varepsilon(\tau, U),
\quad U(0)=0.
\label{penalizedproblem_transformed-shifted}$$
Equation (\[penalizedproblem\_transformed-shifted\]) can be understood as an abstract parabolic equation in the phase space $X^\gamma={\mathscr L}^p_{2\gamma}(\mathbb{R})$, i.e. $U(\tau)\in C([0,T], X^\gamma)$ where $F: X^\gamma\to X$. Furthermore, $h(\tau), g_\varepsilon(\tau, U) \in X$ for any $\tau\in(0,T]$ and $U\in X^\gamma$, i.e. they are $x$-dependent functions for each $\tau$.
The penalty term $g_\varepsilon$ can be deduced from ${\mathcal G}_\varepsilon$, i.e. $$g_\varepsilon(\tau,U(\tau,x))(x) = \varepsilon^{-1} e^{x^-}
(w(\tau,x) - U(\tau,x))^+,
\quad \hbox{where}\
w(\tau,x) = e^{r\tau}\Phi(K e^x) - u_{BS}(\tau,x).$$ Recall that the linear operators $A$ and $f$ were defined in (\[Au\_def\]) and (\[functional\_f\_def\]) and $$F(U) = (r-\sigma^2/2)\frac{\partial U}{\partial x} + f[U],
\qquad h(\tau)=f[u_{BS}(\tau,\cdot)].$$
Before proving existence and uniqueness of a solution to the penalized PIDE equation (\[penalizedproblem\_transformed-shifted\]) we need the following auxiliary lemma.
\[gprop\] The penalty function $g_\varepsilon: [0,T]\times X \to X$ is Lipschitz continuous in the $U$ variable and Hölder continuous in the $\tau$ variable, i.e. there exists a constant $C_0>0$ such that $$\Vert g_\varepsilon(\tau, U_1)-g_\varepsilon(\tau, U_2)\Vert_X
\le \varepsilon^{-1}\Vert U_1-U_2\Vert_X,\ \
\Vert g_\varepsilon(\tau_1, U)-g_\varepsilon(\tau_2, U)\Vert_X
\le \varepsilon^{-1} C_0 |\tau_1-\tau_2|^{\frac{p+1}{2p}}$$ for any $U, U_1, U_2\in X$ and $\tau, \tau_1,\tau_2\in[0,T]$.
Proof. Note the inequality $|a^+-b^+|\le |a-b|$ for all $a,b\in\mathbb{R}$. As $e^{x^-}\le 1$, we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\Vert g_\varepsilon(\tau, U_1)-g_\varepsilon(\tau, U_2)\Vert_{L^p}^p
&\le&\varepsilon^{-p}\int_{-\infty}^\infty \left| (w(\tau,x) - U_1(x))^+ - (w(\tau,x) - U_2(x))^+ \right|^p {\mathrm{d}}x
\\
&\le& \varepsilon^{-p} \int_{-\infty}^\infty | U_1(x)- U_2(x)|^p {\mathrm{d}}x
=\varepsilon^{-p} \Vert U_1-U_2\Vert_{L^p}^p.\end{aligned}$$ Moreover, it is easy to verify that the function $ e^{x^-} w(\tau,x)$ belongs to $X=L^p$ and $$w(\tau,x) = e^{r\tau}\Phi(K e^x) - K N(-d_2(\tau,x)) + K e^{r\tau +x} N(-d_1(\tau,x)).$$ Hence $g_\varepsilon(\tau,0)\in X=L^p$ and $g_\varepsilon(\tau,\cdot):X \to X$ is well defined and Lipschitz continuous mapping for any $\tau\in[0,T]$.
Recall that $d_1-d_2 = \sigma \sqrt{\tau}$, $d_1+d_2 = 2(x+ r\tau)/\sigma \sqrt{\tau}$, and, consequently, $e^{r\tau +x} N^\prime(-d_1) - N^\prime(-d_2) =0$. Since $N(-d_1)=1-N(d_1)$ we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\partial_\tau w &=&
r e^{r\tau}\Phi(K e^x) + r K e^{r\tau +x} N(-d_1)
- K N^\prime(-d_2) \frac{\sigma}{2\sqrt{\tau}}
\\
&=& r e^{r\tau}\Phi(K e^x) - r v
- K \frac{e^{-d_2^2/2}}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \frac{\sigma}{2\sqrt{\tau}} \end{aligned}$$ where the auxiliary function $v$ was defined as in (\[vtaux\]). Therefore $$\begin{aligned}
\Vert e^{x^-} \partial_\tau w\Vert_{L^p}
&\le&
r e^{r\tau} \Vert e^{x^-}\Phi(K e^x)\Vert_{L^p}
+r \Vert e^{x^-} v\Vert_{L^p}
+ \frac{K \sigma}{2\sqrt{\tau}}
\left(
\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{p x^-}
\frac{e^{-p d_2^2/2}}{(2\pi)^{p/2}} {\mathrm{d}}x
\right)^{1/p}
\\
&\le&
r K e^{r\tau} \Vert e^{x^-} 1_{x\le 0}\Vert_{L^p}
+r \Vert v\Vert_{L^p}
+ \frac{K \sigma}{2\sqrt{\tau}}
\left(
\int_{-\infty}^\infty
\frac{e^{-p \xi^2/2}}{(2\pi)^{p/2}} \sigma\sqrt{\tau} {\mathrm{d}}\xi
\right)^{1/p}
\\
&\le& C_0 \tau^{\frac{1}{2p} -\frac12},\end{aligned}$$ where $C_0>0$ is a constant independent of $\tau\in(0,T]$. Thus $$\begin{aligned}
\Vert g_\varepsilon(\tau_1, U)-g_\varepsilon(\tau_2, U)\Vert_{L^p}^p
&=&\varepsilon^{-p}\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{p x^-}\left| (w(\tau_1,x) - U(x))^+ - (w(\tau_2,x) - U(x))^+ \right|^p {\mathrm{d}}x
\\
&\le& \varepsilon^{-p} \int_{-\infty}^\infty
e^{p x^-}| w(\tau_1,x) - w(\tau_2,x) |^p {\mathrm{d}}x
\\
&=& \varepsilon^{-p} \Vert e^{x^-}(w(\tau_1,\cdot )-w(\tau_2,\cdot ))\Vert_{L^p}^p.\end{aligned}$$ Hence $$\Vert g_\varepsilon(\tau_1, U)-g_\varepsilon(\tau_2, U)\Vert_{L^p}
\le \varepsilon^{-1} \int_{\tau_1}^{\tau_2} \Vert e^{x^-} \partial_\tau w(\tau,\cdot)\Vert_{L^p} {\mathrm{d}}\tau \le \varepsilon^{-1} C_0 |\tau_1-\tau_2|^{\frac{p+1}{2p}},$$ as claimed. The proof of lemma follows.$\diamondsuit$
Similarly as in the case of a linear PIDE, applying Lemmas \[lemma-f\], \[lemmafuBS\], \[A-sectorial\], and Proposition \[semilinear\_existence\_result\] we obtain the following existence and uniqueness result for the nonlinear penalized PIDE (\[penalizedproblem\_transformed-shifted\]).
\[existence\_nonlinear\_PIDE\] Assume $\nu$ is an admissible activity Lévy measure with the shape parameters $\alpha<3$, and either $\mu>0, D^\pm\in\mathbb{R}$, or $\mu=0$ and $D^- +1<0<D^+$. Let $X^\gamma={\mathscr L}^p_{2\gamma}(\mathbb{R})$ be the space of Bessel potentials where $\frac12 \le \gamma<1$ and $\frac{\alpha-1}{2}<\gamma < \frac{p+1}{2p}$. Suppose that the structural condition (\[nuassumption\]) is fulfilled for the Lévy measure $\nu$.
Then, for any $\varepsilon >0$ and $T>0$, the nonlinear penalized PIDE (\[penalizedproblem\_transformed-shifted\]) has the unique solution $U_\varepsilon\in C([0,T),X^{\gamma})$. Moreover, $U_\varepsilon(\tau, \cdot )\in X^1={\mathscr L}^p_{2}(\mathbb{R})\hookrightarrow W^{2,p}(\mathbb{R})$, and $\partial_\tau U_\varepsilon(\tau, \cdot )\in L^p({\mathbb{R}})$ for any $\tau\in (0,T)$.
Numerical experiments
=====================
In this section we present comparison of solutions to the linear PIDE with various Lévy measures. We consider European style of put options only, i.e. $\Phi(S)=(K-S)^+$. We compare a solution for the linear Black-Scholes equation with solutions to the Merton and Variance Gamma PIDE models. The common model parameters were chosen as follows $\sigma=0.23, K=100, T=1$ and $r\in\{0, 0.1\}$. As for the underlying Lévy process we consider the Variance Gamma process with parameters $\theta=-0.43, \kappa=0.27$ and the Merton processes with parameters $\lambda=0.1, m=-0.2, \delta=0.15$. In order to compute numerical solution we chose the finite difference discretization scheme proposed and analyzed by Cruz and Ševčovič in [@NBS19]. The scheme is based on a uniform spatial finite difference discretization with a spatial step $\Delta x = 0.01$, and implicit time discretization with a step $\Delta t = 0.005$. The total number of spatial discretization steps was chosen $N=400$ and the number of time discretization steps $M=200$. We restricted the spatial computational domain to $x\in[-L,L ]$ where $L=4$. We refer the reader to [@NBS19] for details concerning discretization scheme.
In Fig. \[fig-1\] we show comparison of European put option prices between PIDE models and the linear Black–Scholes model. In Fig. \[fig-1\] a) we plot put option prices $V(0,S)$ for $S\in[80,125]$ for the zero interest rate $r=0$, whereas b) depicts put option prices for the interest rate $r=0.1$. Numerical values of option prices are summarized in Table \[tab1\] for two different values of the interest rate $r=0.1$ and $r=0$. The option price for both Merton’s as well as the Variance Gamma models are higher when compared to the option prices computed by means of the classical Black-Scholes model. This is in accordance with an intuitive observation that prices of put or call options should be higher on underlyings assets following stochastic processes with jumps when compared to those following a continuous geometric Brownian motion.
![ Graphical comparison of European put option prices for the Black–Scholes (BS) model and the PIDE Variance Gamma (VG) and Merton’s (Mer) models. []{data-label="fig-1"}](figures/fig_r0_vec.pdf "fig:"){width="48.00000%"} ![ Graphical comparison of European put option prices for the Black–Scholes (BS) model and the PIDE Variance Gamma (VG) and Merton’s (Mer) models. []{data-label="fig-1"}](figures/fig_r1_vec.pdf "fig:"){width="48.00000%"}
a\) 7truecm b)
--------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ---------
Payoff
$S$ $r=0$ $r=0.1$ $r=0$ $r=0.1$ $r=0$ $r=0.1$
85.2144 15.2547 7.35166 19.2687 14.9855 17.1692 12.9056 14.7856
88.692 12.2484 5.24145 17.2948 13.3899 14.8335 10.9901 11.308
92.3116 9.42895 3.51944 15.428 11.8822 12.6423 9.21922 7.68837
96.0789 6.90902 2.21106 13.674 10.4691 10.6201 7.61307 3.92106
100. 4.78444 1.29196 12.0372 9.15576 8.78655 6.18483 0.
104.081 3.1099 0.69843 10.52 7.94499 7.155 4.94044 0.
108.329 1.88555 0.34773 9.12343 6.83762 5.73137 3.87864 0.
112.75 1.0604 0.15881 7.84623 4.51403 5.83246 2.99166 0.
--------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ---------
: European put option prices $V(0,S)$ for the Black-Scholes and PIDE models under Variance Gamma and Merton’s processes for $r=0$ and $r=0.1$.[]{data-label="tab1"}
Conclusions
===========
In this paper, we analyzed existence and uniqueness of solutions to a partial integro-differential equation (PIDE) in the Bessel potential space. As a motivation we considered a model for pricing vanilla call and put options on underlying assets following a geometric Lévy stochastic process. Using the theory of abstract semilinear parabolic equations we proved existence and uniqueness of solutions in the Bessel potential space representing a fractional power space of the space of Lebesgue $p$-integrable functions with respect to the second order Laplace differential operator. We generalized known existence results for a wider class of Lévy measures including those having strong singular kernel. We also proved existence and uniqueness of solutions to the penalized PIDE representing approximation of the linear complementarity problem arising in pricing American style of options.
Acknowledgements
================
This research was supported by the project CEMAPRE MULTI/00491 financed by FCT/MEC through national funds and the Slovak research Agency Project VEGA 1/0062/18.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
Periodic structures subject to quenched disorder are a generic model for a vast number of physical phenomena. The recent upraise of interest was motivated by the discovery of high temperature superconductors (HTS) that set a physical realization of the random system with tunable parameters and which are easily accessible in experiments [@review]. As the statistical mechanics of the [ *static*]{} periodic media in the presence of disorder reaches its mature phase, the physics of [*non-equilibrium*]{} processes proposes a diversity of unresolved challenging questions. In the static case it is established that quenched pinning destroys the crystalline order of the vortex lattice on intermediate spatial scales [@review; @lark; @feig]. The long-range order of the vortex lattice is reduced to the quasi-long-range order of the “Bragg glass” [@N90; @GD94]. It is important to note that in the static case and for weak pinning, the topological structure of the lattice is preserved in a certain range of the phase diagram [@top-order].
One of the central issues of [*non-equilibrium*]{} statistical physics of dirty periodic media is the very nature of driven steady states. It was observed [@copp; @j; @KV94] that the depinning transition can be accompanied by plastic deformations of the driven periodic structures leading to the destruction of the moving solid. For driven vortex lattices it was proposed [@KV94] that at larger drives a true dynamic phase transition occurs from an incoherently moving non-equilibrium state to a coherently moving solid phase. This conclusion was later extended to driven charge density waves [@BF95]. Such dynamic transitions have indeed been observed in experiments [@dm-exp] and simulations [@KV94; @Ryu+96]. Note, that even in the limit of strong driving disorder severely affects the lattice structure on large length scales (in dimensions $d \leq 3$), which becomes strongly anisotropic and keeps glassy features [@GL96; @MSZ96; @BMR96].
A phenomenology of this dynamic melting is built on the notion that the driven periodic medium experiences pinning as temporally fluctuating distortion in the comoving frame. A convenient heuristic tool to investigate the dynamic transition was introduced in Ref. [@KV94], where the effect of temporarily fluctuating disorder was described as an additional thermal noise with an effective “shaking temperature”. This temperature increases when the current is reduced and can lead to a “dynamic melting” of the lattice structure. While the phenomenological approach enables to estimate the position of the transition line on the phase diagram, the nature of the dynamic melting remains an open question. A microscopic understanding of dynamic melting requires the analysis of topological defects, which become free at the transition. In this Letter we present a first step in this direction focusing on the study the dynamics of [ *independent*]{} dislocations in the driven two-dimensional vortex lattice. Note that in a [*homogeneously*]{} driven vortex lattice without pinning dislocations and vortices move with the same average velocity. Inhomogeneous pinning of different parts of the vortex lattice causes shear strains which generate a fluctuating force acting on dislocations. A motion of dislocation relative to the vortices arises from correlations of this force on [*intermediate*]{} scales. We examine the glide motion of the dislocations in the driven vortex lattice in the limit of large vortex drive, weak disorder, and well below the melting temperature of the pure vortex lattice. We calculate the dislocation velocity perturbatively and find that dislocations are retarded with respect to the vortices. The velocity where dislocations get pinned by disorder provides a non-equilibrium estimate for the crossover between elastic and plastic vortex flow.
In order to derive the equation of motion for the dislocation we first consider the dynamic response of the vortex lattice to disorder and thermal fluctuations. We restrict our discussion for simplicity to the two-dimensional vortex lattice. This lattice is supposed to move with an average velocity ${\bf v}$ as a consequence of the Lorentz force ${\bf f}_{\rm L}$ generated by electric transport currents. We label vortices by their perfect lattice position ${\bf R}$ in the comoving frame. Their actual position in the laboratory frame is denoted by ${\bf r}$. Then a displacement can be defined as usual by ${\bf
u}({\bf R},t)={\bf r} ({\bf R},t)-{\bf v}t$.
Neglecting nonlocal effects the elastic energy of the vortex lattice reads $${\cal H}_{\rm el}=\frac 12 \int \frac{d^2q}{(2\pi)^2} \left\{c_{11}
q^2 |{\bf u}^L({\bf q})|^2 +c_{66} q^2 |{\bf u}^T({\bf q})|^2
\right\},$$ where ${\bf q}$ runs only over the first Brillouin zone and ${\bf
u}^{L,T}$ are the longitudinal / transverse projections of the displacement field ${\bf u}({\bf q},\omega) = \int dt \ ({\phi_0}/{B})
\sum_{\bf R} \ e^{i \omega t - i {\bf q} \cdot {\bf R}} \ {\bf u}({\bf
R},t)$ and ${\phi_0}/{B}$ is the area per vortex. The pinning potential $V({\bf r})$ is supposed to have correlations $\overline{
V({\bf r}) V({\bf r}')} = \Delta({\bf r}- {\bf r}')$. The pinning energy of the lattice is ${\cal H}_{\rm pin}=\sum_{\bf R} V({\bf
r}({\bf R}))$.
The motion of vortices follows the overdamped Langevin equation $$\label{eq.mo}
\eta \dot {\bf r} ({\bf R},t) = - \frac{\partial}{\partial {\bf r}
({\bf R},t)}[{\cal H}_{\rm el}+{\cal H}_{\rm pin}] + {\bf f}_{\rm L} +
{\bbox \xi } ({\bf R},t)$$ with the Bardeen-Stephen friction coefficient $\eta$ and a thermal noise correlation $\langle \xi_\alpha({\bf R},t) \xi_\beta({\bf
R}',t') \rangle = 2 \eta T \delta_{\alpha \beta} \delta_{{\bf
R} {\bf R}'} \delta (t-t')$.
In the limit of large driving forces ${\bf f}_{\rm L}$ the response of the vortices to the pinning potential vanishes. Then one has to leading order ${\bf v}={\bf f}_{\rm L}/\eta$ and the external force acting on the vortices is ${\bbox f} ({\bf R},t) := {\bbox \xi } ({\bf
R},t)-{\bbox \nabla } V({\bf R+v}t)$. Its correlations read $$\begin{aligned}
\label{f.corr}
\overline
{\langle f_\alpha ({\bf q}, \omega) f_\beta ({\bf q}', \omega') \rangle}
=\Xi_{\alpha \beta} ({\bf q}, \omega)
\delta ({\bf q} + {\bf q}') \delta(\omega + \omega'),
\\
\Xi_{\alpha \beta}({\bf q}, \omega) = 2 \eta T \frac {\phi_0}{B}
\delta_{\alpha \beta}
+ \sum_{\bf Q} k_\alpha k_\beta \Delta ({\bf k})
\delta (\omega+{\bf k} \cdot {\bf v}), \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where ${\bf k}:= {\bf Q}+{\bf q}$ with a reciprocal lattice vector ${\bf Q}$. In linear response [@SH73] the vortex displacements are obtained from the forces ${\bf f}$ through the response function with longitudinal part $\Gamma^L ({\bf q},\omega)=[-i\eta \omega +c_{11}
(\phi_0/B) q^2]^{-1}$ and transverse part $\Gamma^T ({\bf
q},\omega)=[-i\eta \omega +c_{66} (\phi_0/B) q^2]^{-1}$. Typically the longitudinal response is small compared to the transverse response since $c_{11} \gg c_{66}$.
As one can immediately recognize from expression (\[f.corr\]), pinning forces are more relevant than thermal forces[@GL96] on [*large*]{} length and time scales: thermal fluctuations give a finite contribution to $\Xi_{\alpha \beta}({\bf q}=0,
\omega=0)$, whereas pinning forces give singular contributions for ${\bf Q}\neq 0$ with ${\bf Q} \cdot {\bf v}=0$. This effect is due to the periodic structure of the vortex density and leads to the destruction of transitional long-range order for all velocities ${\bf
v}$ in dimensions $d\leq 3$ [@GL96; @BMR96]. For any finite driving the correct asymptotic behavior of the lattice roughness cannot be obtained in a linear response approach. However, as we show below, dislocation dynamics is governed by the elastic response of the vortex lattice on intermediate scales where this approach is sufficient.
The topological structure of the vortex lattice is expected to be destroyed by dislocations and disclinations, at least for sufficiently high temperature, strong disorder, and/or weak driving. Within an elastic approach vortices are found to move like in channels [@GL96; @MSZ96] when the lattice is moving along one of its principal directions. The displacement field component having the strongest fluctuations is the component parallel to the velocity [@MSZ96; @BMR96]. This favours dislocations with Burgers vectors parallel to the velocity.
The motion of such a dislocation is easiest in the glide-direction parallel to the Burgers vector ${\bf b}$ with length of the lattice spacing $a\approx \sqrt{\Phi_0/B}$. In this direction it can move by slips of individual vortices. A motion of the dislocation perpendicular to the Burgers vector (climb) is possible only in combination with the creation of vacancies or interstitials. In other terms, glide is controlled by the Peierls barrier which is much lower than the energy barriers for dislocation creep. In what follows we thus can ignore dislocation climb. The dislocation motion is then one-dimensional in the direction parallel to the Burgers vector and to the velocity. Its position along this direction in the [*moving*]{} vortex frame is denoted by $X(t)$, and we can consider $Y(t)=0$ fixed.
According to the theory of dislocations[@theo_dis] internal stresses $$\sigma_{\alpha \beta} = 2c_{66} \nabla_\alpha u_\beta +
(c_{11}-2c_{66}) \nabla_\gamma u_\gamma \delta_{\alpha \beta}$$ of the lattice, due to thermal fluctuations and pinning, induce the so-called Peach-Koehler (PK) force $$K_\alpha=\varepsilon_{\alpha \beta}\sigma_{\beta \gamma} b_\gamma$$ acting on the dislocation, where ${\bf \varepsilon }$ denotes the antisymmetric tensor. In addition, the dislocation is subject to a periodic potential $W(X)\approx -(W_{\rm p}/2) \cos(2 \pi
X/a)$ with amplitude $W_{\rm p} \approx 10^{-2} c_{66} a^2$ representing the Peierls barrier for glide motion. The resulting equation of motion for the dislocation reads $$\label{eqmo.disl}
\eta_{\rm d} \dot{X}(t) = K_x(X(t),t)- \nabla_x W(X(t)) .$$ Here the dislocation friction coefficient is taken equal to its low velocity value $\eta_{\rm d} \approx (\eta/8 \pi) \ln \left(1/ n_{\rm
d} a^2 \right)$ [@B69; @K92] for an average dislocation density $n_{\rm d}$. We assume that the vortex lattice is still ordered on intermediate length scales, i.e. the density of dislocations is small compared to the vortex density and $\eta_{\rm d} \gg \eta$.
The fluctuating PK force includes thermal and disorder induced parts. The corresponding spatio-temporal correlator follows within linear response straightforwardly from Eq. (\[f.corr\]) and has has a rather complicated form. For the further analysis we single out the most important contributions.
One contribution arises from the thermal noise ${\bbox \xi}$ acting on the vortices and it is present even in the absence of disorder and a driving force. It can be described as effective thermal noise $\xi_{\rm d}(t)$ with correlations $\langle \xi_{\rm d}(t) \xi_{\rm
d}(t') \rangle \approx 2 \eta_{\rm d} T \delta(t-t')$ experienced by [*dislocations*]{}.
The other contribution comes from pinning forces generating fluctuating displacements ${\bf u}({\bf R},t)$. As pointed out in Ref. [@GL96], the modes ${\bf Q}$ with ${\bf Q} \cdot {\bf v}=0$ of the force correlator (\[f.corr\]) generate displacements, which are stationary in the laboratory frame, ${\bf u}^{(0)}({\bf R},t)={\bf u}^{(0)}({\bf
R}+{\bf v}t)$. The associated contribution to the PK force is also stationary in the laboratory frame and can be the only origin of a pinning of dislocations by disorder. The correlations of these contributions $K_x^{(0)}$ at $Y=0$ are $$\begin{aligned}
\label{chi}
\overline {K_x^{(0)}(q_x) K_x^{(0)}(q_x')}& =& \chi(q_x) \delta(q_x+q_x'), \\
\chi(q_x) &\approx& \frac{16 a^2 c_{66}^2 \Delta_0 }{3 \pi a \eta^2 v^2}
\left( \frac{\eta v |q_x|}{c_{66}^2} \right)^{1/2}. \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ Here $\Delta_0:=\sum_{{\bf Q}: Q_x=0} Q_y^2 \Delta({\bf Q})$ and the obtained formula is valid for $\eta v \gg c_{11} a$. Although the mode ${\bf Q}=0$ also gives a stationary contribution, it is negligible as compared to the modes ${\bf Q}\neq 0$ with ${\bf Q}
\cdot {\bf v}=0$, because of $c_{11} \gg c_{66}$. We ignored the modes ${\bf Q} \cdot {\bf v} \neq 0$ which represent a shaking of the dislocation due to the discreteness of the vortex lattice and are expected only to renormalize the effective dislocation temperature. This effect is negligible for large ${\bf v}$, and does not contribute to the dislocation glide.
Having made the above approximations we rewrite the equation of motion (\[eqmo.disl\]) determining the dislocation glide velocity in a form $$\label{eqmo.disl.2}
\eta_{\rm d} \dot{X} =K_x^{(0)}(X+vt) -
\frac {\pi W_{\rm p}}a \sin \frac{2 \pi X}{a}+\xi_{\rm d}. \nonumber$$ We restrict ourselves to temperatures $T \ll W_{\rm p}$, i.e. well below the melting temperature $T_{\rm KT} \approx (3 c_{66} a^2)/8
\pi$ of the pure lattice [@KT73]. In this case the dislocation moves via thermal activation from one minimum of the Peierls potential to a neighboring one favored by the PK force. In the driven lattice disorder biases this motion in the direction opposite to the vortex drift.
For weak disorder $\Delta \ll T^2$ this effect is conveniently calculated perturbatively in the dynamical functional formalism [@MSR], where the dislocation position $X$ and its response field $\tilde{X}$ are assigned a statistical weight $\exp(-{\cal A})$ with a dynamic action $$\begin{aligned}
\label{def.act}
{\cal A}&=&{\cal A}_0+{\cal A}_1 , \\
{\cal A}_0&=& \int dt \{ \eta_{\rm d} T \tilde{X}^2 + i \tilde{X}
[\eta_{\rm d} \dot X+\nabla_X W(X)] \} \nonumber , \\
{\cal A}_1&=& \frac 12 \int dt \int dt' \tilde{X} \tilde{X}'
\chi(X-X'+v(t-t')) . \nonumber \end{aligned}$$ Here the disorder average is already performed and abbreviations $X
\equiv X(t)$, $X' \equiv X(t')$ etc. are used.
In the absence of disorder, dynamics is controlled by the free action ${\cal A}_0$. This action is minimized by instanton trajectories which start from a minimum/maximum of $W$ at $t=-\infty$ and end at a neighbored maximum/minimum at $t=\infty$:
\[instanton\] $$\begin{aligned}
X_{\rm i}(t)&=& \sigma_2 \frac {a}{\pi} \arctan \left[ \exp \left(
\sigma_1 \frac t{t_{\rm i}} \right) \right] , \\
\tilde{X}_{\rm i}(t)&=& -\frac{i}{2 \eta_{\rm d} T} [ \eta_{\rm d} \dot
X_{\rm i}(t) + \nabla_X W(X_{\rm i})],\end{aligned}$$
where $t_{\rm i}=a^2 \eta_{\rm d}/2 \pi^2 W_{\rm p}$ is an instanton time scale and $\sigma_1, \sigma_2=\pm1$ specifies the type. For $\sigma_1=\pm1$ motion is up or down from a minimum to a maximum of $W$ or vice versa. For $\sigma_1 \sigma_2=\pm1$ motion is forward/backward in $X$ direction. Both “down”-instantons have $\tilde{X}_{\rm i}^{\rm down}(t)=0$ and thus ${\cal A}_0^{\rm
down}=0$. Both “up”-instantons have
\[up\] $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal A}_0^{\rm up} &=& W_{\rm p}/T ,\\
\tilde{X}_{\rm i}^{\rm up}(t) &=& -
\frac {i \sigma_2 a}{2 \pi t_{\rm i} T} \frac 1{\cosh (t/t_{\rm i})}.\end{aligned}$$
Eq. (\[up\]a) gives the usual statistical weight of thermally activated instantons.
Now one can easily calculate the disorder corrections to the instanton actions in perturbation theory. To evaluate ${\cal A}_1$ in the lowest order in $\Delta$ one has to use the [*unperturbed*]{} instanton solutions and recognizes immediately that ${\cal A}_1^{\rm down}=0$ since $\tilde{X}^{\rm down}=0$. Near its saddle-point the dislocation has a velocity $v_{\rm i}=v+\dot X_{\rm i}(0)$ relative to the disorder, which is different for “forward” and “backward” instantons. In terms of this velocity the action correction reads $$\begin{aligned}
\label{A_1}
{\cal A}_1 &\approx& \frac 12 \int dt \int dt'
\tilde{X} \tilde{X}'\chi(v_{\rm i} (t-t'))
\nonumber \\
&\approx& - \frac{2 \Delta_0}{3 \pi^2 T^2}
\left( \frac{2 a^2 c_{66}}{\pi \eta v v_{\rm i} t_{\rm i}} \right)^{3/2}.\end{aligned}$$
The resulting dislocation glide velocity $V_{\rm d}:=\langle \dot X
\rangle$ is obtained from the difference of activation rates for forward and backward instantons, $V_{\rm d} \approx
(a/t_0)[\exp(-{\cal A}^{\rm fw, up})- \exp(-{\cal A}^{\rm bw, up})]$. The attempt frequency of the dislocation $t_0\approx a^2 \eta_{\rm d}/
\pi W_{\rm p}$ is estimated according to Kramers rate theory [@kramer]. In terms of the dislocation diffusion constant $D_0=(a^2 /t_0) \exp (-{\cal A}_0)$ in the pure lattice we eventually find a drift velocity $$\label{v.glide}
V_{\rm d} \approx - \frac{D_0 \Delta_0}{v t_{\rm i} T^2}
\left(\frac{2 a^2 c_{66}}{\pi^3 \eta v^2 t_{\rm i}} \right)^{3/2}
\propto v^{-4}$$ in the limit $v \to \infty$, where ${\cal A}_1 \ll 1$.
Several properties of this resulting drift velocity are noteworthy: it decays with the fourth power of velocity, which is much faster than $V_{\rm d} \sim v^{-1}$ that one might expect on the basis of symmetry arguments. The drift velocity is independent of $c_{11}$ for $c_{11}
\gg c_{66}$, where only shear modes of the lattice get excited. In the considered temperature range $T \ll W_{\rm p}$ the drift velocity arises from a small bias of instantonic hops. Since this process is thermally activated the drift velocity increases monotonously with temperature. The asymptotic form (\[v.glide\]) holds only down to a certain minimum temperature determined by the condition ${\cal A}_1
\ll 1$, which however is satisfied for large velocity.
From Eq. (\[v.glide\]) we can estimate the critical velocity where a crossover from “elastic” to “plastic” flow takes place. In the “elastic” flow regime vortices flow essentially coherently. Topological defects may be present due to thermal fluctuations. Although we found that dislocations are always retarded with respect to the vortices, this effect is small for high drift velocities $v \gg
|V_{\rm d}|$. On the other hand there is the “plastic” flow regime, where dislocations are essentially pinned by impurities. Such dislocations are a source of rearrangements of neighborhoods between vortices. This plasticity becomes significant for $1-|V_{\rm d}|/v \ll
1$. Although our derivation of Eq. (\[v.glide\]) is strictly valid only for large velocities, we expect it to give a qualitatively correct estimate for the velocity $$\label{v_c}
v_{\rm c} \approx \left[ \frac {D_0 \Delta_0}
{t_{\rm i} T^2}
\left(\frac {2 a^2 c_{66}}{\pi^3 \eta t_{\rm i}} \right)^{3/2} \right]^{1/5}$$ of the crossover between both regimes.
Although the instantaneous forces acting on the dislocation arise from local stresses in the vortex lattice, the dislocation glide velocity results from the correlations of these stresses on [*intermediate*]{} scales $|X| \lesssim v t_{\rm i}$ for large drift velocities: According to Eq. (\[up\]b) the quantity $\tilde X_i(t)$ decays exponentially on the instanton time scale $t_{\rm i}$. Thus the main contributions to ${\cal A}_1$ in Eq. (\[def.act\]) come from $\chi(X)$ for $|X| \lesssim v t_{\rm i}$. This scale increases $\propto v^1$, whereas the dynamic Larkin length, up to where the perturbative calculation of $\chi$ is reliable, increases $\propto
v^3$ [@GL96; @BMR96]. It is for this reason that the calculation of $\chi$ in linear response approximation for the vortex lattice is sufficient for the dislocation dynamics at large drive.
Relating our result $v_{\rm c} \propto \Delta_0^{1/5}$ with the finding [@KV94] of a dynamic freezing velocity $v_{\rm f} \propto
\Delta_0$, one has to distinguish the case of weak and strong pinning. For [*strong*]{} pinning $v_{\rm c}<v_{\rm f}$. Expression (\[v\_c\]) for $v_{\rm c}$ is then formally invalid since the lattice is no longer ordered at these velocities. In this case we can describe only the regime $v> v_{\rm f}$, where the vortex lattice preserves its crystalline order on large scales and dislocations move with the vortices. In the limit of [*weak*]{} pinning both velocities $v_{\rm
f} < v_{\rm c}$ become small and the perturbative findings are no longer quantitatively reliable. Nevertheless, the smallness of the velocities indicates that the lattice is well ordered and dislocations move essentially with the lattice at practically all drift velocities. Qualitatively, our finding suggests a crossover between practically elastic flow for $v>v _{\rm c}$ and strongly plastic flow for $v<v
_{\rm c}$. This crossover can be viewed as precursor of the pinning transition.
To sum up, our result $V_{\rm d}\propto v^{-4}$ implies that the motion of the vortex lattice in disorder is [*always*]{} accompanied by plasticity, even if it is extremely weak at high drives. For weak pinning we have estimated the characteristic velocity of the crossover between “elastic” and “plastic” flow of the vortex lattice. We expect these results to be valid also after the inclusion of interactions between dislocations. For example a dislocation-antidislocation pair will be retarded with respect to the vortex lattice essentially as a whole, since the resulting glide velocity is independent of the dislocation type. But even if this pair remains bound it can create point defects during its motion. Interactions between dislocations are clearly relevant for a study of the qualitative nature of the dynamic melting transition [@KV94], we will address this issue in a forthcoming publication.
The authors gratefully acknowledge discussions with G.T. Zimányi. This work was supported from Argonne National Laboratory through the U.S. Department of Energy, BES-Material Sciences, under contract No. W-31-109-ENG-38 and by the NSF-Office of Science and Technology Centers under contract No. DMR91-20000 Science and Technology Center for Superconductivity and by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft project SFB341.
G. Blatter [*et al.*]{}, Rev. Mod. Phys. [**66**]{}, 1125 (1994).
A. I. Larkin, Sov. Phys. JETP [**31**]{}, 784 (1970).
M. V. Feigelman [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. [ **63**]{}, 2303, (1989).
T. Nattermann, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**64**]{}, 2454 (1990).
T. Giamarchi and P. Le Doussal, Phys. Rev. Lett. [ **72**]{}, 1530 (1994); Phys. Rev. B [**52**]{}, 1242 (1995).
J. Kierfeld, T. Nattermann, and T. Hwa, preprint cond-mat/9512101; J. Kierfeld, preprint cond-mat/9609045; D. Ertas and D.R. Nelson, preprint cond-mat/9607142; D. Carpentier, P. Le Doussal, and T. Giamarchi, Europhys. Lett. [**35**]{}, 379 (1996); T. Giamarchi and P. Le Doussal, preprint cond-mat/9609112.
S. N. Coppersmith, Phys. Rev. Lett., B [**44**]{}, 2887 (1991).
H. J. Jensen [*et al.*]{}, J. Low Temp. Phys. [**74**]{}, 293 (1989).
A.E. Koshelev and V.M. Vinokur, Phys. Rev. Lett. [ **73**]{}, 3580 (1994).
L. Balents and M.P.A. Fisher, Phys. Rev. Lett. [ **75**]{}, 4270 (1995).
M.C. Hellerqvist [*et. al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. [ **76**]{}, 4022 (1996).
S. Ryu [*et al.*]{}, preprint cond-mat/9606126.
T. Giamarchi and P. Le Doussal, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**76**]{}, 3408 (1996); preprint cond-mat/9608153.
K Moon, R.T. Scalettar, and G.T. Zimányi, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**77**]{}, 2778 (1996).
L. Balents, M.C. Marchetti, and L. Radzihovski, preprint cond-mat/9608009.
A. Schmid and W. Hauger, J. Low Temp. Phys. [**11**]{}, 667 (1973).
see, e.g., J.P. Hirth and J. Lothe, “Theory of dislocations” (Wiley & Sons, New York, 1982).
E.H. Brandt, Phys. Stat. Sol. [**36**]{}, K167 (1969).
A.E. Koshelev, Phys. Rev. B [**45**]{}, 12936 (1992).
J.M. Kosterlitz and D.J. Thouless, J. Phys. C [**6**]{}, 1181 (1973).
P.C. Martin, E.D. Siggia, and H.A. Rose, Phys. Rev. A [**8**]{}, 423 (1973).
P. Hänggi, P. Talkner, and M. Borkovec, Rev. Mod. Phys. [**62**]{}, 251 (1990).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'In this paper we define a family of preferential attachment models for random graphs with fitness in the following way: independently for each node, at each time step a random fitness is drawn according to the position of a moving average process with positive increments. We will define two regimes in which our graph reproduces some features of two well-known preferential attachment models: the Bianconi–Barabási and the Barabási–Albert models. We will discuss a few conjectures on these models, including the convergence of the degree sequence and the appearance of Bose–Einstein condensation in the network when the drift of the fitness process has order comparable to the graph size.'
address: 'TU Delft (DIAM), Building 28, van Mourik Broekmanweg 6, 2628 XE, Delft, The Netherlands'
author:
- Alessandra Cipriani
- Andrea Fontanari
title: 'Dynamical fitness models: evidence of universality classes for preferential attachment graphs'
---
Introduction
============
Preferential attachment models (PAMs) are a type of dynamic network that exhibits features observed in many real-life datasets, such as the power-law decay in the tails of the degree distribution [@remco2016random]. Since the works [@yule1925ii], [@simon1955class], one of the versions of preferential attachment graphs which became prominent is the Barabási–Albert model [@barabasialbert]. In the simplest case, at each discrete time step a new node attaches itself to one of the already existing vertices with probability proportional to that vertex’s degree. One of the main features of this model is the [*old-get-richer*]{} phenomenon, for which older vertices tend to accumulate higher degree. PAMs have been extended to allow for different attachment probabilities. In physics it is relevant to look at the following generalisation: each node comes into the network with an additional label called [*fitness*]{}, sampled at random. Now the attachment probability to a node is not only proportional to its degree, but to its degree times its fitness. This graph is called PAM with fitness, first introduced by [@bianconi2001competition]. We shall henceforth refer to this model as the Bianconi–Barabási model. One of the main interests in fitness models of preferential attachment is due to their link to a well-known phenomenon called “Bose–Einstein condensation” [@barabasi2016network]. Roughly speaking, condensation for a graph means that a small fraction of the nodes collects a sum of degrees which is linear in the network size. In physical terms this means that particles in a Bose–Einstein gas (corresponding to nodes in our graph) crowd at the lowest energy level (roughly corresponding to the fitness). It has been shown ([@borgs2007first; @dereich2016; @dereich2017nonextensive; @dereich_ortgiese_2014] are some of the many references) that under suitable conditions on the fitness distribution a condensate appears in the Bianconi–Barabási model. In recent years, applications for preferential attachment models with fitness went beyond physics. On the mathematical side, several variants of the Bianconi–Barabási model have been developed to study condensation and related phenomena [@garavaglia; @haslegrave2016preferential; @haslegrave2019condensation]. On the modelling side they have been used to study the power-law exhibited by cryptocurrency transaction networks such as Bitcoins [@BitcoinFitness], and citation networks [@Garavaglia2017]. The reason for this is that one can think that nodes represent agents and connections among them depend on their reputation (the degree) and their skills (the fitness). Studying properties of such networks can lead to better understanding of real-life phenomena.
So far the fitness has been considered fixed in time. Clearly this may not be the case, for example when the skills of an agent increase in time via a learning-by-doing mechanism. Motivated by this, we want to define a family of PAMs with [*dynamical fitness*]{}. In our networks, the fitness $\F_t(v)$ is allowed to vary over time, independently for each vertex $i$, according to a stochastic process that arises out of the sum of i.i.d. positive random variables $\epsilon$. It turns out that by choosing the right summation scheme we are able to range between the Barabási–Albert and the Bianconi–Barabási model. More precisely, we start by showing that if the amount of increments $\epsilon$ is finite, we are able to compare our model to the Barabási–Albert and Bianconi–Barabási models by showing that some features resemble those of these benchmark cases (eg. expected asymptotic attachment probability). Furthermore, we investigate numerically the behavior of the degree sequence and show it is asymptotically close to that of the Barabási–Albert resp. Bianconi–Barabási model. Indeed the [*old-get-richer*]{} phenomenon is reinforced by the presence of larger fitness of older nodes.
We continue by focusing on the Bianconi–Barabási model proving that condensation can be induced by summing sufficiently many increments. Provided the mean increment $\mu_\epsilon$ is less than ${1}/{2}$ we can always find a fitness distribution $\nu(\epsilon)$ such that the Bianconi–Barabási model with that fitness condensates, in particular $\nu(\epsilon)$ is obtained via convolution of the increment distribution. However, for a larger mean increment condensation will not appear regardless of the growth of the fitness (as long as it is bounded in time), thus showing a phase transition at $\mu_\eps={1}/{2}.$ We then conjecture, and provide numerics in support, that this behavior carries over to our model as well.
Finally, we conclude with several open problems and conjectures. In particular, we perform simulations suggesting the appearance of a condensate when the sum of the increments grows linearly in the network size. We inquire whether this phase transition is universal in the increment law.
Drawing conclusions from our work, both mathematical and empirical evidence hints at the universal behavior of the Barabási–Albert and the Bianconi–Barabási model which appear to be stable under random, but bounded in time, perturbations of the attachment probability.
The main challenge at present is that the study of random networks with fitness has been successfully carried through via a coupling with continuous-time branching processes (CTBP) and generalised Pólya’s urns. However, our time-varying fitness corresponds to a change of the reproduction rate in each family of the associated CTBP, [*at every birth event*]{}, making the CTPB lose its Markovian properties and independence over families. Using the observation that the degree sequence corresponds to an element of a simplex, the theory of majorization turns out to be a good tool to control the quantities we are interested in. To the best of the authors’s knowledge, majorization seems to be newly applied in the context of PAMs, although it has been widely used for other random graphs [@arnold2007].
#### Structure of the article {#structure-of-the-article .unnumbered}
In Section \[sec:model\_res\] we describe the model we are considering and state our main Theorems, which are proved, together with auxiliary results, in Section \[sec:proofs\]. We describe some conjectures and numerical simulations in Section \[sec:conj\]. We finally conclude with the remarks of Section \[sec:concl\].
#### Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
The authors are grateful to Remco van der Hofstad and Cécile Mailler for several stimulating discussions. The first author is supported by the grant 613.009.102 of the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO). The second author acknowledges the support of grant FP7 Marie Curie ITN Project WakEUpCall Nr. 643045.
Notation {#notation .unnumbered}
--------
For a random variable $X$ we denote its expectation as $\mu_X$. We say that $f(x)\asymp g(x)$ if there exist universal constants $c_r,\,c_\ell>0$ such that $c_\ell g(x)\le f(x)\le c_r g(x)$ for all $x.$ We use the standard notation for graphs $G_t=(V_t,\,E_t)$ where $V_t$ denotes the vertex set at time $t$ and $E_t$ denotes the edge set. The degree of a node $v$ at time $t$ in a graph $G=G_t$ is indicated as $\deg_t(v)$. We write $w\to v$ to indicate that node $w$ is attached to node $v$ in the graph $G$, and the bond between the two nodes is written as $(w,\,v)$. We will use bold fonts for vectors. For $\bo{x}=(x_1,\,\ldots,\,x_d)\in\R^d$ let $$x_{[1]} \ge \cdots\ge x_{[d]}$$ denote the components of $x$ in decreasing order, and let $$\bo{x}_\downarrow: = (x_{[1]},\, \ldots\, x_{[d]})$$ denote the decreasing rearrangement of $\bo x$. We will use the Landau notation always with respect to a time parameter $t\to\infty.$ For a probability law $\nu$ we denote as $\nu^{(m)}$ the $m$-convolution of $\nu$. Finally, $d_{TV}$ denotes the total variation distance.
The model and main results {#sec:model_res}
==========================
Definition of the model {#subsec:def}
-----------------------
We will now begin by setting up the definition of our preferential attachment graphs. In particular in this work we will construct random trees where at each time step a new node attaches itself to a previous one according to the preferential attachment rule given in Equation .
The construction algorithm is the following:
*initial step*: $G_1=(V_1,\,E_1) \gets (\{1,\,2\},\,(1,2))$ $\F_1\gets (\F_1(1),\,\F_1(2))$ *recursive step*: $\F_i\gets (\F_i(v))$ for all $v\in V_{i-1}$. node $\gets j\in V_{i-1}$ chosen with probability $$\label{eq:attach_rule}
P(i\to j)=\frac{\F_{i}(j)\deg_{i-1}(j)}{\sum_{v\in V_{i-1}}\F_i(v)\deg_{i-1}(v)}$$ $V_i\gets V_{i-1}\cup\{i\}$ $E_i=E_{i-1}\cup \{(i,\,node)\}$
The choice of the initial graph $G_1$ is arbitrary and does not affect our results. The random variable $$Z_t:=\sum_{v\in V_{t-1}}\F_t(v)\deg_{t-1}(v)$$ is the partition function at time $t$. Note also that we label a vertex by its arrival time in the graph. This mapping is valid since our graph is a tree. Therefore we will interchangeably use $u,\,v,\,w,\ldots$ as names of vertices or as times in the graph evolution without risk of confusion.
The new feature of our model is that fitnesses randomly vary in time according to a specific discrete-time stochastic process whose definition is given in Definition \[def:fit\].
\[def:fit\]Given the graph $G_{t-1}=(V_{t-1},\,E_{t-1}) $ we set $(\F_t(v))_{v\in V_{t-1}}$ as $$\label{eq:fitness_process}
\F_t(v):=\sum_{i=v+1}^{t}\alpha_i\epsilon_i(v),$$ where $\bm{\alpha}=(\alpha_i)_{i=1}^t$ is such that $\alpha_i\in\{0,\,1\}$ for all $i=1,\,\ldots,\,t$, and $(\epsilon_i(v))_{i\in\N,\,v\in V_{t-1}}$ is a collection of i.i.d. non-negative random variables.
The law of $\epsilon$ is denoted by $\nu$. In the present work, we assume that $\text{supp}(\nu)\subset [0,\,1]$, as common in the literature on condensation for preferential attachment models with fitness ([@borgs2007first; @dereich2017nonextensive; @haslegrave2019condensation]).
According to the choice of $\bm\alpha$, spans a rich variety of stochastic processes. Some notable ones are
1. \[item:a\_m\] the i.i.d. sampling from the law $\nu$ if $\bm{\alpha}=(0,\,\ldots,\,0,\,1)$, namely for every $v$ one has $\F_{i}(v)= \epsilon_i(v).$ Observe that $\F_i(v)$ is independent from $\F_j(v)$ for all $i\neq j$.
2. \[item:b\_m\] A moving average process $MA(m)$ of order $m$, $m<\infty$, for $\displaystyle \bm{\alpha}=(0,\,0,\,\ldots,0,\,\underbrace{1,\,\ldots,\,1}_{m})$. Observe that, for fixed $v$ and $i$, $\F_{i}(v)$ is independent from $\F_{i+m}(v)$ ($m$-Markov property).
3. \[item:c\_m\] The random walk with positive increments $\eps$ for $\bm{\alpha}=(1,\,\ldots,\,1).$
4. \[item:d\_m\] When $\bm{\alpha}=(\underbrace{1,\,\ldots,\,1}_{m},\,0,\,\ldots,\,0)$ with $m<\infty$ the fitness is a finite sum of increments such that $\F_i(v)=\F_{v+1+m}(v)$ for all $i\ge v+1+m$.
5. \[item:e\_m\] When $\bm{\alpha}=(1,\,0,\,\ldots,\,0)$ we obtain a time-independent fitness such that for every $v$ one has $\F_i(v)=\epsilon_{v+1}(v)$ for all $i\ge v+1$.
The classical Bianconi–Barabási model corresponds to \[item:e\_m\]. On the other hand of the spectrum, we will provide evidence (see Section \[sec:conj\]) to support the conjecture that the model in Case \[item:a\_m\] resembles a Barabási–Albert model. In our opinion this motivates the choice of the summation scheme in since it allows for a possible interpolation between the Bianconi–Barabási and the Barabási–Albert models.
In the next Subsection we will indeed identify two regimes in which the behavior of our model follows closely that of the Bianconi–Barabási resp. Barabási–Albert graphs.
Identification of two regimes
-----------------------------
The relevance of our model lies in the fact that, by a suitable tuning of the vector $\bm{\alpha}$, we can construct two families of graphs that will either behave roughly like the Bianconi–Barabási or the Barabási–Albert models. Therefore, our graph can be used as a tool to test the universality of these two models.
The first step is to partition our family of graphs into suitable regimes where the associated graphs share some features. Subsequently we identify, wherever possible, a representative benchmark for the class which will be either the Bianconi–Barabási or the Barabási–Albert.
In order to define properly the regimes, we introduce a parameter $m\in\N$ that roughly measures the total number of summed increments in . More precisely, $m$ represents the length of a block of $1$’s in vector $\bm{\alpha}$. Note also that $m$ may depend on the graph size. According to the position of the block three fitness categories are identified which in turn define the following graph regimes:
\[def:R1\] Let $m$ fixed. The class $R1$ is the class of all graphs $G_t$ evolving according to Algorithm \[euclid\] with fitness $$\F_t(v)=\sum_{i=(t-m)\vee (v+1)}^{t}\epsilon_i(v)$$ for every node $v$.
\[def:R2\] Let $m$ fixed. The class $R2$ is the class of all graphs $G_t$ evolving according to Algorithm \[euclid\] with fitness $$\F_t(v)=\sum_{i=v+1}^{(v+m+1)\wedge t}\epsilon_i(v)$$ for every node $v$.
\[def:R3\] Let $m(t)$ be a $\N$-valued function of the graph size $t$ which is increasing and unbounded. The class $R3$ is the class of all graphs $G_t$ evolving according to Algorithm \[euclid\] with fitness $$\F_t(v)=\sum_{i=v+1}^{(v+m(t))\wedge t}\epsilon_i(v)\label{eq:fit_R3}$$ for every node $v$.
A few remarks are now due:
The fitness process of the class $R1$ covers Cases \[item:a\_m\]-\[item:b\_m\]. We will show that in this regime a Barabási–Albert-like behavior emerges.
The fitness process of the class $R2$ covers Cases \[item:d\_m\]-\[item:e\_m\]. We will show that in this regime a BB-like behavior emerges. Indeed, we recover a model similar to the BB in the following sense: nodes after $m$ steps stop adding increments and start behaving as if they were in a Bianconi–Barabási graph with fitness law $\nu^{(m)}$.
The fitness process of the class $R3$ includes Case \[item:c\_m\] which can be obtained by setting $m(t)=t$ in Definition \[def:R3\]. Clearly other functions can be used, for example $m(t)=\lfloor{\log t}\rfloor$. As we shall see, according to the speed of the chosen function different behaviors will arise especially regarding the phenomenon of condensation. One may also wonder what happens when one chooses a fitness process as $$\F_t(v)=\sum_{i=(t-m(t))\vee (v+1)}^{t}\epsilon_i(v).\label{eq:fit_useless}$$ When $m(t)=t$ and coincide. Any other other choice of $m(t)$ in is uninteresting for the purposes of our study (for example, we will see that the phenomenon of condensation is trivial in this case).
Before giving our main results, we conclude this Subsection with heuristics on the “rich-get-richer” phenomenon, a characterising property of preferential attachment models.
Note that for every regime the expected fitness of vertex $v$ at time $t$ is $$\label{eq:ex_fitness}
\EE[\F_t(v)]=\mu_\eps (m\wedge(t-v-1))$$ where $m$ can also depend on $t$. It is clear from that older nodes have a higher fitness on average, thus reinforcing the idea that the old-get-richer phenomenon is likely to be preserved in our family of models.
We now turn to the main results of the paper. We will start by studying the phenomenon of condensation (defined precisely in Subsection \[subsubsec:CTBP\]). Then we will move to the attachment probability.
Condensation
------------
The first result for condensation concerns the classical Bianconi–Barabási model and shows that condensation can be enforced by a convolution operation. More specifically, given a fitness distribution in a Bianconi–Barabási model with mean less than $1/2$, we will prove that the graph in Definition \[def:BBm\] whose fitness is the $m$-convolution condensates for $m$ large enough. On the other hand, if the mean is larger or equal to $1/2$, condensation does not appear. This result provides new insight on the heuristic behind condensation. Since this phenomenon requires more “rarified” high fitness population [@borgs2007first], the convolution, which increases the tail decay rate of the distribution, will favor condensation. On the other side, if the mean is too high, mass will not escape from the upper endpoint of the distribution, countering the appearance of the condensate. Therefore, there is a trade-off between these two mechanisms, which results in a phase transition at $1/2$.
We now make the above reasoning rigorous. We introduce a family of Bianconi–Barabási graphs parametrized by the convolution of the fitness law, that is, given a probability distribution $\nu$ in $[0,\,1]$, we call $BB(m)$ a Bianconi–Barabási graph with fitness law $\nu^{(m)}$.
\[def:BBm\] Let $m\in\N$. We denote $BB(m)$ a preferential graph evolving according to Algorithm \[euclid\] with $$\F_t(v)=\sum_{i=1}^m \epsilon_i(v).$$
We stress that the fitness distribution is independent of time and is distributed as the convolution $\nu^{(m)}$. Taking $m=1$ one obtains a Bianconi–Barabási model with fitness $\epsilon$. In the sequel, we will refer as “Bianconi–Barabási models” to any graph constructed via Algorithm \[euclid\], and we will use the notation $BB(m)$ when it will be important to stress the dependence on the convolution.
\[prop:force\_cond\] Assume that the probability distribution $\nu$ of the fitness increment $\epsilon$ satisfies $$\label{eq:cond_MCT}
\int_0^1 \frac{x}{1-x}\;\de \nu(x)<\infty.$$ and $$\label{eq:media_mu}
\int_0^1 x\;\de \nu(x)<\frac12.$$ Then there exists $m^*\in\N$ such that $BB(m^*)$ condensates.
The law of the beta distribution $Beta(\alpha,\,\beta)$ with $\alpha<\beta<\alpha+1$ satisfies - and does not condensate [@borgs2007first Appendix C.3]. Therefore by Proposition \[prop:force\_cond\] there exists an $m^*$ such that the $m^*$-convolution condensates.
The second result instead is relative to the $R1$ regime of our model. It states that in this case condensation does not occur.
\[thm:cond\] No condensation occurs for graphs in Regime $R1$.
When trying to prove a similar result for Regime $R2$ one faces additional difficulties. The main one is that one needs to control the empirical degree distribution, but the available techniques relying on continuous-time branching processes fail because of the interdependence among the branching rates of the particles represented by the vertices in our context. However, numerical simulations we performed in Section \[sec:conj\] show that when $BB(m)$ condensates, the corresponding graph in $R2$, which sums the same $m$ increments, will also condensate.
Evolution of the attachment probability
---------------------------------------
We now state three Propositions regarding the behavior of the attachment probability for our graphs. The main challenge lies in the fact that the attachment probability depends on the fitness, so it is a random object as well.
In particular the role of Proposition \[prop:attach\_proba\] is to justify why in Regime $R1$ we expect a behavior reminiscent of the Barabási–Albert model. Indeed, the refresh of the fitness after $m$ steps will imply that on average we attach new nodes with a probability proportional only to the degree multiplied by a constant, the mean increment. This mirrors the behavior in the Barabási–Albert graph where no fitness is present. More formally, we show
\[prop:attach\_proba\] Let $G_t$ be a graph in Regime $R1$. If $v\in V_t$ is such that $v\le t-m$, then $$\label{eq:attach_R1}
\EE\left[P(t+1\to v)\right]\asymp\frac{\EE\left[\deg_{t-m}(v)\right]}{t}+O(t^{-1})$$ where the error is a.s. in $t$.
Note that in there is no equality sign, but we are off by a multiplicative factor as the proof will show.
Proposition \[prop:attach\_R2\] shows that the attachment probability in Regime $R2$ depends on the fitness distribution, resulting in the naming “Bianconi–Barabási-like” case.
\[prop:attach\_R2\] Let $G_t$ be a graph in Regime $R2$. If $v\in V_t$ is such that $v\le t-m$, then $$\label{eq:attach_R1}
P(t+1\to v)\asymp\frac{\deg_{t}(v)\F_t(v)}{t}\quad a.s.$$
Finally, when $m$ depends on $t$ (the $R3$ case) we cannot refer to any benchmark model so it is natural to investigate the attachment probability in this case too. In particular we observe a behavior more similar to the Barabási–Albert model. This is due to the fact that, essentially as a consequence of the law of large numbers, the fitness may be replaced by a constant, its mean, thus cancelling out in the numerator and denominator of the attachment probability.
\[item:nr\_tre\] Let $G_t$ be a graph in Regime $R3$. Then $$\label{eq:attach_R3}
P(t+1\to v)\asymp \frac{\deg_t(v)}{t}\quad a.s.\text{ and }L^1.$$
We notice in passing that when the fitness is distributed as in the result of Proposition \[item:nr\_tre\] carries over as well.
Proofs of the results {#sec:proofs}
=====================
Preliminaries
-------------
The two main tools we use to study preferential attachment graphs are the majorization order and some results in the theory of branching processes. Although by no means complete, we wish to recall here the basics we are going to employ in our work.
### Majorization
Majorization is a tool which was first introduced in [@hardy1929some]. We refer the interested reader to the monography [@marshall1979inequalities] for a complete overview.
For two vectors $\mathbf u,\,\bo{v}\in\R^d_+$ we will write $\mathbf u\prec \bo v$ (“$v$ majorizes $u$”), if and only if the following is satisfied: $$\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
\sum_{i=1}^k u_{[i]}\le \sum_{i=1}^k v_{[i]}, & k=1,\,\ldots,\,d-1 \\
\sum_{i=1}^d u_{[i]}=\sum_{i=1}^d v_{[i]}. &
\end{array} \right.$$
We will call $$\mathscr D_d:=\{(u_1,\,\ldots,\,u_d)\in \R^d:\,u_1\ge u_2\ge \ldots\ge u_d\}.$$ Majorization becomes a useful tool in random graphs because it provides a way to control functions whose domain is a simplex, and since the degree sequence satisfies $\sum_{v=1}^t\deg_t(v)=2(t-1)$ for trees we can apply majorization to find maxima and minima of appropriate quantities. In particular, we will look at Schur-convex functions, which are are isotonic with respect to the majorization order (see [@marshall1979inequalities Definition A.1, Section 3]). One such function is the partition function of the attachment probability at time $t$.
### Condensation and continuous-time branching processes {#subsubsec:CTBP}
Condensation can be defined rigorously in several ways. The first definition we use requires the introduction of the upper end-point of the fitness distribution $\nu$: $$h=h(\F):=\sup\{x:\,\nu(-\infty,\,x)<1\}.$$ To restrict ourselves to interesting cases, we assume there is no atom at the upper end-point, that is, $\nu\{h(\F)\})=0.$ The standard approach to study condensation is the embedding of preferential attachment graphs into continuous-time branching processes. This technique goes back to [@athreya1968embedding; @bhamidi2007universal; @janson2004functional] and we adapt here the presentation given in [@dereich2017nonextensive] to the setting of the Bianconi–Barabási model with fitness law $\nu$ supported on $[0,\,1]$.
In [@dereich2017nonextensive Theorem 2.1] it is shown that a Bianconi–Barabási model exhibits condensation if $$\label{eq:cond_cecile_dereich}
\int_0^1\frac{\F}{1-\F} \de \F<1.$$ In this case the [*weighted empirical*]{} fitness distribution$$\Xi_t:=\frac{1}{2t}\sum_{i=1}^t \deg_t(i)\delta_{\F_t(i)}$$ converges as $t$ goes to infinity to the sum of an absolutely continuous[^1] part, called the bulk, and a Dirac mass in the essential supremum of the support of the fitness distribution, called the condensate.
By viewing the CTBP as a reinforced Pólya’s urn, it is also possible to study condensation by establishing the strict positivity in the limit of the cumulative degree for vertices with high fitness. This is in fact the first approach to the mathematical study of condensation, pioneered by [@borgs2007first], see also [@freeman2018extensive]. Let $V_{\tilde h}:=\{v\in V_{t}:\,\F_t(v)\ge \tilde h\}$ for $\tilde h\le h$. Condensation is based on the behavior of the functional $$M_{\tilde h}:=\sum_{v\in V_{t}}\deg_{t}(v)\mathbbm{1}_{\{\F_t(v)\ge \tilde h\}}$$ as $t\to \infty$ (firstly) and $\tilde h\to h$ (secondly). Models that do condensate are those for which $$\label{eq:cond_cond}
\lim_{\tilde h \to h}\liminf_{t\to\infty}\EE\left[\frac{M_{\tilde h}}{t}\right]>0.$$ We remark that these conditions to define condensation have been investigated only in the cases of static fitnesses. It is for example possible to see without difficulty that is satisfied for $\F_t$ such that $\lim_{t\to\infty}\F_t=+\infty$ a.s. and for which an $m$-Markov property holds, as one first takes the limit in $t$ and then in $\tilde h$. This is the reason why we are not interested in studying models with fitness process given in .
Auxiliary lemmas
----------------
### Condensation
The next Lemma shows that for the $BB(m)$ model defined in Definition \[def:BBm\] condensation is monotone under the convolution operation. Namely, once observed, the phenomenon of condensation is not disrupted by adding more increments in the fitness.
Assume $\nu$ has compact support and $m_1<m_2$. If $BB(m_1)$ condensates then $BB(m_2)$ condensates.
Without loss of generality we can assume $m_1=1,\,m_2=2$. The proof will proceed similarly for $1<m_1<m_2$ by a repeated application of the arguments below. We assume also that the law $\nu$ of the fitness of $BB(1)$ is normalised so that $\text{supp}(\nu)=[0,\,1]$. In order to prove the result we will verify the condition of condensation . We have, by assumption, $$\label{eq:given}
\int_0^1 \frac{x}{1-x}\de\nu(x)<1$$ and we have to show $$\label{eq:to_show_fit}
\int_0^2 \frac{x}{2-x}\de\nu^{(2)}(x)<1.$$ Mind that under $\nu^{(2)}$ one has $X=X_1+X_2 $ with each $X_i\sim \nu$ and independent from each other. We introduce the notation $\bo x_m:=(x_1,\,\ldots,\,x_m)$. We rewrite as $$\int_{0}^2 \frac{\frac{x}{2}}{1-\frac{x}{2}}\de\nu^{(2)}(x)<1\iff \iint_{[0,\,1]^2} \frac{\langle \bo a_2,\, \bo x_2\rangle}{1-\langle \bo a_2,\, \bo x_2\rangle}\de\nu(x_1)\de \nu(x_2)<1$$ where $\bo a_m:=(\underbrace{\nicefrac{1}{m},\,\ldots,\,\nicefrac{1}{m}}_{m},\,0,\,\ldots,\,0)\in \R^{m+\ell}$, $\ell\in\N$. In the present case we choose $m=2,\,\ell=0$. Consider the function $$\begin{aligned}
\phi:\,\mathscr D_2&\to \R\nonumber\\
\bo a_2&\mapsto \iint_{[0,\,1]^2} \frac{\langle \bo a_2,\, \bo x_2\rangle}{1-\langle \bo a_2,\, \bo x_2\rangle}\de\nu(x_1)\de \nu(x_2). \label{eq:def_phi} \end{aligned}$$ This function is Schur-convex in $\mathscr D_2$ as one can see by applying [@marshall1979inequalities Theorem A.3, Section 3]: $$\label{eq:Schur_conv}
\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial \bo (\bo a_2)_i}(\bo a_2)=\1_{\bo (\bo a_2)_i\neq 0}\iint_{[0,\,1]^2}\frac{x_i }{(1-\langle \bo a_2,\, \bo x_2\rangle)^2}\de\nu(x_1)\de \nu(x_2)\ge 0,\quad i=1,\,2.$$ The derivative in each $ (\bo a_2)_i$ can be taken inside the integral since the integrand is $C^1$ in the domain $ \mathscr D_2\times [0,\,1)^2$. Note also that $\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial (\bo a_2)_1}(\bo a_2)=\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial (\bo a_2)_2}(\bo a_2).$ Therefore by definition of Schur-convexity and the fact that $\bo a_m\succeq \bo a_{m-1}$ it follows that $$\phi(\bo a_2)\le \phi(\bo a_1)=\int_0^1 \frac{x_1}{1-x_1}\de \nu(x_1)\stackrel{\eqref{eq:given}}{<}1$$ which implies .
As a part of the proof (and we will name it Corollary) we have obtained the following:
\[cor:phi\] For $i,\,j\in\N$, the function $\phi$ of satisfies $\phi(\bo a_i)\le \phi(\bo a_j)$ if $i\ge j$.
Without loss of generality we assume that $\nu$ is such that $BB(1)$ does not exhibit condensation (otherwise $m^*=1$). To show that the model condensates for some $m^*\in\{2,\,3,\,\ldots\}$, we observe that for a random vector $\bo X_m\in[0,\,1]^m$ with $\bo X_m\sim \prod_{i=1}^m\de \nu$ one has $$\label{eq:average_kernel}\langle \bo a_m,\,\bo X_m\rangle=\overline X_m=\sum_{i=1}^m \frac{X_i}{m}.$$ Now notice that can be rewritten using as $$\label{eq:rearr_x}
\EE\left[\frac{\overline X_m}{1-\overline X_m}\right]=\EE\left[\frac{\overline{(\bo X_\downarrow)}_m}{1-\overline{(\bo X_\downarrow)}_m}\right]$$ since under $\prod_{i=1}^m\de \nu$ one has $$\label{eq:subs_LLN}
\overline X_m\stackrel{d}{=}\overline{(\bo X_\downarrow)}_m=\frac1m\sum_{i=1}^m X_{[i]}.$$ From $\bo X_\downarrow$ fix a realisation $\bo x_\downarrow$. Consider the function $$\begin{aligned}
\Phi:\,\mathscr D_m&\to \R\nonumber\\
\bo a&\mapsto \frac{\langle \bo a,\,\bo x_\downarrow\rangle}{1-\langle \bo a,\,\bo x_\downarrow\rangle}. \label{eq:def_Phi} \end{aligned}$$ As shown for $\phi$ of in , one can prove that $\Phi$ is Schur-convex, so that, for fixed $x_\downarrow$, $\Phi(\bo a_m)$ is decreasing in $m$. This enables us to say that $$\label{eq:last_eq}
\lim_{m\to\infty}\EE\left[\frac{\overline X_m}{1-\overline X_m}\right]\stackrel{\eqref{eq:rearr_x}}{=}\lim_{m\to\infty}\EE\left[\frac{\overline{(\bo X_\downarrow)}_m}{1-\overline{(\bo X_\downarrow)}_m}\right]=\EE\left[\lim_{m\to\infty}\frac{\overline{(\bo X_\downarrow)}_m}{1-\overline{(\bo X_\downarrow)}_m}\right]$$ using the monotone convergence theorem in the last step (applicable by and the monotonicity of $\Phi$). We can now show the right-hand side of equals $\mu_\eps/(1-\mu_\eps)$ using and the strong law of large numbers. This yields that $\left\{\EE\left[\frac{\overline X_m}{1-\overline X_m}\right]:\,m\in\N\right\}$ is a bounded decreasing sequence converging to $\mu_\eps/(1-\mu_\eps)$. This implies the result.
### Attachment probability
A classical result we need to quote is the following. Its proof can be found in [@hardy1952inequalities Theorem 368, Section 10.2].
\[lem:rearr\] For every $n\in\N$, every sequence of real numbers $x_1\le x_2\le\ldots\le x_n$, $y_1\le y_2\le\ldots\le y_n$ and every permutation $\sigma\in\mathfrak S_n$ it holds that $$\sum_{i=1}^n y_i x_{n-i+1}\le \sum_{i=1}^n y_i x_{\sigma(i)}\le \sum_{i=1}^n y_i x_i.$$
In order to treat the attachment probability, we need to have control on the partition functions. We will do so using majorization in Regimes $R1$-$R3$.
\[lem:ristorante\] Let $Z_t:=\sum_{v\in V_{t-1}}\F_{t}(v)\deg_{t-1}(v)$ be the partition function of of models in Regimes $R1$-$R3$. Then the following holds: $$(Z_t)^{-1}\asymp (t m)^{-1}\quad a.s.$$ where the constants in the asymptotic upper and lower bounds are deterministic.
The proof is based on the following two steps:
1. first we find two matching a.s. upper and lower bounds for $Z_t$ that involve roughly the same sum of independent and identically distributed random variables.
2. Secondly we show by the strong law of large numbers that the sum behaves asymptotically like $mt$.
Let us begin with the two bounds. Using the fact that the degree is always at least one, we can bound $Z_t$ from below by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Z_bound_below}
Z_t\ge \sum_{v\in V_{t-1}} \F_t(v).
\end{aligned}$$ We then look for a similar bound from above. Let us rename the vertices $v\in V_{t-1}$ in such a way that $\deg_t(v)=\deg_{t,\,\downarrow}(v).$ Namely we rearrange the degree sequence in decreasing order. Therefore for some permutation $\sigma\in\mathfrak S_t$ $$\label{eq:Maj_Z}
Z_t=\sum_{v\in V_{t-1}}\deg_{t,\,\downarrow}(v) \F_t(\sigma(v))\le \sum_{v\in V_{t-1}}\deg_{t,\,\downarrow}(v) \F_{t,\,\downarrow}(v)$$ by the Rearrangement Inequality of Lemma \[lem:rearr\]. Now $(\deg_{t,\,\downarrow}(v))\in \mathscr D^*:=\{\bo x\in\mathscr D_t:\,\sum_{i}x_i=2(t-1)\}.$ The function $$\mathscr D^*\ni \bo x\mapsto \langle \bo x,\, \bo{\F}_{t,\,\downarrow}\rangle$$ is a.s. Schur-convex in $\mathscr D^*$ by [@marshall1979inequalities Theorem A.3, Section 3]. Therefore it attains its maximum at the maximal element for the majorization order in the simplex $\mathscr D^*$ [@marshall1979inequalities Prop. H.2.a, Section 3]. It is straightforward to identify this element as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{claim:appendix}
\bo x_{max}&=(t-1,\,\underbrace{1,\,\ldots,\,1}_{t-1}).
\end{aligned}$$ Given , we invoke to argue that with probability one $$\label{eq:maj_up_Z}
Z_t\le (t-1)\F_{t,\,\downarrow}(1)+\sum_{v=2}^t\F_{t,\,\downarrow}(v)\le (t-1)m+ \sum_{v=1}^t\F_{t}(v).$$ We have thus obtained and which have the same order of magnitude as $t$ grows. We will then study only the asymptotics for , the other bound being very similar.
We begin by observing that, for every $v\in V_{t-1},$ $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:sum_fitness}
Z_t\ge \sum_v \F_t(v)\ge \sum_{k=1}^L\epsilon_k
\end{aligned}$$ where we have relabeled the increments[^2] and numbered them until $$\label{eq:L}L:=(t-m)m+(m-1)m/2=tm-m^2/2-m/2.$$ Equation holds for any regime because the total number of increments is the same. Equation is going to infinity for $m\le t$. Then by the strong law of large numbers, for every $\eta>0$ we can find an a.s. $L_0=L_0(\eta)$ such that for all $L\ge L_0$ $$\sum_{k=1}^L\epsilon_k\ge \mu_\epsilon L-\eta.$$ Choose then $t_0=t_0(\eta)$ in a set of probability one such that $L\ge L_0$ for $t\ge t_0$ (this is possible since $L$ is an explicit function of $t$). Therefore we obtain an almost-sure bound of the form $$\label{eq:boundFit}
Z_t\ge \sum_v \F_t(v)\ge \mu_\epsilon(tm-m^2/2-m/2)-\eta.$$ This concludes the proof.
Proofs of the main results
--------------------------
For a preferential attachment model with fitness, we have that $$\begin{aligned}
M_{\tilde h}&=\sum_{v\in V_{t-1}}\deg_{t-1}(v)\1_{\{\F_t(v)\ge \tilde h\}}=\sum_{v}\deg_{t-1-m}(v)\1_{\{\F_t(v)\ge \tilde h\}}\nonumber\\
&+\sum_{v}D_{v,\,m}\1_{\{\F_t(v)\ge \tilde h\}}\label{eq:dec_M}\end{aligned}$$ where $D_{v,\,m}:=\{t'\ge t-m:\,t'\to v\}$ is a random variable bounded almost surely by $m$. Thus recalling the definition $V_{\tilde h}:=\{v\in V_{t}:\,\F_t(v)\ge \tilde h\}$, we have that $\EE[M_{\tilde h}]$ is bounded above by $$\begin{aligned}
P(\F_t(1)\ge \tilde h)&\EE\left[\sum_{v}\deg_{t-m-1}(v)\right]+m \EE[V_{\tilde h}]\nonumber\\
&=P(\F_t(1)\ge \tilde h)2(t-m-2)+m \EE[V_{\tilde h}].\label{eq:fitn_RHS}\end{aligned}$$ Here we have used the fact that $\F_t(1)$ is independent of the sigma algebra $\sigma(G_{t-m-1})$ (the fitness has the $m$-Markov property) and that the sum of the degrees up to $t-m-1$ is deterministic. Furthermore, we notice that, due to the independence of the fitnesses over vertices, one has $$\label{eq:card_V}
\frac{\EE[V_{\tilde h}]}{ t-1}\sim P\left(\sum_{i=1}^m \epsilon_i\ge \tilde h\right)\to 0$$ as $t\to \infty$ and $\tilde h \to h$. We justify since for every node $v\le t-m$ the fitness is a sum of $m$ i.i.d. increments. These two observations combined prove that, for $m$ constant, converges to $0$.
We recall the bound $$\label{eq:bound_on_Zt}
\mu_\eps m\left(t-\frac{m}{2}\right)(1+o(1))\le Z_t\le \mu_\eps m\left(t-\frac{m}{2}\right)(1+o(1))+tm\quad a.s.$$ for $t$ large enough from Lemma \[lem:ristorante\]. Thus using the left-hand side of one can rewrite the expected attachment probability as $$\begin{aligned}
\EE\left[\frac{\deg_{t-1}(v)\F_t(v)}{Z_t}\right]&\ge \EE\left[\frac{\deg_{t-1}(v)\F_t(v)}{\mu_\eps m \left(t-\frac{m}{2}\right)(1+o(1)) }\right]=\EE\left[\frac{\deg_{t-m}(v)\F_t(v)}{\mu_\eps m \left(t-\frac{m}{2}\right)(1+o(1)) }\right]\nonumber\\
&+\EE\left[\frac{D_{v,\,m}\F_t(v)}{\mu_\eps m \left(t-\frac{m}{2}\right)(1+o(1)) }\right]\label{eq:dec_attach_prob}
\end{aligned}$$ where $D_{v,\,m}$ is as in . The a.s. bound on $D_{v,\,m}$ and the fact that $\EE[\F_t(v)]=\mu_\eps m$ yield that the second summand in is $O(1/t)$ with probability one. As for the first summand, note that $\deg_{t-m}(v)$ and $\F_t(v)$ are independent. Therefore we obtain that $$\begin{aligned}
\EE\left[\frac{\deg_{t-m}(v)\F_t(v)}{Z_t}\right]\ge \EE\left[\frac{\deg_{t-m}(v)}{\left(t-\frac{m}{2}\right)(1+o(1))}\right].
\end{aligned}$$ The other bound can be obtained in the same way from the right-hand side of .
The result follows by applying Lemma \[lem:ristorante\] to the partition function of the attachment probability.
Using again the right-hand side of we get $$\label{eq:boundR3_attach}
\frac{\deg_{t-1}(v)\F_t(v)}{Z_t}\ge \frac{\deg_{t-1}(v)}{(\mu_\eps +1)tm(1+\frac{\mu_\eps}{2(\mu_\eps+1)}\frac{m}{t}+o(1))}\frac{\F_t(v)}{\mu_\eps m}\mu_\eps m.$$ Observe now that $$\frac{\deg_{t-1}(v)}{t}\le 1$$ and that ${\F_t(v)}/({\mu_\eps m})$ converges to one by the strong law of large numbers with probability one. Hence by dominated convergence theorem one can argue that $$\lim_{t\to\infty}\frac{\mu_\eps }{\mu_\eps +1}\EE\left[\left|\frac{\deg_{t-1}(v)}{t(1+\frac{\mu_\eps}{2(\mu_\eps+1)}\frac{m}{t}+o(1))}\left(\frac{\F_t(v)}{\mu_\eps m}-1\right)\right|\right]=0.$$ This shows that $$\frac{\deg_{t-1}(v)\F_t(v)}{Z_t}\ge X^{(\ell)}_t$$ where $X^{(\ell)}_t$ is a random variable that is asymptotic in $L^1$ and a.s. to $$\frac{\mu_\eps}{\mu_\eps+1}\frac{ \deg_t(v)}{t(1+\frac{\mu_\eps}{2(\mu_\eps+1)}\frac{m}{t})}.$$ The a.s. statement is a consequence of the law of large numbers for the term ${\F_t(v)}/({\mu_\eps m})$ going to one. A similar upper bound, this time using the lower bound of the partition function in , yields that $$\frac{\deg_{t-1}(v)\F_t(v)}{Z_t}\le X^{(r)}_t$$ where $X^{(r)}_t$ is a random variable that is asymptotic in $L^1$ and a.s. to $$\frac{ \deg_{t-1}(v)}{\left(t-\frac{m}{2}\right)}.$$
Conjectures {#sec:conj}
===========
The condensation phenomenon and the attachment probability hint at the fact that the Barabási–Albert and the $BB(m)$ models represent benchmarks. However, these two quantities are not sufficient to establish a full universality result. Therefore we believe that investigating other aspects of interest can strengthen our claim. We will devote this Section to the numerical study of some additional observables of our graph and the relation with the benchmark models.
We focus on the degree distribution and the condensation phenomenon. As for the former, since the results on the attachment probability are local, in the sense that they hold for fixed vertices, looking at the degree distribution gives broader information on the network. As for the latter, we want to verify whether the threshold for the appearance of condensation derived in Proposition \[prop:force\_cond\] for the $BB(m)$ is mirrored in our model in Regime $R2$.
Finally, since to the best of the authors’ knowledge there is no reference in the literature to preferential attachment models with fitness as in Regime $R3$, we want to shed light on the behavior of condensation in this case.
Degree distribution
-------------------
We now present the numerical results for the degree distribution in Regimes $R1$ and $R2$.
We will show that the total variation distance between the degree distribution of our model and the benchmarks vanishes asymptotically in the graph size. We chose the total variation distance, other than for its numerical tractability, also because it implies the convergence of the laws.
\[conj:d\_TVAB\] Let $m\in \N$, and let $\mathbf{deg}_t$ be the empirical degree distribution of a graph $G_t$ in Regime $R1$. Let $\mathbf{deg}_t^{BA}$ be the empirical degree distribution of a Barabási–Albert graph. Then $$\label{eq:dTVAB}
\lim_{t\to\infty}d_{TV}(\mathbf{{deg}}_t,\,\mathbf{deg}_t^{BA})=0.$$ The limit is taken a.s. in the fitness realisation for $G_t$.
In Figure \[fig:dTVMean\] we plot the mean of the total variation distance averaged over 100 Monte Carlo simulations with $m=1$ and $\eps\sim U(0,\,1)$ for different graph sizes. Since our result is quenched in the fitness, we are keeping the same realization of the fitnesses and averaging the total variation distance over the Monte Carlo trials.
![Left: mean of the total variation distance , $m=1$, $\epsilon\sim U(0,\,1)$. Right: mean of the total variation distance , $m=5$, $\epsilon\sim U(0,\,1)$. Note that it decreases towards zero.[]{data-label="fig:dTVMean"}](dTVAB_unif.png){width="\textwidth"}
![Left: mean of the total variation distance , $m=1$, $\epsilon\sim U(0,\,1)$. Right: mean of the total variation distance , $m=5$, $\epsilon\sim U(0,\,1)$. Note that it decreases towards zero.[]{data-label="fig:dTVMean"}](dTVAB_unif_m5.png){width="\textwidth"}
Due to the convergence of we are also conjecturing that the asymptotic survival function of the degree distribution is close to a power law with exponent $\tau=2$, as in the standard Barabási–Albert model [@remco2016random Section 8.4]. We then compare the tail exponent of the survival function of the degree distribution between our model in $R1$ and the Barabási–Albert model in Figure \[fig:tail\_expABNostro3\].
![Loglog plot of the empirical survival function for our model (left) in Regime $R1$, $m=1$, $\epsilon\sim Beta(1,\,3)$ and a Barabási–Albert model (right). The plot looks like a straight line which hints towards a power law behavior [@cirillo2013your]. On top $\tau$ is computed.[]{data-label="fig:tail_expABNostro3"}](tailABNostro_Beta13_T20000.png "fig:"){width=".45\textwidth"} ![Loglog plot of the empirical survival function for our model (left) in Regime $R1$, $m=1$, $\epsilon\sim Beta(1,\,3)$ and a Barabási–Albert model (right). The plot looks like a straight line which hints towards a power law behavior [@cirillo2013your]. On top $\tau$ is computed.[]{data-label="fig:tail_expABNostro3"}](tailAB_T20000.png "fig:"){width=".45\textwidth"}
\[conj:d\_TVBB\] Let $m\in\N$, and let $\mathbf{deg}_t$ be the empirical degree distribution of a graph $G_t$ in Regime R2. Let $\mathbf{deg}_t^{BB(m)}$ be the empirical degree distribution of a $BB(m)$ model with the same parameter $m\in\N$. Then $$\label{eq:dTVBB}
\lim_{t\to\infty}d_{TV}(\mathbf{deg}_t,\,\mathbf{deg}_t^{BB(m)})=0.$$ The limit is taken a.s. in the fitness realisation of $G_t$.
In Figure \[fig:dTVBBN1\] we plot the mean total variation distance over 100 Monte Carlo simulations with $m=5$ resp. $m=10$ and $\epsilon\sim Beta(1,\,3)$ for various graph sizes. As in the AB case, the fitness realisation is kept fixed over the various Monte Carlo trials.
![Left: mean of the total variation distance between our model in Regime $R2$ and $BB(m)$, $m=5$, $\epsilon\sim Beta(1,\,3)$. Right: mean of the total variation distance between our model in Regime $R2$ and $BB(m)$, $m=10$, $\epsilon\sim Beta(1,\,3)$. In both cases it goes to zero.[]{data-label="fig:dTVBBN1"}](dTVBBN_m5_conv_Beta13.png){width="100.00000%"}
![Left: mean of the total variation distance between our model in Regime $R2$ and $BB(m)$, $m=5$, $\epsilon\sim Beta(1,\,3)$. Right: mean of the total variation distance between our model in Regime $R2$ and $BB(m)$, $m=10$, $\epsilon\sim Beta(1,\,3)$. In both cases it goes to zero.[]{data-label="fig:dTVBBN1"}](dTVBBN_m10_conv_Beta13.png){width="100.00000%"}
As a comparison, observe in Figure \[fig:wrongdTV\] the behavior of the mean total variation distance between our model in Regime $R2$ with $m\neq 1$ and a $BB(1)$ averaged over $100$ Monte Carlo simulations.
![Left: Mean total variation distance between our model with $m=5$ and a $BB(1)$, $\epsilon\sim Beta(1,\,3).$ Right: mean total variation distance between our model with $m=2$ and a $BB(1)$, $\epsilon\sim U(0,\,1).$ In both cases the mean total variation does not approach zero.[]{data-label="fig:wrongdTV"}](dTVBBN_m5_Beta13.png){width="100.00000%"}
![Left: Mean total variation distance between our model with $m=5$ and a $BB(1)$, $\epsilon\sim Beta(1,\,3).$ Right: mean total variation distance between our model with $m=2$ and a $BB(1)$, $\epsilon\sim U(0,\,1).$ In both cases the mean total variation does not approach zero.[]{data-label="fig:wrongdTV"}](dTVBBN_m2_Beta11.png){width="100.00000%"}
Again this hints at the fact that the way in which fitnesses increase is substantially uninfluential on the growth of the network, provided we sum finitely many increments. This also shows that the $BB(m)$ model is robust under dynamical perturbations.
Condensation {#subsec:cond}
------------
We now present the numerical results on condensation in Regimes $R1$-$R3$. To do so, we will plot the cumulative degree of the nodes grouped by fitness. In this setting, based on the argument outlined in the Introduction, we expect to see condensation when the landscape of the above has more and higher spikes concentrated towards the upper end point of the fitness law.
To begin with, recall that by Theorem \[thm:cond\] no condensate appears in Regime $R1$. Indeed, when picturing condensation using the cumulative degree grouped by fitness (see Figure \[pics:tramaxAB\]) one can notice that the position of the spikes varies on the whole support of the distribution. This is due to the the $m$-Markov property.
![Cumulative degree of the nodes grouped by fitness for our model in Regime $R1$ with $m=1$, $\epsilon\sim Beta(1,\,3)$. Observe that the location of the highest spike of the degree does not escape towards the supremum of the fitness but is randomly shuffled.[]{data-label="pics:tramaxAB"}](TravelMaxAB_1.png "fig:"){width=".3\textwidth"}![Cumulative degree of the nodes grouped by fitness for our model in Regime $R1$ with $m=1$, $\epsilon\sim Beta(1,\,3)$. Observe that the location of the highest spike of the degree does not escape towards the supremum of the fitness but is randomly shuffled.[]{data-label="pics:tramaxAB"}](TravelMaxAB_2.png "fig:"){width=".3\textwidth"}![Cumulative degree of the nodes grouped by fitness for our model in Regime $R1$ with $m=1$, $\epsilon\sim Beta(1,\,3)$. Observe that the location of the highest spike of the degree does not escape towards the supremum of the fitness but is randomly shuffled.[]{data-label="pics:tramaxAB"}](TravelMaxAB_3.png "fig:"){width=".3\textwidth"}
We now turn our attention to Regimes $R2$ and $R3$.
Condensation for $R2$
---------------------
Given Conjecture \[conj:d\_TVBB\] on the asymptotic degree distribution, we formulate a conjecture on the condensation for $R2$ models.
Let $m\in\N$ and let $G_t$ be a preferential attachment graph in Regime $R2$. Then $G_t$ condensates if $BB(m)$ condensates.
We will support the above conjecture with a few simulations. We recall [@borgs2007first Appendix C.3] that in a $BB(1)$ model the fitness distribution $Beta(\alpha,\,\beta)$ condensates if and only if $\beta>\alpha+1$. In Figure \[pics:tramax\_m1\_Beta11\] one can observe the absence of a condensate for $U(0,\,1)$-distributed increments and $m=1$. In Figure \[pics:tramax\_m5\_Beta119\] a condensate appears for the increment distribution $Beta(1,\,1.9)$ when $m=2$. Note finally in Figure \[fig:phase\_trans\_nostro\] that there is no condensation for $Beta(3,\,1)$-distributed increments for $m=5$. Since in this case $\mu_\eps=3/4>1/2$ the threshold in Proposition \[prop:force\_cond\] seems to be binding in $R2$ as well.
![Cumulative degree in fitness intervals for Regime $R2$ with $m=1$, $\epsilon\sim U(0,\,1)$. Note that the degree distribution per fitness becomes smoother at the right endpoint of the fitness distribution. This model is known not to exhibit condensation. []{data-label="pics:tramax_m1_Beta11"}](Prova_T1000_beta11.png "fig:"){width=".25\textwidth"}![Cumulative degree in fitness intervals for Regime $R2$ with $m=1$, $\epsilon\sim U(0,\,1)$. Note that the degree distribution per fitness becomes smoother at the right endpoint of the fitness distribution. This model is known not to exhibit condensation. []{data-label="pics:tramax_m1_Beta11"}](Prova_T100000_beta11.png "fig:"){width=".25\textwidth"}![Cumulative degree in fitness intervals for Regime $R2$ with $m=1$, $\epsilon\sim U(0,\,1)$. Note that the degree distribution per fitness becomes smoother at the right endpoint of the fitness distribution. This model is known not to exhibit condensation. []{data-label="pics:tramax_m1_Beta11"}](Prova_T1000000_beta11.png "fig:"){width=".25\textwidth"}
![Cumulative degree in fitness intervals for Regime $R2$ with $m=2$ with $\epsilon\sim Beta(1,\,1.9)$. In this case, higher spikes appear as the graph size increases towards the upper endpoint of the fitness distribution. Recall that the classical Bianconi–Barabási model does not condensate for $Beta(1,\,1.9)$-distributed fitness. []{data-label="pics:tramax_m5_Beta119"}](Beta119_m2_T1000.png "fig:"){width=".25\textwidth"}![Cumulative degree in fitness intervals for Regime $R2$ with $m=2$ with $\epsilon\sim Beta(1,\,1.9)$. In this case, higher spikes appear as the graph size increases towards the upper endpoint of the fitness distribution. Recall that the classical Bianconi–Barabási model does not condensate for $Beta(1,\,1.9)$-distributed fitness. []{data-label="pics:tramax_m5_Beta119"}](Beta119_m2_T10000.png "fig:"){width=".25\textwidth"}![Cumulative degree in fitness intervals for Regime $R2$ with $m=2$ with $\epsilon\sim Beta(1,\,1.9)$. In this case, higher spikes appear as the graph size increases towards the upper endpoint of the fitness distribution. Recall that the classical Bianconi–Barabási model does not condensate for $Beta(1,\,1.9)$-distributed fitness. []{data-label="pics:tramax_m5_Beta119"}](Beta119_m2_T1000000.png "fig:"){width=".25\textwidth"}
![Cumulative degree in fitness intervals for Regime $R2$ with $m=5$, $\epsilon\sim Beta(3,\,1)$. The degree distribution per fitness appears without peaks as the graph increases and no condensates forms.[]{data-label="fig:phase_trans_nostro"}](Scond_Beta13_T1000.png "fig:"){width=".25\textwidth"}![Cumulative degree in fitness intervals for Regime $R2$ with $m=5$, $\epsilon\sim Beta(3,\,1)$. The degree distribution per fitness appears without peaks as the graph increases and no condensates forms.[]{data-label="fig:phase_trans_nostro"}](Scond_Beta13_T100000.png "fig:"){width=".25\textwidth"}![Cumulative degree in fitness intervals for Regime $R2$ with $m=5$, $\epsilon\sim Beta(3,\,1)$. The degree distribution per fitness appears without peaks as the graph increases and no condensates forms.[]{data-label="fig:phase_trans_nostro"}](Scond_Beta13_T1000000.png "fig:"){width=".25\textwidth"}
Condensation in Regime $R3$
---------------------------
The case in which $m(t)\gg 1$ presents an interesting open problem which is illustrated in the following simulations.
In Figures \[pics:m\_log\_t\]-\[pics:m\_t\] we are plotting the cumulative degree for nodes grouped by fitness with $U(0,\,1)$ increments in the regimes $m=\floor{\log t},\,\floor{\sqrt t},\,t$ respectively. As one can see, the limiting fitness distribution resembles the cumulative fitness distribution for the first two cases, while in the $m=t$ regime a spike appears at $\mu_\eps t$.
As stated at the beginning of Subsection \[subsec:cond\], in this kind of plots condensation is indicated by the presence of spikes around the supremum of the fitness. Looking at Figures \[pics:m\_log\_t\]-\[pics:m\_sqrt\_t\] there are no peaks and the landscape of the empirical fitness distribution resembles the cumulative degree grouped by fitness. On the other hand, in Figure \[pics:m\_t\] the two quantities are different: the cumulative degree by fitness exhibits a spike roughly around $\mu_\eps t$, $t=100000$, and the empirical fitness distribution seems to be uniform in $[0,\,\mu_\eps t].$ Heuristically, a uniform law appears because by summing a linear number of increments the central limit theorem kicks in, so that each node has roughly a Gaussian fitness. More precisely, for most nodes $i$ the fitness is close in law to $\mathcal N(\mu_\eps (t-i),\sigma^2_\eps(t-i))$, where $\sigma^2_\eps$ is the variance of the increments. Therefore, by Gaussian concentration properties around the mean, we see a fitness landscape close to a uniform in $[0,\,\mu_\eps t].$
Based on the above considerations, we expect that the speed at which $m(t)$ grows in time influences the appearance of a condensate. Namely, if $m(t)$ is too slow, condensation cannot be enforced, while a faster $m(t)$ leads to Bose–Einstein condensation. Because of the scaling of the central limit theorem, we conjecture $m(t)=\Theta( t)$ to be the threshold for condensation in $R3$.
This is summarised in the following conjecture:
If $m(t)=\Theta( t)$ $R3$ exhibits condensation with the cumulative fitness distribution having an atom at $\mu_\eps t.$
![Cumulative degree grouped by fitness in Regime $R3$ with $m=\floor{\log_2{t}}$ with $\epsilon\sim U(0,\,1)$ Bottom picture: empirical fitness distribution corresponding to the last cumulative degree plot. Notice that the empirical fitness distribution resembles the cumulative degree by fitness. The plots exhibit no spike. []{data-label="pics:m_log_t"}](CumDeg_fitnessLog_BBNostro_10000.png "fig:"){width=".3\textwidth"}![Cumulative degree grouped by fitness in Regime $R3$ with $m=\floor{\log_2{t}}$ with $\epsilon\sim U(0,\,1)$ Bottom picture: empirical fitness distribution corresponding to the last cumulative degree plot. Notice that the empirical fitness distribution resembles the cumulative degree by fitness. The plots exhibit no spike. []{data-label="pics:m_log_t"}](CumDeg_fitnessLog_BBNostro_100000.png "fig:"){width=".3\textwidth"} ![Cumulative degree grouped by fitness in Regime $R3$ with $m=\floor{\log_2{t}}$ with $\epsilon\sim U(0,\,1)$ Bottom picture: empirical fitness distribution corresponding to the last cumulative degree plot. Notice that the empirical fitness distribution resembles the cumulative degree by fitness. The plots exhibit no spike. []{data-label="pics:m_log_t"}](CumDeg_fitnessLog_BBNostro_500000.png "fig:"){width=".3\textwidth"}
![Cumulative degree grouped by fitness in Regime $R3$ with $m=\floor{\log_2{t}}$ with $\epsilon\sim U(0,\,1)$ Bottom picture: empirical fitness distribution corresponding to the last cumulative degree plot. Notice that the empirical fitness distribution resembles the cumulative degree by fitness. The plots exhibit no spike. []{data-label="pics:m_log_t"}](FitnessFrequency_oLogT_500000.png)
![Cumulative degree grouped by fitness in Regime $R3$ with $m=\floor{\sqrt t}$ with $\epsilon\sim U(0,\,1)$ Bottom picture: empirical fitness distribution corresponding to the last cumulative degree plot. Notice that the empirical fitness distribution resembles the cumulative degree by fitness. The plots exhibit no spike.[]{data-label="pics:m_sqrt_t"}](CumDeg_fitnessSqrt_BBNostro_10000.png "fig:"){width=".3\textwidth"}![Cumulative degree grouped by fitness in Regime $R3$ with $m=\floor{\sqrt t}$ with $\epsilon\sim U(0,\,1)$ Bottom picture: empirical fitness distribution corresponding to the last cumulative degree plot. Notice that the empirical fitness distribution resembles the cumulative degree by fitness. The plots exhibit no spike.[]{data-label="pics:m_sqrt_t"}](CumDeg_fitnessSqrt_BBNostro_100000.png "fig:"){width=".3\textwidth"} ![Cumulative degree grouped by fitness in Regime $R3$ with $m=\floor{\sqrt t}$ with $\epsilon\sim U(0,\,1)$ Bottom picture: empirical fitness distribution corresponding to the last cumulative degree plot. Notice that the empirical fitness distribution resembles the cumulative degree by fitness. The plots exhibit no spike.[]{data-label="pics:m_sqrt_t"}](CumDeg_fitnessSqrt_BBNostro_500000.png "fig:"){width=".3\textwidth"}
![Cumulative degree grouped by fitness in Regime $R3$ with $m=\floor{\sqrt t}$ with $\epsilon\sim U(0,\,1)$ Bottom picture: empirical fitness distribution corresponding to the last cumulative degree plot. Notice that the empirical fitness distribution resembles the cumulative degree by fitness. The plots exhibit no spike.[]{data-label="pics:m_sqrt_t"}](FitnessFrequency_sqrtT_500000.png)
![Cumulative degree grouped by fitness in Regime $R3$ with $m=t$ with $\epsilon\sim U(0,\,1)$. Bottom picture: empirical fitness distribution corresponding to the last cumulative degree plot. As expected, the fitness distribution is uniform in $[0,\,\mu_\eps t]$. In particular $\mu_\eps=1/2,$ $t=100000$, and $\mu_\eps t\approx 50000.$ []{data-label="pics:m_t"}](BBNostro_10000_Unif.png "fig:"){width=".3\textwidth"}![Cumulative degree grouped by fitness in Regime $R3$ with $m=t$ with $\epsilon\sim U(0,\,1)$. Bottom picture: empirical fitness distribution corresponding to the last cumulative degree plot. As expected, the fitness distribution is uniform in $[0,\,\mu_\eps t]$. In particular $\mu_\eps=1/2,$ $t=100000$, and $\mu_\eps t\approx 50000.$ []{data-label="pics:m_t"}](BBNostro_100000_Unif.png "fig:"){width=".3\textwidth"}
![Cumulative degree grouped by fitness in Regime $R3$ with $m=t$ with $\epsilon\sim U(0,\,1)$. Bottom picture: empirical fitness distribution corresponding to the last cumulative degree plot. As expected, the fitness distribution is uniform in $[0,\,\mu_\eps t]$. In particular $\mu_\eps=1/2,$ $t=100000$, and $\mu_\eps t\approx 50000.$ []{data-label="pics:m_t"}](FitnessFrequency_100000_oT.png)
We expect our results to be universal regardless of the increment distribution. In order to properly address this topic, we need to identify two fitness families. [@mailler2019competing] propose two fitness categories in the context of competing growth processes and dynamical networks. The difference arises essentially in the behavior at the maximal fitness value (regular variation vs. exponential behavior) that implies a different treatment of the two regarding condensation. The families are:
1. bounded random variables in the maximum domain of attraction of the Weibull distribution eg. Beta distribution [@embrechts2013modelling Section 3.3.2];
2. \[item:Gumbel\] bounded random variables in the maximum domain of attraction of the Gumbel distribution eg. those with survival function [@embrechts2013modelling Section 3.3.3]. $$\label{eq:eps_G}\overline F(x)=\exp(-x/(1-x)),\quad x\in[0,\,1].$$
So far we have used in our simulations Beta-distributed increments. In order to better support our claims, we provide a realisation of our model in $R3$ with increments belonging to Class \[item:Gumbel\]. Namely, we will use increments distributed as . As one can notice, the behavior shown in Figure \[pics:m\_t\_vonMises\] is qualitatively similar to Figure \[pics:m\_t\]. The intuition behind this is that the central limit theorem works regardless of the initial increment distribution.
![Cumulative degree grouped by fitness in Regime $R3$ with $m=t$ with increments distributed as . Bottom picture: empirical fitness distribution corresponding to the last cumulative degree plot. As expected, the fitness distribution is uniform in $[0,\,\mu_\eps t]$. In particular $\mu_\eps=1/2,$ $t=100000$, and $\mu_\eps t\approx 50000.$ []{data-label="pics:m_t_vonMises"}](BBNostro_oT_Mises_10000.png "fig:"){width=".3\textwidth"}![Cumulative degree grouped by fitness in Regime $R3$ with $m=t$ with increments distributed as . Bottom picture: empirical fitness distribution corresponding to the last cumulative degree plot. As expected, the fitness distribution is uniform in $[0,\,\mu_\eps t]$. In particular $\mu_\eps=1/2,$ $t=100000$, and $\mu_\eps t\approx 50000.$ []{data-label="pics:m_t_vonMises"}](BBNostro_oT_Mises_100000.png "fig:"){width=".3\textwidth"}
![Cumulative degree grouped by fitness in Regime $R3$ with $m=t$ with increments distributed as . Bottom picture: empirical fitness distribution corresponding to the last cumulative degree plot. As expected, the fitness distribution is uniform in $[0,\,\mu_\eps t]$. In particular $\mu_\eps=1/2,$ $t=100000$, and $\mu_\eps t\approx 50000.$ []{data-label="pics:m_t_vonMises"}](FitnessFrequency_oT_Mises_100000.png)
Concluding remarks {#sec:concl}
==================
As mentioned in the Introduction most the main tools (urn models, continuous-time branching processes etc) developed to analyze preferential attachment models with fitness are still not able to treat dynamical fitness models. This is why the behavior of these models poses an interesting mathematical challenge. In this paper we started the investigation, both mathematical and empirical, of these models. We believe that a rigorous analysis of dynamical fitness preferential attachment graphs can shed light on the existence of universality classes for random graphs. In particular this can justify the use of the Barabási–Albert and the Bianconi–Barabási models in applications. As an example, since the attachment probability of a graph is hard to estimate, knowing that the benchmark models are robust under bounded fluctuations of the fitness makes them suitable to fit observed networks.
Finally, a rigorous study of Regime $R3$ is advocated. The reason for this is that it creates a new universal model where the phase transition seems not to depend anymore on the fitness but rather on the speed of the fitness growth.
[^1]: With respect to the fitness law.
[^2]: In we are summing all increments in the tree. Therefore we drop the dependence of $\eps$ on a vertex $v$ since the increments are i.i.d.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: '[[$J/\psi$]{}]{} production has been measured in Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions at [[$\sqrt{s_{NN}}$]{}]{} = 200 GeV by the PHENIX experiment at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) during 2004 and 2005, respectively, at mid-rapidity ($|\eta| \le$ 0.35) via [[$J/\psi$]{}]{} $\rightarrow$ [[$e^{+}e^{-}$]{}]{} decay and at forward rapidity (1.2 $\le | \eta | \le$ 2.2) via [[$J/\psi$]{}]{} $\rightarrow$ [[$\mu^{+}\mu^{-}$]{}]{} decay. The nuclear modification factor ($R_{AA}$) of $J/\psi$ is presented as a function of the collision centrality for Au+Au collisions (final results) and Cu+Cu collisions (preliminary results) in both rapidity windows. These results are compared to SPS results at lower energy and to various theoretical calculations.'
address: 'Center for Nuclear Study, Graduate School of Science, the University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-0033, JAPAN'
author:
- 'T. Gunji (for the PHENIX Collaboration)'
title: 'Centrality Dependence of [[$J/\psi$]{}]{} Production in Au+Au and Cu+Cu Collisions by the PHENIX Experiment at RHIC'
---
Introduction
============
Heavy quarkonia ($J/\psi$, $\psi^{\prime}$, $\chi_{c}$ and $\Upsilon$) has long been considered as one of the most promising probes for the deconfinement of the hot and dense QCD medium. In the deconfined medium, above a critical temperature $T_c$, the yield of heavy quarkonia is predicted to be suppressed due to the dynamical color screening effect [@bib:1]. The dissociation temperature depends on the binding energy of quarkonia and is extracted to be $\sim$2$T_{c}$ for $J/\psi$ and $\sim$1.1$T_{c}$ for $\psi^{\prime}$ and $\chi_c$ from quenched lattice QCD calculations [@bib:2]. While the primordial $J/\psi$ is expected to be dissolved in the deconfined medium, the $J/\psi$ yield is also expected to be enhanced at RHIC energy due to the abundant creation of $c\bar c$ pairs and the subsequent recombination of uncorrelated $c\bar c$ pairs in the medium and/or at the hadronization stage [@bib:3].
Cold nuclear matter effects (CNM) such as nuclear absorption and gluon shadowing are expected to modify the [[$J/\psi$]{}]{} yield. [[$J/\psi$]{}]{} measurement in $d$+Au collisions by PHENIX has shown that CNM effects are smaller at RHIC than those observed at SPS energies [@bib:4].
PHENIX Experiment and Data Analysis
===================================
The PHENIX experiment consists of two central arm spectrometers, each of which covers the pseudo-rapidity range $|\eta| < 0.35$ and 90 degrees in azimuthal angle, and two forward spectrometers covering $1.2<|\eta|<2.4$ with full azimuthal acceptance [@bib:phenix]. The [[$J/\psi$]{}]{} yield is obtained from the unlike-sign dilepton invariant mass spectrum after subtracting combinatorial background using an event mixing method for each centrality class, transverse momentum and rapidity bin. Finally, the numbers of reconstructed $J/\psi$’s are $\sim$1000 for the di-electron channel and $\sim$4500 for the di-muon channel in minimum bias Au+Au collisions. The invariant $J/\psi$ yield is extracted by correcting the number of recorded events for the acceptance and efficiency of the spectrometers [@bib:jpsi_auau]. The [[$J/\psi$]{}]{} yield measured in 2005 $p+p$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}$=200 GeV [@bib:jpsi_pp] was used in the calculation of [[$R_{AA}$]{}]{} for Au+Au collisions.
Results
=======
Fig. \[fig:raa\_rhic\] (left) shows [[$R_{AA}$]{}]{} of [[$J/\psi$]{}]{} as a function of the number of participants $N_{part}$ in Au+Au (circle symbols) and Cu+Cu collisions (square symbols) at mid-rapidity (closed symbols) and at forward-rapidity (open symbols). [[$R_{AA}$]{}]{} is similar between mid-rapidity and forward-rapidity up to $N_{part}\sim100$ and stronger suppression is observed at forward-rapidity for $N_{part}\ge100$. Fig. \[fig:raa\_rhic\] (right) shows the ratio of [[$R_{AA}$]{}]{} at forward-rapidity to that at mid-rapidity, which goes down to $\sim$0.6 for $N_{part}\ge100$.
The left and middle panels of Fig. \[fig:raa\_comp\] show comparison of [[$R_{AA}$]{}]{} in Au+Au collisions to the models involving only the dissociation of [[$J/\psi$]{}]{} by comoving partons and hadrons and by thermal gluons, respectively [@bib:capela; @bib:rapp1; @bib:nuxu1]. These models overestimate [[$J/\psi$]{}]{} suppression observed at mid-rapidity at RHIC. The predictions, which take into account the recombination of [[$J/\psi$]{}]{} from $c\bar{c}$ pairs in the medium or at hadronization stage, are shown in the right panel of Fig. \[fig:raa\_comp\] [@bib:rapp1; @bib:nuxu1; @bib:thews; @bib:anton; @bib:brat]. They match the data better than the models with dissociation only. However, charm production and its modifications in Au+Au collisions, which are input information for recombination scenario, are unclear and need to be understood. From the experimental side, measurement of [[$J/\psi$]{}]{} azimuthal anisotropy will provide useful and direct information on recombination of [[$J/\psi$]{}]{}, which will be done in upcoming Au+Au data taking.
To extract the final state effects, [[$R_{AA}$]{}]{} was divided by that expected from CNM effects ([[$R_{AA}$]{}]{}/CNM). CNM effects in Au+Au collisions were extrapolated from those in $d$+Au collisions [@bib:vogt]. Fig. \[fig:saa\] (left) shows [[$R_{AA}$]{}]{}/CNM as a function of Bjorken energy density in NA50 Pb+Pb collisions ([[$\sqrt{s_{NN}}$]{}]{}=17.3 GeV), NA60 In+In collisions ([[$\sqrt{s_{NN}}$]{}]{}=17.3 GeV) and Au+Au collisions ([[$\sqrt{s_{NN}}$]{}]{}=200 GeV). The formation time here is assumed to be 1 fm/$c$ for both SPS and RHIC, which could be larger than 1 fm/$c$ at the lower SPS energy and smaller at the higher RHIC energy. A nuclear absorption cross section of 1 mb was used in the calculation of [[$R_{AA}$]{}]{}/CNM for RHIC and the additional systematical uncertainties from CNM effects, which are shown as boxes, were estimated using nuclear absorption cross sections of 0 mb and 2 mb.
[[$J/\psi$]{}]{} suppression at SPS can be interpreted as the melting of only $\chi_{c}$ and $\psi^{\prime}$ since they are expected to be dissolved at lower temperature than $J/\psi$ and they contribute $\sim$40% of its total yield via decay (feed-down) [@bib:melt]. It is seen that [[$J/\psi$]{}]{} suppression at RHIC is stronger than the expectation from only $\chi_{c}$ and $\psi^{\prime}$ melting in central collisions. However, the error is too large to conclude that direct produced $J/\psi$’s are suppressed at RHIC and a more precise measurement of CNM effects is urgently needed. Also the fraction of $J/\psi$ from $\chi_{c}$ and $\psi^{\prime}$ decay needs to be measured at RHIC energy. Fig. \[fig:saa\] (right) shows the comparison of [[$R_{AA}$]{}]{}to the threshold model, which is associated with the onset of suppression of directly produced $J/\psi$ [@bib:threshold] and reproduce the tendency of [[$J/\psi$]{}]{} suppression at mid-rapidity.
Summary
=======
PHENIX measured the [[$J/\psi$]{}]{} yield in Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions at [[$\sqrt{s_{NN}}$]{}]{} = 200 GeV at mid-rapidity and forward-rapidity. The stronger suppression is observed at forward-rapidity for $N_{part}\ge100$. The destruction of [[$J/\psi$]{}]{} by thermal gluons does not reproduce the observed suppression and dissociation/recombination scenario is favored at RHIC energy. However, charm production and its modifications in medium are unclear and need to be understood. [[$R_{AA}$]{}]{}/CNM at RHIC shows that the [[$J/\psi$]{}]{} suppression seems to be stronger than expected from the melting of only $\chi_{c}$ and $\psi^{\prime}$ in central collisions. However, the error is too large to draw a firm conclusion. What should be done in the future experiments is to measure CNM effects precisely, the feed-down contribution from $\chi_{c}$ and $\psi^{\prime}$ at RHIC energy and also the azimuthal anisotropy of [[$J/\psi$]{}]{}, which provide more detailed information to understand the medium effects for [[$J/\psi$]{}]{} production in heavy ion collisions.
References {#references .unnumbered}
==========
[10]{} T. Matsui and H. Satz, Phys. Lett. [**B178**]{} (1986) 416. M. Asakawa and T. Hatsuda, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**92**]{} (2004) 012001.\
S. Datta, [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. [**[D69]{}**]{} (2004) 094507. L. Grandchamp [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**92**]{} (2004) 212301. S. S. Adler [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**96**]{} (2006) 012304. K. Adcox [*et al.*]{}, Nucl. Instr. Meth. [**A499**]{} (2003) 469 A. Adare [*et al.*]{}, nucl-ex/0611020. A. Adare [*et al.*]{}, hep-ex/0611020. M. C. Abreu [*et al.*]{}, Eur. Phys. J. [**[C39]{}**]{} (2005) 335. R. Vogt, nucl-th/0507027. A. Capella and E. G. Ferreiro, nucl-th/0505032. R. Rapp, Eur. Phys. J. [**[C43]{}**]{} (2005) 91, hep-ph/0502208. L. Yan, P. Zhuang, Nu Xu, nucl-th/0608010. R. Thews, Phys. Rev. [**[C73]{}**]{} (2006) 014904. A. Andronic, P. Braun-Munzinger, K. Redlich and J. Stachel, nucl-th/0611023. W. Cassing, E. L. Bratkovskaya, S. Juchem, Nucl. Phys. [**[A674]{}**]{} (2000) 249. F. Karsch, D. Kharzeev and H. Satz, Phys. Lett. [**B637**]{} (2006) 75. A. K. Chaudhuri, nucl-th/0610031.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'It is widely believed that axions are ubiquitous in string theory and could be the dark matter. The peculiar features of the axion dark matter are coherent oscillations and a coupling to the electromagnetic field through the Chern-Simons term. In this paper, we study consequences of these two features of the axion with the mass in a range from $10^{-13}\,{\rm eV}$ to $10^{3}\,{\rm eV}$. First, we study the parametric resonance of electromagnetic waves induced by the coherent oscillation of the axion. As a result of the resonance, the amplitude of the electromagnetic waves is enhanced and the circularly polarized monochromatic waves will be generated. Second, we study the velocity of light in the background of the axion dark matter. In the presence of the Chern-Simons term, the dispersion relation is modified and the speed of light will oscillate in time. It turns out that the change of speed of light would be difficult to observe. We argue that the future radio wave observations of the resonance can give rise to a stronger constraint on the coupling constant and/or the density of the axion dark matter.'
author:
- Daiske Yoshida
- Jiro Soda
bibliography:
- 'AxionResonanceEM.bib'
title: Electromagnetic waves propagating in the string axiverse
---
Introduction
============
According to string theory, axions are ubiquitous in the universe, dubbed the string axiverse [@Svrcek:2006yi; @Arvanitaki:2009fg; @Cicoli:2012sz; @Halverson:2017deq; @Stott:2017hvl]. Remarkably, the axions could be a dark component of the universe and might be a dominant piece of the dark matter [@Preskill:1982cy; @Abbott:1982af; @Dine:1982ah; @Hu:2000ke; @Marsh:2015xka; @Hui:2016ltb; @Lee:2017qve]. In fact, it is difficult to discriminate between the axion dark matter and the cold dark matter on large scales. Therefore, it is important to find a method for proving the existence of the axions.
The key feature of the axion dark matter is its coherent oscillation. In particular, if the axion has the mass $10^{-23}\,{\rm eV}$, the time scale of the oscillation is a few years and the oscillation produces the oscillation in the gravitational potential. Hence, one can use pulsar timing arrays to observe oscillating gravitational potential [@Khmelnitsky:2013lxt; @Porayko:2014rfa; @Aoki:2016mtn; @Aoki:2017ehb]. There are other methods proposed for detecting the axion dark matter, for example, the super-radiance instability of the axion field in the rotating black holes constraining the mass range $10^{-20}\sim10^{-10}\,{\rm eV}$ [@Arvanitaki:2009fg; @Arvanitaki:2010sy; @Yoshino:2015nsa; @Brito:2017zvb], gravitational wave interferometers for probing the axion with mass $10^{-22}\sim10^{-20}\,{\rm eV}$ [@Aoki:2016kwl], the dynamical resonance of the binary pulsars probing the mass range $10^{-23}\sim10^{-21}\,{\rm eV}$ [@Blas:2016ddr], and cosmological axion oscillations for exploring a wide mass range [@Soda:2017dsu; @Zhang:2017dpp].
Recently, we have studied the gravitational waves in dynamical Chern-Simons gravity in the axion dark matter background [@Yoshida:2017cjl]. Then, we found that there occurs the parametric resonance of gravitational waves with parity-violation, that is, circularly polarized gravitational waves which allows us to probe the axions with the mass range $10^{-14}\sim10^{-10}\,{\rm eV}$.
Apparently, we can expect the same phenomena for electromagnetic waves. Since electromagnetic waves are often used to explore the universe, it is worth studying the phenomena in detail. The electrodynamics in the presence of the axion is called the axion electrodynamics [@Wilczek:1987mv] which has the Chern-Simons coupling between the axion and the gauge field. We see this interaction induces the parametric resonance of electromagnetic waves and also yields to the oscillation of the speed of light in time. In this paper, we study these two effects to gives rise to a new way to explore the axion dark matter in a mass range $10^{-13}\sim10^{3}\,{\rm eV}$ corresponding to the observable frequency range of electromagnetic waves $10{\rm Hz}\sim10^{5}\,{\rm THz}$. Note that the axions with the mass above $10^{3}$ eV are unstable against decaying into photons [@Lee:2017qve; @Hu:2000ke; @Marsh:2015xka; @Hui:2016ltb].
The organization of the paper is as follows. In Sec. II, we introduce the axion electrodynamics. In Sec. III, we derive wave equations in the oscillating axion background. In Sec. IV, we study the parametric resonance in the axion background. In Sec. V, we investigate the speed of light. The final section is devoted to conclusion.
Axion electrodynamics
=====================
The action of the axion electrodynamics is given by $$S=S_{{\rm EM}}+S_{{\rm \Phi}}+S_{{\rm int}}\ ,$$ where each part of this action reads $$\begin{aligned}S_{{\rm EM}}\equiv & \int dx^{4}\sqrt{-g}\left(-\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}\right),\\
S_{{\rm \Phi}}\equiv & \int dx^{4}\sqrt{-g}\left(-\frac{1}{2}\left(\nabla_{\!\mu}{\rm \Phi}\right)\left(\nabla^{\mu}{\rm \Phi}\right)-U({\rm \Phi})\right)\ ,\\
S_{{\rm int}}\equiv & \int dx^{4}\sqrt{-g}\left(-\frac{\lambda}{4}{\rm \Phi}F_{\mu\nu}\tilde{F}^{\mu\nu}\right).
\end{aligned}$$ Here $\lambda$ is a coupling constant, $U({\rm \Phi})$ is a potential function for an axion field ${\rm \Phi}$, and $A^{\mu}=(A^{0},\bm{A})$ is a gauge field with the field strength $F_{\mu\nu}\equiv\nabla_{\!\mu}A_{\nu}-\nabla_{\!\nu}A_{\mu}$. The dual of the field strength $\tilde{F}^{\mu\nu}$ is defined by $$\tilde{F}^{\mu\nu}=\frac{1}{2}\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}F_{\rho\sigma},$$ where the anti-symmetrical epsilon tensor $\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}$ is given by $$\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}\equiv\frac{1}{\sqrt{-g}}\tilde{\epsilon}^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}\hspace{1em}\text{and}\hspace{1em}\tilde{\epsilon}^{0123}=+1.$$ Here, $\tilde{\epsilon}^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}$ is the Levi-Civita symbol.
From the above action, we get the equations of motion for the electromagnetic waves
$$\nabla_{\!\mu}F^{\alpha\mu}+\frac{\lambda}{2}\epsilon^{\alpha\mu\nu\lambda}\left(\nabla_{\!\mu}{\rm \Phi}\right)F_{\nu\lambda}=0$$
and the equation for the axion field $$\nabla_{\!\mu}\nabla^{\mu}{\rm \Phi}-\frac{d}{d{\rm \Phi}}U({\rm \Phi})=\frac{\lambda}{4}F_{\mu\nu}\tilde{F}^{\mu\nu}.$$ Now, we can study electromagnetic wave propagation in the axion background.
Wave equations in the axiverse
===============================
We assume the background spacetime is the Minkowski spacetime, because the dynamics of the cosmic expansion can be neglected on inter-galactic scales [@Yoshida:2017fao]. Then, the metric reads $$\begin{aligned}ds^{2} & =\,\eta_{\mu\nu}\,dx^{\mu}\,dx^{\nu}\\
& =\,-dt^{2}+dx^{2}+dy^{2}+dz^{2}\ .
\end{aligned}$$ Now, the covariant derivative is simply reduced to a partial derivative $\partial_{\mu}$. We are interested in the time-evolution of the gauge field in the axion background. The gauge field is considered as the perturbed field $A_{\mu}=\delta A_{\mu}$. Next, we consider a homogeneous axion background $${\rm \Phi}(t,\bm{x})={\rm \Phi}(t)\ .$$ Then, the equation of motion of axion is given by $$(\partial_{t}^{2}+m^{2}){\rm \Phi}(t)\simeq0\ .$$ Here, we assumed the potential of the axion as $$U({\rm {\rm \Phi}})=\frac{1}{2}m^{2}{\rm \Phi}^{2}\ .$$ It is easy to obtain the solution $${\rm \Phi}(t)={\rm \Phi}_{0}\cos(m\,t)\ ,$$ where ${\rm \Phi}_{0}$ is determined by the density of the dark matter $\rho$ and the mass of the axion $m$ as $${\rm \Phi}_{0}=\frac{\sqrt{2\rho}}{m}\ .$$ The equations of motion of the axion electrodynamics can be deduced as $$\begin{aligned}\partial_{\mu}\delta\!F^{0\mu} & =0\ ,\\
\partial_{\mu}\delta\!F^{i\mu}-\lambda\epsilon^{ijk}\left(\partial_{0}\Phi\right)\partial_{j}\delta\!A_{k} & =0.
\end{aligned}$$ Here, the epsilon tensor in this coordinate system is defined as $$\epsilon^{ijk}\equiv\epsilon^{tijk}.$$ The time-component of the modified Maxwell equation is the same as the conventional Maxwell equation.
This modified Maxwell theory is invariant under the gauge transformation, $$A_{\mu}\rightarrow A'_{\mu}=A_{\mu}+\partial_{\mu}\Lambda.$$ So, we can adopt the radiation gauge for the electromagnetic field, $$\delta\!A^{0}=0,\hspace{1em}\nabla\cdot\delta\!\bm{A}=0,$$ and we get the wave equations of the axion electrodynamics, $$\Box\,\delta\!\bm{A}+\lambda\left(\partial_{0}\Phi\right)(\nabla\times\delta\!\bm{A})=0,$$ where we defined the derivative operators $\Box\equiv\nabla_{\!\mu}\nabla^{\mu}$ and $\nabla\equiv(\partial_{x},\partial_{y},\partial_{z})$.
We can diagonalize the wave equations with the circular polarization basis. In Fourier space, the vector field $\delta\!\bm{A}$ is expressed by $$\delta\!\bm{A}\equiv\int\bm{a}(t)\,e^{i\bm{k}\cdot\bm{x}}d\bm{k}\ ,$$ where $\bm{k}$ is the wave number vector. The transverse gauge condition can be written as $$\bm{k}\cdot\bm{a}(t)=0\ .$$ We can take polarization basis vectors, $\bm{e}_{(1)},\,\,\bm{e}_{(2)}$, satisfying the following conditions $$\begin{aligned}
& & \bm{e}_{(I)}\cdot\bm{k}=0,\\
& & \bm{e}_{(I)}\cdot\bm{e}_{(J)}=\delta_{IJ}\ ,\hspace{1em}\text{for }I,\,J=(1,2)\\
& & \bm{e}_{(1)}\times\bm{e}_{(2)}=\frac{\bm{k}}{k}\ .\end{aligned}$$ Here, we defined $k=|\bm{k}|$. Thus, the Fourier coefficient $\bm{a}(t)$ is expanded as $$\bm{a}(t)=\sum_{I=1,2}a_{I}(t)\bm{e}_{(I)}.$$ Alternatively, we can use the circular polarization basis $$\bm{e}_{{\rm R}}\equiv\frac{\bm{e}_{(1)}+i\bm{e}_{(2)}}{\sqrt{2}}\hspace{1em}\text{and}\hspace{1em}\bm{e}_{{\rm L}}\equiv\frac{\bm{e}_{(1)}-i\bm{e}_{(2)}}{\sqrt{2}}.$$ Now, the Fourier coefficient $\bm{a}(t)$ is expanded as $$\bm{a}(t)=\sum_{B={\rm L},{\rm R}}a_{B}(t)\bm{e}_{B}.$$ Note that the components are related as $$a_{{\rm R}}=a_{(1)}-i\,a_{(2)},\hspace{1em}a_{{\rm L}}=a_{(1)}+i\,a_{(2)}.$$ This basis is useful for studying the parity violation. Using the relation $$\begin{aligned}
\epsilon^{ijk}\frac{k^{j}}{k}\bm{e}_{R/L}^{k}=\mp i\bm{e}_{R/L}^{i}\end{aligned}$$ we can diagonalize the wave equations as $${\displaystyle \ddot{a}_{B}+k^{2}\left(1+\epsilon_{B}\lambda\frac{m}{k}\Phi_{0}\sin(mt)\right)a_{B}=0}$$ where $$\begin{array}{c}
\epsilon_{B}=\begin{cases}
1 & :B={\rm R}\ ,\\
-1 & :B={\rm L}\ .
\end{cases}\end{array}$$ This equation is nothing but the Mathieu equation describing the parametric resonance. Therefore, the growth rate is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma=\frac{1}{4}\lambda m\Phi_{0}\ .\end{aligned}$$ Since the axion has a non-trivial profile, the parity symmetry is violated in the equation of motion. Thus, the circular polarization should be generated. To be more precise, it is useful to define the polarization-rate of the electromagnetic field $${\rm parity}(t)\equiv\frac{\left|\dot{a}_{{\rm R}}\right|^{2}-\left|\dot{a}_{{\rm L}}\right|^{2}}{\left|\dot{a}_{{\rm R}}\right|^{2}+\left|\dot{a}_{{\rm L}}\right|^{2}}.$$ Due to the parametric amplification, the growth of one of the modes is larger that the other mode. In that case, we should have ${\rm parity}(t)\simeq\pm1$. Moreover, since the dispersion relation is modified by the axion, the speed of light is oscillating. We study the effects of these phenomena on electromagnetic waves in the following.
Parametric resonance
====================
We assume that a lot of clumps whose sizes are about the Jeans length $L_{{\rm a}}$ exist in the core of Galaxy and the axion is coherently oscillating there. These fuzzy object have the interaction with the electromagnetic fields through the Chern-Simons coupling. Thus, the coherent oscillations of the axion induce the parametric resonance of electromagnetic waves.
From the general theory of the parametric resonance, the resonance wave number $k_{{\rm r}}$ is given by $$k_{{\rm r}}=\frac{m}{2}.$$ It is convenient to convert $k_{{\rm r}}$ into the resonance frequency $f_{{\rm r}}$ of the waves as $$f_{{\rm r}}=1.2\times10^{4}\,{\rm Hz}\times\left(\frac{m}{10^{-10}\,{\rm eV}}\right).$$ This frequency corresponds to VLF (very low frequency) band, $3\sim30\,{\rm kHz}$. The existing FAST (Five-hundred-meter Aperture Spherical radio Telescope) has the frequency band from $70\,{\rm MHz}$ to $3\,{\rm GHz}$ in [@Nan:2011um]. Hence, this detector can survey the mass range from $10^{-7}\,{\rm eV}$ to $10^{-5}\,{\rm eV}$. The SKA (Square Kilometre Array) has the frequency from $50$ MHz to $350$ MHz (SKA-low) and from $350$ MHz to $14$ GHz [@Dewdney2015]. Now, this detector will survey the mass range from $10^{-7}\,{\rm eV}$ to $10^{-4}\,{\rm eV}$. If we consider the heavier axion with mass $m\sim1\,{\rm eV}$, the resonance frequency is that of the visible light around $10^{2}\,{\rm THz}$.
On halo scales of the Galaxy, the energy density of the axion dark matter is about $0.3\,{\rm GeV/cm^{3}}$. Hence, the growth rate can be estimated as $$\Gamma_{{\rm max}}=5.4\times10^{-29}\,{\rm eV}\times\left(\frac{\lambda}{(10^{16}\,{\rm GeV})^{-1}}\right)\sqrt{\frac{\rho}{0.3\,{\rm GeV/cm^{3}}}}.$$ Notice that this quantity is independent of the mass of the axion. In fact, the growth rate is determined by the coupling constant and the energy density of the axion dark matter. From this growth rate, we can estimate the time scale, $t_{\times10}$, for the amplitude to become ten times, as $$t_{\times10}=4.3\times10^{28}\,{\rm eV}^{-1}\times\left(\frac{(10^{16}\,{\rm GeV})^{-1}}{\lambda}\right)\sqrt{\frac{0.3\,{\rm GeV/cm^{3}}}{\rho}}.$$ Note that the time corresponding to 1pc is given by $t_{1{\rm pc}}\simeq1.6\times10^{23}\,{\rm eV^{-1}}$. Thus, after the $10$ Mpc propagation, the amplitude will be enhanced by $10^{10^{2}}$ times. Therefore, we can obtain a stringent constrain on the coupling constant and/or the fraction of the axion dark matter in the universe.
The parametric resonance occurs in the frequency band $$f_{{\rm r}}-\frac{\Delta f}{2}\lesssim f_{{\rm r}}\lesssim f_{{\rm r}}+\frac{\Delta f}{2}\ ,$$ where $\Delta f$ is given by $$\Delta f=2.6\times10^{-14}\,{\rm Hz}\times\left(\frac{\lambda}{(10^{16}\,{\rm GeV})^{-1}}\right)\sqrt{\frac{\rho}{0.3\,{\rm GeV/cm^{3}}}}\ .$$ Since the band is very narrow, the circularly polarized monochromatic wave grows sharply at the resonance frequency.
If the electromagnetic waves go through near the core of the Galaxy, the energy density of dark matter gets enhanced $$\rho\lesssim0.3\times10^{6}\,{\rm GeV/cm^{3}}.$$ In this situation, $t_{\times10}$ becomes $$\begin{aligned}t_{\times10}= & 4.3\times10^{25}\,{\rm eV}^{-1}\\
& \hspace{1em}\times\left(\frac{(10^{16}\,{\rm GeV})^{-1}}{\lambda}\right)\sqrt{\frac{0.3\times10^{6}\,{\rm GeV/cm^{3}}}{\rho}}
\end{aligned}$$ From this estimation, the amplitude of waves going through the Galaxy core is further amplified by about $10^{2}$ times. At the resonance frequency, when the amplitudes of waves are highly amplified, the electromagnetic wave should be fully polarized, namely, ${\rm parity}(t)\simeq\pm1$.
If we detected the resonance signal, we would argue that the axion dark matter exist. If we did not detect the resonance signal, we would be able to give the constraint on the energy density or the coupling constant. Therefore, we can say that the future very long wavelength radio wave observations of this effect can give rise to stronger constraints on the coupling constant and/or the density of the axion dark matter.
The speed of light
==================
In axion electrodynamics, the dispersion relation in the axion background reads $$\omega^{2}=k^{2}\left(1+\epsilon_{A}\lambda\frac{m}{k}\Phi_{0}\,\sin\left(mt\right)\right).$$ The phase velocity $v_{{\rm p}}$ is given by $$v_{{\rm p}}\equiv\frac{\omega}{k}=\sqrt{1+\epsilon_{A}\lambda\frac{m}{k}\Phi_{0}\sin(mt)}.$$ Then, the deviation from the speed of light $\delta c_{{\rm p}}$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}\delta c_{{\rm p}} & \equiv\left|v_{{\rm p}}-1\right|\\
& \leq\left|\sqrt{1+\epsilon_{A}\lambda\frac{m}{k}\Phi_{0}}-1\right|\simeq\frac{\lambda\sqrt{\rho}}{\sqrt{2}k}.
\end{aligned}$$ For example, if we observe the visible light which is in the wavelength range $380\sim750\,{\rm nm}$, we find the relative deviation of the speed of light: $$\begin{aligned}\delta c_{{\rm p}} & \simeq4.3\times10^{-29}\\
& \times\left(\frac{\lambda}{(10^{16}\,{\rm GeV/cm^{3}})^{-1}}\right)\left(\frac{l_{{\rm em}}}{500\,{\rm nm}}\right)\sqrt{\frac{\rho}{0.3\,{\rm GeV/cm^{3}}}}.
\end{aligned}$$ Here, $l_{{\rm em}}$ is the wave length of the visible light.
In fact, the group velocity is more relevant to observations. The group velocity $v_{{\rm g}}$ is given by $$v_{{\rm g}}\equiv\frac{\partial\omega}{\partial k}=\frac{1}{2\omega}\left(2k+\epsilon_{A}\lambda m\Phi_{0}\sin\left(mt\right)\right).$$ The deviation from the speed of light $\delta c_{{\rm g}}$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}\delta c_{{\rm g}} & \equiv\left|v_{{\rm g}}-1\right|\\
& \simeq\left|1-\frac{1}{4}\lambda^{2}\frac{m^{2}}{k^{2}}\Phi_{0}^{2}\sin^{2}\left(mt\right)-1\right|\lesssim\frac{\lambda^{2}\rho}{2k^{2}}.
\end{aligned}$$ Notice that the linear term is canceled out in the above formula [^1] and the deviation of the group velocity is given by the square of that of the phase velocity $$\delta c_{{\rm g}}=(\delta c_{{\rm p}})^{2}.$$ Thus, we can estimate $\delta c_{{\rm g}}$ as $$\begin{aligned}\delta c_{{\rm g}} & \simeq1.8\times10^{-49}\\
& \times\left(\frac{\lambda}{(10^{16}\,{\rm GeV/cm^{3}})^{-1}}\right)^{2}\left(\frac{l_{{\rm em}}}{500\,{\rm nm}}\right)^{2}\left(\frac{\rho}{0.3\,{\rm GeV/cm^{3}}}\right).
\end{aligned}$$ The relative deviation from the speed of light $\delta c$ is constrained by observations of gamma-ray bursts [@Nemiroff:2012] as $$\delta c\lesssim10^{-21}\ .$$ Since $\delta c_{g}$ is much smaller than the current observational constraint, we can say that there is no constraint on the energy density of axion field or the coupling constant from the speed of light.
Conclusion
==========
Since the axion is one of the candidates for the dark matter, it is worth seeking a method for detecting axion. In this paper, we considered the axion with the mass range from $10^{-13}\,{\rm eV}$ to $10^{3}\,{\rm eV}$. We focused on two consequences of the coherent oscillation of the axion dark matter and a coupling to the electromagnetic field through the Chern-Simons term. First, we studied the parametric resonance of the gauge field induced by the coherently oscillating axion. It turned out that, as a result of the resonance, the amplitude of the electromagnetic waves is enhanced and the circularly polarized monochromatic waves are generated. We found that the future very long wavelength radio wave observations of this effect can give rise to stronger constraints on the coupling constant and/or the density of the axion dark matter. Second, we studied the velocity of light in the background of the axion dark matter. We found that the dispersion relation is modified and the speed of light shows oscillations in time, but this modification is too tiny to be observed.
In this paper, we have discussed the modification of the dispersion relations which leads to the change of the speed of light. However, this effect was very small in axion electrodynamics. This would also happen to gravitational waves. We report the detailed analysis in a future work.
We would like to thank Asuka Ito for useful discussions. We are grateful to Tomohiro Fujita for useful comments. D.Y. was supported by Grant-in-Aid for JSPS Research Fellow and JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP17J00490. J.S. was in part supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers JP17H02894, JP17K18778, JP15H05895 and JP17H06359.
[^1]: We thank Tomohiro Fujita for pointing out this fact.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'In order to examine the rotational effect around neutron star in tensor-vector-scalar (TeVeS) theory, we consider the slowly rotating relativistic stars with a uniform angular velocity. As a result, we find that similar to the case in general relativity (GR), the angular momentum is proportional to the angular velocity. Additionally, as the value of coupling constant $K$ becomes higher, the frame dragging in TeVeS becomes quite different distribution from that in GR, where we can also see the deviation even in the interior of star. While with smaller value of $K$, although the frame dragging approaches to that expected in GR, the induced vector field due to the rotation does not vanish and still exists. Thus, through the observations associated with relativistic object, one could be possible to distinguish the gravitational theory in strong field regime even in the case that the value of coupling constant $K$ is quite small.'
author:
- 'Hajime Sotani$^{1,2}$'
title: 'Slowly Rotating Relativistic Stars in Tensor-Vector-Scalar Theory'
---
Introduction {#sec:I}
============
In the weak gravitational field such as solar system, there are many experiments and the validity of general relativity (GR) has been shown, while the gravitational theory in the strong field regime are still unconstrained by the observations. However, the development of technology will be possible to observe compact objects with high accuracy and those observations could be used as a direct test of the gravitational theory in strong field regime [@Psaltis2008]. In fact, there are attempts to test the gravitational theory by using surface atomic line redshifts [@DeDeo2003] or gravitational waves emitted from the neutron stars [@Sotani2004]. In these works, they suggest the possibility to distinguish the scalar-tensor theory proposed in [@Damour1992] from GR.
As an alternative gravitational theory, the tensor-vector-scalar (TeVeS) theory has attracted considerable attention, which is proposed originally by Bekenstein [@Bekenstein2004] as a covariant theory for modified Newtonian dynamics [@Milgrom1983] (see [@Skordis2009] for review of TeVeS). The advantage to adopt this theory is possible to explain the galaxy rotational curves and the Tully-Fisher law without the existence of dark matter [@Bekenstein2004]. Additionally, TeVeS has successfully explained not only strong gravitational lensing [@Chen2006] but also the galaxy distribution through an evolving Universe without cold dark matter [@Dodelson2006]. In the strong gravitational region of TeVeS, the Schwarzschild solution was found by Giannios [@Giannios2005], and the Reissner-Nordström solution was found by Sagi and Bekenstein [@Sagi2008]. Furthermore, Lasky et al. derived the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff (TOV) equations in TeVeS and they produced the static, spherically symmetric neutron star models in TeVeS [@Paul2008].
Recently, there are some suggestions to distinguish TeVeS from GR by using some observations, i.e., with the redshift of the atomic spectral lines radiated from the surface of neutron star [@Paul2008], with the Shapiro delays of gravitational waves and photons or neutrinos [@Desai2008], and with the emitted gravitational waves from neutron stars [@Sotani2009a]. In this article, we examine the different way to distinguish TeVeS from GR, i.e., the rotational effect around neutron stars. For this purpose, we consider the slowly rotating neutron stars with a uniform angular velocity. The analysis of slowly rotating neutron star in GR has originally done by Hartle [@Hartle1967], and subsequently many works have done in this field. Actually, taking into account the rotational effect is more natural and more important. For example, due to the rotational effect, the new oscillation family, i.e., so-called $r$ mode, could be excited [@Miltos2008; @Erich2009]. So, this article would become a first step to consider the rotational effect in more complicated system in TeVeS.
This article is organized as follows. In the next section, we describe the fundamental parts of TeVeS and the equations to produce the non-rotating relativistic stellar models in TeVeS, which are corresponding to TOV equations in GR. In section \[sec:III\], we derive the equations to describe the slowly rotating relativistic stars. In order to discuss about the slowly rotating star models in TeVeS, as mentioned later, two variables are required, i.e., one is the variable shown the frame dragging and the other is the vector field induced by the rotation. In this section, we also show the numerical results for many stellar models. At last, we make a conclusion in section \[sec:IV\]. In this article, we adopt the unit of $c=G=1$, where $c$ and $G$ denote the speed of light and the gravitational constant, respectively, and the metric signature is $(-,+,+,+)$.
Stellar Models in TeVeS {#sec:II}
=======================
TeVeS {#sec:II-1}
-----
In this section, we briefly describe the fundamental parts of TeVeS, which are necessary for the calculations in this article (see for the details of this theory in [@Bekenstein2004]). TeVeS is constructed with three dynamical gravitational fields, i.e., an Einstein metric $g_{\mu\nu}$, a timelike 4-vector field ${\cal U}^\mu$, and a scalar field $\varphi$, in addition to a nondynamical scalar field $\sigma$. The vector field fulfills the normalization condition, $g_{\mu\nu}{\cal U}^\mu{\cal U}^\nu=-1$, and the physical metric is given by $$\begin{gathered}
\tilde{g}_{\mu\nu} = e^{-2\varphi}g_{\mu\nu} - 2{\cal U}_\mu{\cal U}_\nu\sinh(2\varphi),\end{gathered}$$ along which usual matter such as electromagnetic fields propagate. Hereafter, all quantities in the physical frame are denoted with a tilde, and any quantity without a tilde is in the Einstein frame. The total action of TeVeS, $S$, contains contributions from the three dynamical fields and a matter contribution, i.e., the Einstein-Hilbert action, $S_g$, the vector field’s action, $S_v$, the scalar’s action, $S_s$, and the matter action, $S_m$. These four parts of action can be written down as $$\begin{aligned}
S_g =& \frac{1}{16 \pi G} \int{g^{\alpha\beta}R_{\alpha\beta}\sqrt{-g}d^4x}, \\
S_v =& -\frac{K}{32\pi G}\int{\left[\left(g^{\alpha\beta}g^{\mu\nu}{\cal U}_{[\alpha,\mu]}{\cal U}_{[\beta,\nu]}\right)-\frac{2\lambda}{K}\left(g^{\mu\nu}{\cal U}_\mu{\cal U}_\nu+1\right)\right]\sqrt{-g}d^4x}, \\
S_s =& -\frac{1}{2k^2\ell^2G}\int{F(k\ell^2h^{\alpha\beta}\varphi_{,\alpha}\varphi_{,\beta})\sqrt{-g}d^4x}, \\
S_m =& \int{{\cal L}\left(\tilde{g}_{\mu\nu},f^\alpha,f^\alpha_{|\mu},\cdots\right)\sqrt{-\tilde{g}}d^4x},\end{aligned}$$ where ${\cal U}_{[\alpha,\beta]}\equiv{\cal U}_{\alpha,\beta}-{\cal U}_{\beta,\alpha}$, $h^{\alpha\beta}\equiv g^{\alpha\beta}-{\cal U}^\alpha{\cal U}^\beta$, $k$ and $K$ are positive dimensionless parameters associated with the scalar and vector fields respectively, $F$ is a dimensionless free function, $\ell$ is a constant length scale, $\lambda$ is a spacetime dependent Lagrange multiplier, $f$ denotes the field variables collectively, and the covariant derivative denoted by $|$ is taken with respect to $\tilde{g}_{\alpha\beta}$ (see [@Bekenstein2004] for details).
Although the free function, $F$, is not predicted by the theory, as mentioned later our results in this article are independent of this function and therefore our results are also independent from the value of $\ell$. The scalar field coupling, $k$, has been constrained by Bekenstein [@Bekenstein2004] to be $k\simeq 0.03$ by using planetary motions in the outer solar system. While, the restrictions on the vector field coupling, $K$, are less severe, but probably one should consider the range of $0<K<2$, because for $K>2$ one can show that the stellar pressure diverges from the stellar center outward and one can not construct the stellar models [@Paul2008]. Additionally, the Lagrange multiplier, $\lambda$, can be described as a function of field variables from the vector equation with the normalization condition (see Eq.(\[lambda00\])). Furthermore, we should notice about the propagation speed. That is, Bekenstein showed that TeVeS allows for superluminal propagation of tensor, vector, and scalar perturbations when $\varphi<0$ [@Bekenstein2004]. Using perturbations of the various fields in the physical frame, this statement was shown and was independent of the matter content of the model. Thus, in order to avoid the violating causality, the scalar field should not be negative. Namely, one should construct the neutron star model keeping that the scalar field be everywhere greater than or equal to zero. With this condition, the cosmological value of scalar field, $\varphi_c$, can be constrained as $\varphi_c{\, \raisebox{-0.8ex}{$\stackrel{\textstyle >}{\sim}$ }}0.001$ [@Paul2008].
By varying the total action, with respect to $g^{\mu\nu}$, one can obtain the field equations for the tensor field $$G_{\mu\nu} = 8\pi G \left[\tilde{T}_{\mu\nu}+\left(1-e^{-4\varphi}\right){\cal U}^\alpha
\tilde{T}_{\alpha(\mu}{\cal U}_{\nu)}+\tau_{\mu\nu}\right]+\Theta_{\mu\nu},
\label{Einstein}$$ where $\tilde{T}_{\mu\nu}$ is the energy-momentum tensor in the physical frame, $\tilde{T}_{\alpha(\mu}{\cal U}_{\nu)}\equiv\tilde{T}_{\alpha\mu}{\cal U}_{\nu}
+\tilde{T}_{\alpha\nu}{\cal U}_{\mu}$ and $G_{\mu\nu}$ is the Einstein tensor in the Einstein frame. Conservation of energy-momentum is therefore given in the physical frame as $\tilde{\nabla}_\mu \tilde{T}^{\mu\nu}=0$. The other sources in Eq.(\[Einstein\]) are given by $$\begin{aligned}
\tau_{\mu\nu} =& \sigma^2 \bigg[\varphi_{,\mu}\varphi_{,\nu}-\frac{1}{2}g^{\alpha\beta}
\varphi_{,\alpha}\varphi_{,\beta}g_{\mu\nu} - \frac{G\sigma^2}{4\ell^2}F(kG\sigma^2)
g_{\mu\nu}
- {\cal U}^\alpha \varphi_{,\alpha}\left({\cal U}_{(\mu}\varphi_{,\nu)}
-\frac{1}{2}{\cal U}^\beta\varphi_{,\beta}g_{\mu\nu}\right)\bigg], \label{tau} \\
\Theta_{\mu\nu} =& K\left(g^{\alpha\beta}{\cal U}_{[\alpha,\mu]}{\cal U}_{[\beta,\nu]}
- \frac{1}{4}g^{\gamma\delta}g^{\alpha\beta}{\cal U}_{[\gamma,\alpha]}{\cal U}_{[\delta,\beta]}
g_{\mu\nu}\right)
- \lambda {\cal U}_{\mu}{\cal U}_{\nu}.\end{aligned}$$ In the same fashion, by varying $S$ with respect to ${\cal U}_\mu$ and $\varphi$, one obtains the field equations for the vector and scalar fields; $$\begin{gathered}
K{{\cal U}^{[\alpha;\beta]}}_{;\beta} + \lambda {\cal U}^\alpha + 8\pi G\sigma^2{\cal U}^\beta
\varphi_{,\beta}g^{\alpha\gamma}\varphi_{,\gamma}
= 8\pi G \left(1-e^{-4\varphi}\right)g^{\alpha\mu}
{\cal U}^\beta\tilde{T}_{\mu\beta}, \label{vector} \\
\left[\mu(k\ell^2h^{\mu\nu}\varphi_{,\mu}\varphi_{,\nu})h^{\alpha\beta}\varphi_{,\alpha}\right]_{;\beta}
= kG\left[g^{\alpha\beta}+ \left(1+e^{-4\varphi}\right){\cal U}^\alpha{\cal U}^\beta\right]
\tilde{T}_{\alpha\beta}, \label{scalar}\end{gathered}$$ where $\mu(x)$ is a function defined by $2\mu F(\mu) + \mu^2dF(\mu)/d\mu = -2x$. With this function $\mu$, the nondynamical scalar field $\sigma$ is determined by $$kG\sigma^2 = \mu(k\ell^2h^{\alpha\beta}\varphi_{,\alpha}\varphi_{,\beta}). \label{scalar1}$$ At last, the field equations in TeVeS are Eqs. (\[Einstein\]) and (\[vector\]) – (\[scalar1\]).
Now with the normalization condition for ${\cal U}^\mu$, from the vector equation (\[vector\]) one can calculate the Lagrange multiplier $\lambda$; $$\lambda = K {\cal U}_\alpha{{\cal U}^{[\alpha;\beta]}}_{;\beta} + \frac{8\pi}{k}
{\cal U}^{\alpha}{\cal U}^{\beta}\varphi_{,\alpha}\varphi_{,\beta}
- 8\pi G\left(1-e^{-4\varphi}\right){\cal U}^\alpha{\cal U}^\beta\tilde{T}_{\alpha\beta}.
\label{lambda00}$$ Since it has been shown in the strong-field limit that $\mu=1$ is an excellent approximation [@Giannios2005; @Sagi2008], we concentrate on the case with $\mu=1$ [^1]. This implies from Eq. (\[scalar1\]) that $\sigma^2 = 1/(kG)$. Moreover, since one can show that with $\mu=1$ the contribution of $F$ to the field equations vanishes [@Bekenstein2004; @Giannios2005; @Sagi2008], our results are independent of this function and we drop it from the remaining discussion. At the end of this section, we should mention about the assumption that $\mu=1$. As described later, to determine the frame dragging effect we should impose the asymptotical flatness. Strictly speaking, in the asymptotic region, the assumption that $\mu=1$ might not be good, but we set the numerical boundary to be $r=300M$ in this article and the results are independent from the position of numerical boundary if the numerical boundary set to be far from $r=300M$. We consider that this numerical boundary might not be so far from star and as a first step we assume that $\mu=1$ in the whole numerical region.
Non-rotating Relativistic Stellar Models in TeVeS {#sec:II-2}
-------------------------------------------------
The equilibrium configurations of non-rotating relativistic stars in TeVeS have been investigated by Lasky et al. [@Paul2008], where they derived the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff (TOV) equations in TeVeS. In this subsection, we briefly show the TOV equations. Static, spherically symmetric metric can be expressed as $$ds^2 = g_{\alpha\beta} dx^\alpha dx^\beta
= -e^{\nu(r)} dt^2 + e^{\zeta(r)} dr^2 + r^2 d\theta^2 + r^2 \sin^2\theta d\phi^2$$ where $e^{-\zeta} = 1-2m(r)/r$. In general, the vector field for a static, spherically symmetric spacetime can be described as ${\cal U}^\mu=\left({\cal U}^t(r),{\cal U}^r(r),0,0\right)$. But Giannios [@Giannios2005] showed that in vacuum, the parameterized post-Newtonian (PPN) coefficients for a spherically symmetric, static spacetime with a non-zero ${\cal U}^{r}$ can violate observational restrictions. Thus in this article we only consider the case where ${\cal U}^r=0$, which is the same assumption in [@Paul2008; @Sotani2009a]. In this case, the vector field can be fully determined from the normalization condition, such as ${\cal U}^\mu = \left(e^{-\nu/2},0,0,0\right)$. With this vector field, the physical metric is $$d\tilde{s}^2 = \tilde{g}_{\alpha\beta}dx^\alpha dx^\beta
= -e^{\nu+2\varphi}dt^2 + e^{\zeta-2\varphi}dr^2
+ e^{-2\varphi}r^2 \left(d\theta^2 + \sin^2\theta d\phi^2\right) \label{phys-metric}$$ We further assume the stellar matter content to be a perfect fluid, i.e., $\tilde{T}_{\mu\nu} = (\tilde{\rho} + \tilde{P})\tilde{u}_\mu\tilde{u}_\nu
+ \tilde{P}\tilde{g}_{\mu\nu}$, where $\tilde{\rho}$ is the energy density, $\tilde{P}$ is the pressure, and $\tilde{u}_\mu$ is a fluid four-velocity given by $\tilde{u}_\mu = e^\varphi{\cal U}_\mu$. Then one can show that the full system of equations reduces to $$\begin{gathered}
\left(1-\frac{K}{2}\right)m'
= \frac{Km}{2r} + 4\pi G r^2 e^{-2\varphi}\left(\tilde{\rho} + 2K\tilde{P}\right)
+ \left[\frac{2\pi r^2}{k}\psi^2 - \frac{Kr\nu'}{4}\left(1+\frac{r\nu'}{4}\right)\right]
e^{-\zeta}, \\
\frac{Kr}{4}\nu' = -1 + \left[1+K\left(\frac{4\pi Gr^3\tilde{P}e^{-2\varphi}+m}{r-2m}
+ \frac{2\pi r^2}{k}\psi^2\right)\right]^{1/2}, \\
\tilde{P}' = -\frac{\tilde{P} + \tilde{\rho}}{2}(2\psi + \nu'), \label{eq:tov} \\
\varphi' = \psi, \\
\psi' = \left[\frac{m' r - m}{r(r-2m)}-\frac{\nu'}{2} - \frac{2}{r}\right]\psi
+ kGe^{-2\varphi+\zeta}\left(\tilde{\rho} + 3\tilde{P}\right),\end{gathered}$$ where a prime denotes a derivative with respect to $r$. Adding an equation of state (EOS), this system of equations can be closed. The stellar radius in physical frame, $R$, is determined by $R\equiv e^{-\varphi(r_s)}r_s$, where $r_s$ is the position of the stellar surface defined as the point where $\tilde{P}=0$. As additional physical properties, one can introduce the total Arnowitt-Deser-Misner (ADM) mass, $M_{\rm ADM}$, and the scalar mass, $M_\varphi$, which are defined by $$\begin{gathered}
M_{\rm ADM} =\left(m_{\infty}+\frac{kGM_{\varphi}}{4\pi}\right)e^{-\varphi_{c}}, \\
M_\varphi = 4\pi\int_0^{r}r^2\left(\tilde{\rho}+3\tilde{P}\right)e^{(\nu+\zeta)/2-2\varphi}dr,\end{gathered}$$ where $m_{\infty}$ and $\varphi_c$ are the mass function evaluated at radial infinity and the cosmological value of the scalar field, respectively.
In particular, in this article, we adopt the same EOS as in [@Sotani2004; @Paul2008; @Sotani2009a], which are polytropic ones derived by fitting functions to tabulated data of realistic EOS known as EOS A (soft EOS) and EOS II (intermediate EOS). In practice, the adopted EOS can be described as $$\begin{gathered}
\tilde{P} = {\cal K}n_0m_b\left(\frac{\tilde{n}}{m_b}\right)^\Gamma, \\
\tilde{\rho} = \tilde{n}m_b + \frac{\tilde{P}}{\Gamma-1}, \\
m_b = 1.66\times 10^{-24} \ {\rm g}, \\
n_0 = 0.1 \ {\rm fm}^{-3},\end{gathered}$$ where $\Gamma=2.46$ and ${\cal K}=0.00936$ for EOS A and $\Gamma=2.34$ and ${\cal K}=0.0195$ for EOS II. Additionally, we adopt the values of parameters $k$ and $\varphi_c$ as $k=0.03$ and $\varphi_c=0.003$, which are same choices as in [@Sotani2009a], while the value of $K$ is considered in the range of $0<K<2$ (see [@Paul2008] for discussion about the range of value of $K$).
Slowly Rotating Relativistic Stars in TeVeS {#sec:III}
===========================================
Rotational Dragging {#sec:III-1}
-------------------
In this article, we consider a slowly rotating relativistic stellar models with a uniform angular velocity $\tilde{\Omega}$, where we assume to keep only the linear effects in the angular velocity (see in [@Hartle1967] for the discussion about slowly rotating relativistic stars in GR). Here we put the rotational axis to be $\theta=0$. In this case, the star is still spherical because the deformation due to the rotation is of the order $\tilde{\Omega}^2$, and the metric in physical frame is given by $$d\tilde{s}^2 = -e^{\nu+2\varphi} dt^2 + e^{\zeta-2\varphi} dr^2 + r^2 e^{-2\varphi} \left(d\theta^2 + \sin^2\theta d\phi^2\right)
- 2\omega r^2 e^{-2\varphi}\sin^2\theta dt d\phi,$$ where the last term in the right hand side corresponds to the rotational effect and in general $\omega\sim{\cal O}(\tilde{\Omega})$ can be expressed as $$\omega(r,\theta) = -\frac{\omega(r)}{\sin\theta}\partial_\theta P_\ell,$$ where $P_\ell=P_\ell(\cos\theta)$ is the Legendre polynomial of order $\ell$. While, the rotational effects in the other components of metric become of the order $\tilde{\Omega}^2$, because those should behave in the same way under a reversal in the direction of rotation as under a reversal in the direction of time. Similarly, the deviations of pressure, density, and scalar field due to the rotation should be of the order $\tilde{\Omega}^2$. Hereafter, in order to distinguish the effects due to the rotation, the deviation from the background properties would be expressed by using variables with $\delta$. Then the fluid velocity in physical frame of the order $\tilde{\Omega}$ can be described as $$\delta \tilde{u}^\mu = (0,0,0,\tilde{\Omega}\tilde{u}^t),$$ where $\tilde{u}^t$ is $t$-component of four velocity in the case without rotation, i.e., $\tilde{u}^t=e^{-\varphi-\nu/2}$, and non-zero component of the energy-momentum tensor of the order $\tilde{\Omega}$ is only $\delta\tilde{T_{t\phi}}$, which are given by $$\begin{aligned}
\delta\tilde{T}_{t\phi} = -\left(\tilde{\rho}+\tilde{P}\right)r^2e^{-2\varphi}\left(\omega\sin\theta\partial_\theta P_\ell+\tilde{\Omega}\sin^2\theta\right) + \tilde{P}\omega r^2e^{-2\varphi}\sin\theta\partial_\theta P_\ell.\end{aligned}$$ On the other hand, in Einstein frame the deviation of metric from the spherical symmetry is determined by $$\delta g_{\mu\nu} = e^{2\varphi}\delta \tilde{g}_{\mu\nu} + \left(e^{4\varphi}-1\right)\left(\delta {\cal U}_\mu{\cal U}_\nu + {\cal U}_\mu\delta{\cal U}_\nu\right).$$ By using the normalization condition for the vector field, one can show that $\delta {\cal U}^t=\delta {\cal U}_t=0$. So the deviation of vector field from the spherical symmetry can be described as $$\delta {\cal U}^\mu=\left(0, W(r)P_\ell, V(r)\partial_\theta P_\ell, \frac{{\cal V}(r)}{\sin\theta}\partial_\theta P_\ell\right).$$ However, the variables of $W$ and $V$ should be of the order $\tilde{\Omega}^2$ because these components are corresponding to the polar parity. Then the non-zero component of metric in Einstein frame of the order $\tilde{\Omega}$ is only $\delta g_{t\phi}$, which is given as $$\begin{aligned}
\delta g_{t\phi} &= r^2\left[e^{-4\varphi}\omega + e^{\nu/2}\left(e^{-4\varphi}-1\right){\cal V}\right]\sin\theta\partial_\theta P_\ell.\end{aligned}$$ Then from the $(t,\phi)$ component of the Einstein equation (\[Einstein\]), one can get the following equation $$\begin{aligned}
\bigg[&-\omega'' +\left(8\varphi'+\frac{\nu'}{2} + \frac{\zeta'}{2} - \frac{4}{r}\right)\omega' + \left\{4\varphi'' - 2\varphi' \left(8\varphi'+\nu'+\zeta'-\frac{8}{r}\right)+ \nu'' + \left(\frac{\nu'}{2} + \frac{1}{r}\right)\left(\nu'-\zeta'\right) + \frac{(\ell-1)(\ell+2)}{r^2}e^{\zeta}\right\}\omega \nonumber \\
&+ e^{\nu/2} \left(e^{4\varphi}-1\right)\left\{{\cal V}'' + \left(\frac{\nu'}{2} - \frac{\zeta'}{2} + \frac{4}{r}\right){\cal V}' + \left(-\frac{\nu''}{2} + \frac{\nu'\zeta'}{4} - \frac{(\nu')^2}{2} + \frac{\nu'}{r} + \frac{\zeta'}{r} - \frac{(\ell-1)(\ell+2)}{r^2}e^{\zeta}\right){\cal V}\right\} \nonumber \\
&+ e^{\nu/2}\left\{8\varphi'{\cal V}' + \left(4\varphi'' +2\varphi' \left(\frac{8}{r} - 8\varphi' +\nu' - \zeta'\right)\right){\cal V}\right\}\bigg]\sin\theta\partial_\theta P_\ell \nonumber \\
&=16\pi G e^{\zeta} \left[-\tilde{\rho}e^{-2\varphi}\omega -\left(1-e^{-4\varphi}\right) e^{\nu/2+2\varphi}\tilde{P}{\cal V} + \frac{\left(\varphi'\right)^2}{2kG}e^{-\zeta} \left\{-\omega + e^{\nu/2}\left(e^{4\varphi}-1\right){\cal V}\right\}\right] \sin\theta \partial_\theta P_\ell \nonumber \\
&+K\bigg[-\nu'\omega' - \left\{\nu'' + \left(-4\varphi' + \frac{4}{r} - \frac{\zeta'}{2} - \frac{3\nu'}{4}\right)\nu'\right\}\omega - \nu' e^{\nu/2}{\cal V}' \nonumber \\
&+ e^{\nu/2} \left\{-\nu'' +\left(4\varphi' - \frac{4}{r} +\frac{\zeta'}{2} +\frac{\nu'}{4}\left(1-e^{-4\varphi}\right)\right)\nu'\right\}{\cal V}\bigg]\sin\theta\partial_\theta P_\ell
-16\pi G \left(\tilde{\rho} + \tilde{P}\right) e^{\zeta-2\varphi}\tilde{\Omega}\sin^2\theta.
\label{pEinstein-00}\end{aligned}$$ On the other hand, the additional equation to express the relation between $\omega$ and ${\cal V}$ can be obtained from the $\phi$ component of the vector field equation (\[vector\]), which is $$\begin{aligned}
K&\bigg[e^{-\nu/2}\left\{\omega''-\left(8\varphi'+\nu'+\frac{\zeta'}{2}-\frac{4}{r}\right)\omega'-\left(4\varphi''+\nu''-\left(\nu'-\frac{2}{r}+4\varphi'\right)\left(\frac{\zeta'}{2}+4\varphi'-\frac{2}{r}\right)+\frac{2}{r^2}+\frac{\ell(\ell+1)}{r^2}e^{\zeta}\right)\omega\right\} \nonumber \\
&+ {\cal V}'' + \left(-8\varphi'+\frac{4}{r}-\frac{\zeta'}{2}\right){\cal V}' + \left(-4\varphi'' - \frac{\nu''}{2}-\frac{\nu'}{4}\left(\nu'-\zeta'\right)+ \left(4\varphi'-\frac{2}{r}\right)\left(\frac{\zeta'}{2}+4\varphi'-\frac{2}{r}\right)-\frac{2}{r^2}-\frac{\ell(\ell+1)}{r^2}e^{\zeta}\right){\cal V} \nonumber \\
&+ \frac{\nu'}{2}e^{4\varphi}\left({\cal V}' + \frac{\nu'}{2}{\cal V}\right)\bigg]\frac{1}{\sin\theta}\partial_\theta P_\ell
=8\pi G\left(1-e^{-4\varphi}\right)\left(\tilde{\rho}+\tilde{P}\right)e^{\zeta+2\varphi}\left[{\cal V}\frac{1}{\sin\theta}\partial_\theta P_\ell - e^{-\nu/2}\tilde{\Omega}\right].
\label{pvector-00}\end{aligned}$$ Especially, in this article we adopt the case for $\ell=1$ to reproduce the GR limit of TeVeS [@Hartle1967]. In fact, the other value of $\ell$ can not be chosen to satisfy the regularity condition at the stellar center and the asymptotic behavior far from the star. Then, by combining the above equations (\[pEinstein-00\]) and (\[pvector-00\]), one can obtain the following equations $$\begin{aligned}
e^{\nu/2+4\varphi}&{\cal V}'' = -\nu'\left(K-\frac{1}{2}\right)\left(\omega' +e^{\nu/2}{\cal V}'\right) - e^{\nu/2+4\varphi}\left(\nu'-\frac{\zeta'}{2}+\frac{4}{r}\right){\cal V}' + \frac{8\pi G}{K}e^{\zeta-2\varphi}\left(\tilde{\rho}+\tilde{P}\right)\left(2K-1+e^{4\varphi}\right)\tilde{\Omega} \nonumber \\
& - \left[2\varphi'\nu'+\frac{(\nu')^2}{2} - \frac{\nu'}{r}-\frac{2\zeta'}{r}-\frac{2}{r^2}(e^{\zeta}-1) + 16\pi G e^{\zeta-2\varphi}\tilde{\rho}+\frac{8\pi}{k}(\varphi')^2 +K\left\{\nu''+\left(\frac{4}{r}-4\varphi'-\frac{\zeta'}{2}-\frac{3\nu'}{4}\right)\nu'\right\}\right]\omega \nonumber \\
& +e^{\nu/2+4\varphi}\left[\frac{\nu''}{2}-\frac{\nu'\zeta'}{4}+\frac{(\nu')^2}{4}-\frac{\nu'}{r}-\frac{\zeta'}{r}+\frac{8\pi}{k}(\varphi')^2\right]{\cal V}
+e^{\nu/2}\bigg[-2\varphi'\nu' - \frac{(\nu')^2}{4}+\frac{\nu'}{r}+\frac{2\zeta'}{r}+\frac{2}{r^2}(e^{\zeta}-1) \nonumber \\
& -16\pi Ge^{\zeta+2\varphi}\tilde{P} -\frac{8\pi}{k}(\varphi')^2 + \frac{8\pi G}{K}\left(\tilde{\rho}+\tilde{P}\right)e^{\zeta+2\varphi} + K \left\{-\nu''+\left(4\varphi'-\frac{4}{r}+\frac{\zeta'}{2}+\frac{\nu'}{4}\right)\nu'\right\}\bigg]{\cal V} \nonumber \\
& +e^{\nu/2-4\varphi}\left[16\pi G e^{\zeta+2\varphi}\tilde{P} - \frac{8\pi G}{K}\left(\tilde{\rho}+\tilde{P}\right)e^{\zeta+2\varphi} - \frac{K}{4}(\nu')^2\right]{\cal V},
\label{pvector}\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
-&\omega'' +\left(8\varphi'+\frac{\nu'}{2} + \frac{\zeta'}{2} - \frac{4}{r}\right)\omega' + \left\{4\varphi'' - 2\varphi' \left(8\varphi'+\nu'+\zeta'-\frac{8}{r}\right)+ \nu'' + \left(\frac{\nu'}{2} + \frac{1}{r}\right)\left(\nu'-\zeta'\right)\right\}\omega \nonumber \\
&+ e^{\nu/2} \left(e^{4\varphi}-1\right)\left\{{\cal V}'' + \left(\frac{\nu'}{2} - \frac{\zeta'}{2} + \frac{4}{r}\right){\cal V}' + \left(-\frac{\nu''}{2} + \frac{\nu'\zeta'}{4} - \frac{(\nu')^2}{2} + \frac{\nu'}{r} + \frac{\zeta'}{r}\right){\cal V}\right\} \nonumber \\
&+ e^{\nu/2}\left\{8\varphi'{\cal V}' + \left(4\varphi'' +2\varphi' \left(\frac{8}{r} - 8\varphi' +\nu' - \zeta'\right)\right){\cal V}\right\} \nonumber \\
&=16\pi G \left(\tilde{\rho} + \tilde{P}\right) e^{\zeta-2\varphi}\tilde{\Omega} +16\pi G e^{\zeta} \left[-\tilde{\rho}e^{-2\varphi}\omega -\left(1-e^{-4\varphi}\right) e^{\nu/2+2\varphi}\tilde{P}{\cal V} + \frac{\left(\varphi'\right)^2}{2kG}e^{-\zeta} \left\{-\omega + e^{\nu/2}\left(e^{4\varphi}-1\right){\cal V}\right\}\right] \nonumber \\
&-K\bigg[\nu'\omega' + \left\{\nu'' + \left(-4\varphi' + \frac{4}{r} - \frac{\zeta'}{2} - \frac{3\nu'}{4}\right)\nu'\right\}\omega + \nu' e^{\nu/2}{\cal V}' - e^{\nu/2} \left\{-\nu'' +\left(4\varphi' - \frac{4}{r} +\frac{\zeta'}{2} +\frac{\nu'}{4}\left(1-e^{-4\varphi}\right)\right)\nu'\right\}{\cal V}\bigg].
\label{pEinstein}\end{aligned}$$ Note that the GR limit of Eq. (\[pEinstein\]) agrees with the well-known equation describing the frame dragging in GR. With these two equations (\[pvector\]) and (\[pEinstein\]) and with the appropriate boundary conditions, the distributions of $\omega(r)$ and ${\cal V}(r)$ can be determined. Additionally, with an asymptotic flatness, one can show that $\omega$ and ${\cal V}$ are decreasing as $1/r^3$ far from the central object.
Numerical Results {#sec:III-2}
-----------------
In order to determine the distributions of $\omega(r)$ and ${\cal V}(r)$ with the fixed value of $K$ for the adopted stellar model, we impose two boundary conditions, i.e., the regularity condition at the stellar center and the asymptotic flatness far from the star. In practice, at stellar center we set that $\omega(0)=\omega_0$, $\omega'(0)=0$, ${\cal V}(0)={\cal V}_0$, and ${\cal V}'(0)=0$, where $\omega_0$ and ${\cal V}_0$ are some constants. Then we find the correct values of $\omega_0$ and ${\cal V}_0$ in such a way that the solutions of $\omega(r)$ and ${\cal V}(r)$ should satisfy the asymptotic behavior as mentioned in the previous section, i.e., with the trial values of $\omega_0$ and ${\cal V}_0$ the above ordinary differential equations can be integrated outward and we search the correct values by changing the trial values iteratively, where for integration we use the 4th order Runge-Kutta method. In this way, we can determine numerically the distributions of $\omega(r)$ and ${\cal V}(r)$ and those behaviors far from the central star can be described as $$\begin{aligned}
\omega(r) &= \frac{2J}{r^3} + {\cal O}\left(\frac{1}{r^4}\right), \\
{\cal V}(r) &= \frac{2{\cal V}_c}{r^3} + {\cal O}\left(\frac{1}{r^4}\right).\end{aligned}$$ It should be noticed that in GR the distribution of $\omega(r)$ outside the star can be described analytically as $\omega(r) = 2J/r^3$, where the constant $J$ is corresponding to the total angular momentum of the star [@Hartle1967]. Additionally, it is well known that the angular momentum in GR is linearly related to the angular velocity for slow rotation as $J=I\tilde{\Omega}$, where the constant of proportionality $I$ corresponds to the relativistic generalization of momentum of inertia for slowly rotating systems [@Hartle1967]. While, in the case of TeVeS, we can see the same feature as the case of GR, i.e., as shown in Figs. \[fig:Omega-J\] and \[fig:Omega-Vc\], the values of $J/\tilde{\Omega}$ and ${\cal V}_c/\tilde{\Omega}$ are independent of the value of angular velocity $\tilde{\Omega}$ if only one chooses the non-rotating stellar models.
![Dependence of $J/\tilde{\Omega}$ on the angular velocity $\tilde{\Omega}$ for the stellar model with EOS A and $M_{\rm ADM}=1.4M_\odot$, where the solid line corresponds to the case of GR while the broken lines are results in TeVeS with different values of $K$. []{data-label="fig:Omega-J"}](Omega-J)
![Dependence of ${\cal V}_c/\tilde{\Omega}$ on the angular velocity $\tilde{\Omega}$ for the stellar model with EOS A and $M_{\rm ADM}=1.4M_\odot$. []{data-label="fig:Omega-Vc"}](Omega-Vc)
Fig. \[fig:r-omega\] shows the distributions of $\omega(r)$ with different values of $K$ for the stellar model with EOS A, $M_{\rm ADM}=1.4M_\odot$, and $\tilde{\Omega}=1$ kHz. At a glance, we can recognize the difference of distributions between in GR and in TeVeS. Especially, with higher value of $K$ those differences become obvious even in the interior of the star. As mentioned before, the behavior of $\omega(r)$ far from star is proportional to $r^{-3}$, which can be seen in the right panel of Fig. \[fig:r-omega\]. On the other hand, Fig. \[fig:r-V\] shows the distributions of ${\cal V}(r)$ with different values of $K$ for the same stellar model as in Fig. \[fig:r-omega\]. In the right panel of Fig. \[fig:r-V\] one can see the behavior of ${\cal V}(r)$ far from star. From Figs. \[fig:r-omega\] and \[fig:r-V\], we can find the important point that as the value of $K$ becomes smaller, the distribution of $\omega(r)$ in TeVeS approaches to that in GR while the induced vector field ${\cal V}(r)$ does not vanish. Namely, with smaller value of $K$ the physical metric in TeVeS is almost same as that in GR, but there still exists the additional vector fields induced by the stellar rotation. So if one will consider the stellar oscillations and/or the emitted gravitational waves in TeVeS, this induced vector field could play a role as source term in the linearized equations which is corresponding to the linearized right hand side in Eq. (\[Einstein\]), and as a result the deviation in frequencies depending on the gravitational theory can be seen even if the physical metric is not so different from each other. Thus such kinds of observation could tell us the gravitational theory in the strong field regime even if the value of $K$ is quite small.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
![Distributions of $\omega(r)$ with different values of $K$ for the stellar model with EOS A, $M_{\rm ADM}=1.4M_\odot$, and $\tilde{\Omega}=1$ kHz. In order to compare the results, the solid line shows the distribution in GR. []{data-label="fig:r-omega"}](r-omega-a "fig:") ![Distributions of $\omega(r)$ with different values of $K$ for the stellar model with EOS A, $M_{\rm ADM}=1.4M_\odot$, and $\tilde{\Omega}=1$ kHz. In order to compare the results, the solid line shows the distribution in GR. []{data-label="fig:r-omega"}](r-omega-b "fig:")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
![Distributions of ${\cal V}(r)$ with different values of $K$ for the stellar model with EOS A, $M_{\rm ADM}=1.4M_\odot$, and $\tilde{\Omega}=1$ kHz, where the different lines correspond to the results with values of $K$ shown in Fig. \[fig:r-omega\]. []{data-label="fig:r-V"}](r-V-a "fig:") ![Distributions of ${\cal V}(r)$ with different values of $K$ for the stellar model with EOS A, $M_{\rm ADM}=1.4M_\odot$, and $\tilde{\Omega}=1$ kHz, where the different lines correspond to the results with values of $K$ shown in Fig. \[fig:r-omega\]. []{data-label="fig:r-V"}](r-V-b "fig:")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furthermore, the dependences of $J$ and ${\cal V}_c$ on the value of $K$ are shown in Figs. \[fig:K-J-1000Hz\] and \[fig:K-Vc-1000Hz\], where the stellar masses are fixed to be $M_{\rm ADM}=1.4M_\odot$ and the angular velocity are adopted that $\tilde{\Omega}=1$ kHz for EOS A and EOS II. In Fig. \[fig:K-J-1000Hz\] the horizontal broken lines denote the values of $J$ in GR for each EOS. From this figure, we can see that depending on the value of $K$, the angular momentum $J$ could become 42.7% smaller for EOS A and 65.0% smaller for EOS II than those expected in GR. Even if this difference cannot be directly observed, one could find a kind of evidence depending on the gravitational theory in the strong field regime by observing the phenomena around rotating compact object.
![Dependence of $J$ on $K$ for the stellar models with $M_{\rm ADM}=1.4M_\odot$ and $\tilde{\Omega}=1$ kHz for EOS A and EOS II. The horizontal broken lines are corresponding to the values for each EOS in GR. []{data-label="fig:K-J-1000Hz"}](K-J-1000Hz)
![Dependence of ${\cal V}_c$ on $K$ for the stellar models with $M_{\rm ADM}=1.4M_\odot$ and $\tilde{\Omega}=1$ kHz for EOS A and EOS II. []{data-label="fig:K-Vc-1000Hz"}](K-Vc-1000Hz)
Conclusion {#sec:IV}
==========
In this article, in order to examine the rotational effect around the neutron star in the tensor-vector-scalar (TeVeS) theory, we consider the slowly rotating relativistic stars with a uniform angular velocity $\tilde{\Omega}$. To deal with this problem in TeVeS, one has to take into account not only the usual frame dragging $\omega$ but also the induced vector field ${\cal V}$, which is corresponding to the $\phi$ component. The equations for $\omega(r)$ and ${\cal V}(r)$ are derived from the Einstein and vector field equations, and then the distributions of those variables are determined numerically with appropriate boundary conditions.
As a result, we find that, similar to the case in GR, the value of $J/\tilde{\Omega}$ in TeVeS is constant if the stellar mass and value of $K$ are fixed, where $J$ corresponds to the angular momentum. Additionally, with higher value of $K$, the distribution of $\omega(r)$ deviates obviously from that in GR due to the existence of induced vector field and this deviation can be seen even in the interior region of star. On the other hand with smaller value of $K$, although $\omega$ approaches to the that in GR, the induced vector field dose not vanish. That is, even if the stellar properties in TeVeS with small value of $K$, such as the mass and radius, are almost same as those in GR, the induced vector field in TeVeS could still exist. This is a crucial difference depending on the gravitational theory. Thus through the observable phenomena, such as the stellar oscillation and emitted gravitational waves, it is possible to distinguish the gravitational theory in the strong field regime. Furthermore, through the stellar magnetic effect, one might be see another effect coupling to the induced vector field. For example, some quasi-periodic oscillations are observed recently in the giant flares and these are believed to be related to the oscillations of strong magnetized neutron stars [@Sotani2007]. Considering the stellar magnetic fields, one might be possible to obtain the further constraint in the theory.
We thank Demetrios Papadopoulos, Kostas D. Kokkotas, Miltos Vavoulidis, and Erich Gaertig for valuable comments, and also the referees for fruitful comments. This work was supported via the Transregio 7 “Gravitational Wave Astronomy" financed by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft DFG (German Research Foundation).
[999]{} D. Psaltis, Living Rev. Relativity [**11**]{}, lrr-2009-9 (2009).
S. DeDeo and D. Psaltis, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**90**]{}, 141101 (2003).
H. Sotani and K.D. Kokkotas, Phys. Rev. D [**70**]{}, 084026 (2004); [**71**]{}, 124038 (2005).
T. Damour and G. Esposito-Far[\` e]{}se, Classical Quantum Gravity [**9**]{}, 2093 (1992).
J.D. Bekenstein, Phys. Rev. D [**70**]{}, 083509 (2004).
M. Milgrom, Astrophys. J. [**270**]{}, 365 (1983).
C. Skordis, Class. Q. Grav. [**26**]{}, 143001 (2009).
D.M. Chen and H.S. Zhao, Astrophys. J. [**650**]{}, L9 (2006).
S. Dodelson and M. Liguori, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**97**]{}, 231301 (2006).
D. Giannios, Phys. Rev. D [**71**]{}, 103511 (2005).
E. Sagi and D. Bekenstein, Phys. Rev. D [**77**]{}, 024010 (2008).
P.D. Lasky, H. Sotani, and D. Giannios, Phys. Rev. D [**78**]{}, 104019 (2008).
S. Desai, E.O. Kahya, and R.P. Woodard, Phys. Rev. D [**77**]{}, 124041 (2008).
H. Sotani, Phys. Rev. D [**79**]{}, 064033 (2009); [**80**]{} 064035 (2009).
J.B.Hartle, Astrophys. J. [**150**]{}, 1005 (1967).
M. Vavoulidis, K.D. Kokkotas, and A. Stavridis, Mon. Not. R. Astron Soc. [**384**]{}, 1711 (2008).
E. Gaertig and K.D. Kokkotas, Phys. Rev. D [**80**]{}, 064026 (2009).
H. Sotani, K.D. Kokkotas, and N. Stergioulas, Mon. Not. R. Astron Soc. [**375**]{}, 261 (2007); [**385**]{}, L5 (2008); H. Sotani, A. Colaiuda, and K.D. Kokkotas, $ibid$. [**385**]{}, 2161 (2008); H. Sotani and K.D. Kokkotas, $ibid$. [**395**]{}, 1163 (2009).
[^1]: When one will consider the phenomena on cosmological scales, the assumption that $\mu=1$ might not be a good choice [@Bekenstein2004].
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The relationship between the boundaries for Hill and Lagrange stability in orbital element space is modified in the case of resonantly interacting planets. Hill stability requires the ordering of the planets to remain constant while Lagrange stability also requires all planets to remain bound to the central star. The Hill stability boundary is defined analytically, but no equations exist to define the Lagrange boundary, so we perform numerical experiments to estimate the location of this boundary. To explore the effect of resonances, we consider orbital element space near the conditions in the HD 82943 and 55 Cnc systems. Previous studies have shown that, for non-resonant systems, the two stability boundaries are nearly coincident. However the Hill stability formula are not applicable to resonant systems, and our investigation shows how the two boundaries diverge in the presence of a mean-motion resonance, while confirming that the Hill and Lagrange boundaries are similar otherwise. In resonance the region of stability is larger than the domain defined by the analytic formula for Hill stability. We find that nearly all known resonant interactions currently lie in this extra stable region, where the orbits would be unstable according to the non-resonant Hill stability formula. This result bears on the dynamical packing of planetary systems, showing how quantifying planetary systems’ dynamical interactions (such as proximity to the Hill-stability boundary) provides new constraints on planet formation models.'
author:
- Rory Barnes and Richard Greenberg
title: Stability Limits in Resonant Planetary Systems
---
Introduction
============
By the end of 2006, 20 multiple planetary systems had been detected beyond the Solar System (Butler 2006, Wright 2007). Of these, 7 are likely to contain at least 1 pair that is in a mean-motion resonance. Barnes & Quinn (2004; hereafter BQ) showed that one of these resonant pairs, HD 82943 b and c, had best-fit orbital elements that placed the system near a stability limit. Indeed, the best fit was unstable, but a small change (well within observational uncertainties) in the eccentricity $e$ of the outer planet would make the system stable (BQ; Ferraz-Mello 2005). BQ also showed that stability requires the ratio of the orbital periods, $P_c/P_b$, be near 2, and that the relative mean longitudes and difference in longitudes of pericenter lie in a range such that conjunctions never occur at the minimum distance between the orbits. This result suggests that, given the values of $e$ and $a$ of the two planets, stability is only possible if the two planets are in the 2:1 resonance.
Two types of stability have been considered in the literature. Hill stability requires the ordering of planets to remain constant for all time; the outer planet may escape to infinity. The equations that define the limits of Hill stability (Marchal & Bozis 1982; Gladman 1993) only apply to systems of 2 planets that are not in a resonance. Lagrange stability requires all planets remain bound to the star, and the orbits evolve at least quasi-periodically. Lagrange stability is more meaningful, but its criteria have not been delineated analytically.
Barnes & Greenberg (2006a; hereafter BG) showed that the Hill-stability boundary is nearly the same as the Lagrange-stability boundary, at least for the non-resonant planets in HD 12661 and 47 UMa. Although the Hill stability boundary was derived for non-resonant systems, it is not clear how mean-motion resonances distort it. Here we explore the stability boundary near two resonant systems, HD 82943 (Mayor 2004) and 55 Cnc (Marcy 2002; McArthur 2004). Note that for both systems the inner planet of the resonant pair is named b and the outer c. We find that the resonances do provide extra regions of Lagrange stability in phase space that extend beyond the analytic criterion. In $\S$ 2 we describe Hill and Lagrange stability and our numerical methods. In $\S$ 3 we present our results for HD 82943 and 55 Cnc. We also tabulate proximities to the Hill boundary for all applicable systems and find that all but one resonantly interacting pair would lie in an unstable region if not for the resonance. In $\S$ 4 we draw conclusions and suggest directions for future work.
Methodology
===========
Stability Boundaries
--------------------
Hill stability in a coplanar system can be described by the following inequality: $$\label{eq:exact}
-\frac{2M}{G^2M_*^3}c^2h > 1 + 3^{4/3}\frac{m_1m_2}{m_3^{2/3}(m_1+m_2)^{4/3}} -
\frac{m_1m_2(11m_1 + 7m_2)}{3m_3(m_1+m_2)^2} + ...,$$ where $M$ is the total mass of the system, $m_1$ is the mass of the more massive planet, $m_2$ is the mass of the less massive planet, $m_3$ is the mass of the star, $G$ is the gravitational constant, $M_*
= m_1m_2 + m_1m_3 + m_2m_3$, $c$ is the total angular momentum of the system, and $h$ is the energy (Marchal & Bozis 1982). If a given three-body system satisfies the inequality in Eq. (\[eq:exact\]), then the system is Hill stable. If this inequality is not satisfied, then the system may or may not be Hill stable. In this inequality, the left-hand side is a function of the orbits, but the right-hand side is only a function of the masses. This approach is fundamentally different from other common techniques for determining stability which exploit resonance overlaps (Wisdom 1982; Quillen & Faber 2006), chaotic diffusion (Laskar 1990; Pepe 2007), fast Lyapunov indicators (Froeschlé 1997; Sándor 2007), or periodic orbits (Voyatzis & Hadjidemetriou 2005, 2006; Hadjidemetriou 2006).
BG use $\beta$ (the left-hand side of Eq. \[\[eq:exact\]\]), and $\beta_{crit}$ (the right-hand side) to describe the Hill stability boundary. The Hill stability boundary is the curve defined by $\beta/\beta_{crit} = 1$. BG showed that the Lagrange stability boundary appears to be located where $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ is slightly larger than 1 (1.02 for 47 UMa and 1.1 for HD 12661).
Numerical Methods
-----------------
For each system, HD 82943 and 55 Cnc, 1000 initial configurations were generated based on the observational data for each system (Mayor 2004; Marcy 2002), that is, the initial conditions spanned the range of observational uncertainty. Note that more recent, improved elements are available (Butler 2006), but for our purposes the older values serve equally well. Orbital parameters that have known errors, such as $e$ and the period, $P$, are varied as a Gaussian centered on the best fit value, with a standard deviation equal to the published uncertainty, and orbital elements are sampled appropriately. For elements with systematic errors, such as inclination, the initial conditions were varied uniformly. The inclination was varied between 0 and $5^o$, and the longitude of ascending node was varied between 0 and 2$\pi$. Masses were then set to the observed mass divided by the sine of the inclination. The variation of orbits out of the fundamental plane will not significantly affect our calculations of Hill stability (Veras & Armitage 2004). Each element was varied independently. The distribution of initial conditions is presented in Table 1. In this table, $\varpi$ is the longitude of periastron and $T_{peri}$ is the time of periastron passage. The integrations were performed with SWIFT (Levison & Duncan 1994) and MERCURY (Chambers 1999), and conserve energy to at least 1 part in $10^4$. For more details on these methods, consult BQ.
For each simulation we numerically determine Lagrange stability on $\sim 10^6$ year timescales. BQ showed that this timescale identifies nearly all unstable configurations. We then calculate $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ in the parameter space sampled by the numerical integrations. Comparison of these two sets of results shows how the Hill and Lagrange stability boundaries are related near a mean-motion resonance.
Results
=======
For HD 82943 the “stability map” is shown by the grayscale shading in Fig. \[fig:hd82943\]. Shading indicates the fraction of initial conditions, in a certain range of orbital element space, that give Lagrange stable behavior (no ejections or exchanges) over $10^6$ years: White bins contained only stable configurations, black only unstable, and the darkening shades of gray correspond to decreasing fractions of stable configurations. This representation plots the stable fraction as a function of two parameters: the eccentricity of the outer planer, $e_c$ and the ratio of the periods $P_c/P_b$. The numerical simulations show that Lagrange stability is most likely for values of $P_c/P_b$ slightly greater than 2, and $e_c$ less than 0.4. BQ called this feature the “stability peninsula”.
Superimposed on this grayscale map are contours of $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ values. All the values of $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ are well less than 1.02 which ordinarily would imply instability. However, in the resonance zone where $P_c/P_b \approx 2$, the stability peninsula sticks into a regime ($\beta/\beta_{crit}$ as small as 0.75) that would be unstable if the planets were not in a mean motion resonance. Note that the numerical simulations include cases with variations of a few per cent in mass; the $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ contours shown are for the average mass, but would shift only slightly over the range of masses.
For 55 Cnc, the stability map (Fig. \[fig:55cnc\]) was developed from integrations over 4 million years, $10^6$ orbits of the outer planet. Our simulations include planets b, c and d, but not the inner planet, e. Planet e is relatively small and Zhou (2004) found that the outer, non-resonant planet d does not appear to affect the global stability of the system. Therefore our simulations should elucidate the relationship between Hill and Lagrange stability boundaries in the presence of a 3:1 mean motion resonance.
Of our simulations $50.2 \pm 5.5$% were Lagrange stable. The least massive planet, c, was the planet most likely to be ejected. In this system we see that stability is likely for $e_c < 0.3$ everywhere, except at $P_c/P_b \approx 3$, where it extends to $e\sim 0.55$.
Comparing this distribution with the analytical stability criterion ($\beta/\beta_{crit} \lsim 1.03$) we see that the numerical experiments reproduce that boundary, except in resonance where $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ can be as low as 0.96. This stability peninsula for 55 Cnc does not protrude as far into the Hill unstable region as HD 82943. This difference may be because the 2:1 resonance is of a lower order (and thus stronger) than the 3:1, and therefore has a more pronounced stabilizing effect.
Next we tabulate $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ values for all observed systems that contain two planets. We also include GJ 876 c and b, and $\upsilon$ And c and d. Eq. (\[eq:exact\]) is only applicable to two-planet systems, but we consider these latter two pairs, which are each part of a bigger system, as the third planet in each system is probably too small or too far away to significantly change the interaction of those pairs. However, interpreting values of $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ in systems of more than two companions should be made with caution, as there is no guarantee $\beta/\beta_{crit} = 1$ corresponds to the Hill boundary for any individual pair.
Table 2 lists values of $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ and the “class” of the interaction, which distinguishes the dominant phenomenon that changes the shapes of the orbits. “R” denotes pairs whose interaction is dominated by mean-motion resonances (Table 2 also lists the resonance), “T” indicates pairs that may have experienced significant tidal evolution, and “S” indicates pairs with strong secular interactions (Barnes & Greenberg 2006b). All but one resonantly interacting pair have $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ values less than 1. If not for the resonance, these systems would be unstable.
Overall, we find 70% of the pairs we consider are observed to have $\beta/\beta_{crit} < 1.3$. HD 217107 is observed to have a $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ significantly larger than other pairs. In Fig.\[fig:betacrit\] we plot the distribution of $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ values from Table 2.
Conclusions
===========
By explicitly mapping how mean-motion resonances can provide additional regions of stability in orbital element space, we have found that nearly all observed resonant systems lie in these extended regions. More generally, we have also shown the distribution of $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ appears to show that many planetary systems (resonant or not) lie close to the limits of dynamical stability. These distributions provide new constraints for models of planet formation.
In the cases presented here, the 2:1 resonance provides a larger stable region than 3:1, presumably because it is a lower order (stronger) resonance. However, for the 5:1 mean-motion resonance in HD 202206, $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ can reach 0.88 and still be stable. So why is the range of stability for the 3:1 resonance in 55 Cnc so small? Perhaps if $e_c$ in the 55 Cnc system has values in excess of 0.5, it does interact with the third planet, destabilizing the system. Future work should investigate the minimum $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ that allows stability for each resonance. Future work may also determine if the peninsula we find in 55 Cnc is truncated due to interactions with 55 Cnc d.
We seek to identify the origin of the shape of the stability peninsulas in resonant systems. Ideally a general expression will eventually be developed that describes the Lagrange stability boundary that applies to planets both in and out of resonance. One avenue of research is to focus on close approach distances. In the limit of zero eccentricity, orbits are unstable if they are separated by less than 3.5 mutual Hill radii (Gladman 1993). Therefore we speculate that systems with approaches within this distance are unstable. For secularly evolving systems, the orbits change with time and eventually the planets will line up at the minimum distance between the orbits over a secular period. Resonances can prevent planets from lining up at this danger zone, hence the stability peninsulas. This likely explanation for the shape of the Lagrange boundaries might be a fruitful direction of future research into planetary system stability.
The distribution of $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ shows that, regardless of the the presence of mean-motion resonance, many systems have values that are close to the stability boundary. This trend appears to support the hypothesis that planetary systems are dynamically “packed”, that additional planets could not exist in orbits between those that are known without destabilizing the system (Barnes & Quinn 2001; BQ, Barnes & Raymond 2004; Raymond & Barnes 2005; Raymond 2006). Perhaps there is a minimum value of $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ that would permit the insertion of an additional planet that leaves the system still stable. In other words it will be interesting to determine, for a given value of $\beta/\beta_{crit}$, the largest mass object that could orbit between two planets and still leave the system stable. Such a relation could produce an analytic criterion for dynamical packing, which can currently only be estimated numerically (Menou & Tabachnik 2003; Dvorak 2003; Rivera & Haghighipour 2007).
Past work provides illumination on the possibility that some minimum value of $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ may define the limit for which additional planets could be placed between the observed planets. The HD 168443 system ($\beta/\beta_{crit} = 1.94$) has been shown to be unable to support even infinitesimal test masses (Barnes & Raymond 2004). The region between the known planets of HD 169830 ($\beta/\beta_{crit} = 1.28$) is chaotic and a planet in that region is most likely unstable (Érdi 2004). On the other hand, HD 38529 ($\beta/\beta_{crit} = 2.07$) could support a Saturn-mass companion between the known planets (Barnes & Raymond 2004). These results suggest $\beta/\beta_{crit} = 2$ may be the critical value.
The packing of the two planets in HD 190360 demands closer inspection. Although the orbits are more separated and less eccentric than those in HD 168443, their $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ value (1.70) is less than that for HD 168443 (1.94). To explore this issue, we have integrated the HD 190360 system with a hypothetical Earth-mass planet on a circular orbit located at the midpoint between the apoastron distance of the inner planet and the periastron distance of the outer. The additional companion in the HD 190360 system survived for $10^6$ years. A similar experiment with HD 74156 ($\beta/\beta_{crit}
= 1.54$) showed ejection of the Earth-mass planet in only 2500 years. We tentatively conclude that systems are packed if $\beta/\beta_{crit} \lsim 1.5$, not packed if $\beta/\beta_{crit}
\gsim 2$, and the packing status is unknown in the range $1.5 \lsim
\beta/\beta_{crit} \lsim 2$. Future research needs to determine the relationship between $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ and the possibility that additional planets could be stable between known ones.
As noted at the end of $\S$ 3.3, 70% of the tabulated systems have $\beta/\beta_{crit} < 1.3$, indicating that the planets are too fully packed to allow any intermediate planets. This result, coupled with the limitations of radial velocity surveys to detect planets (we used minimum masses), suggests that the vast majority of multiple planet systems are similarly fully packed. Our results are therefore consistent with the “Packed Planetary Systems” hypothesis (BQ; Barnes & Raymond 2004; Raymond & Barnes 2005; Raymond 2006; see also Laskar 1996) which proposes that planetary systems tend to form so as to be dynamically packed. This hypothesis therefore predicts that HD 190360 and especially HD 217107 harbor additional, undetected planets.
This investigation has identified a simple way to parameterize multiple planet systems. At least for a two-planet system, a single parameter $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ may indicate both stability and packing. Moreover, the statistics of the distribution of this dynamical parameter for observed systems are intriguing: Planetary systems tend to be dynamically fully packed and resonant systems lie at values of $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ that would indicate instability for non-resonant systems. Describing planetary systems by parameterizing the character of their dynamical interaction is also the approach taken by Barnes & Greenberg (2006b), who calculated the proximities of planetary systems to the apsidal separatrix. These new methodologies focus on the proximities of the dynamical interactions to boundaries between qualitatively different dynamical regimes.
It now appears that about half of stars with planets have multiple planets (Wright 2007), and descriptions of their dynamical interactions will therefore become increasingly more relevant, especially since many planets’ eccentricities oscillate by two orders of magnitude (Barnes & Greenberg 2006b). We encourage research that models planet formation (Lee & Peale 2002; Sándor & Kley 2006) to include comparisons of the simulated values of $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ to those of real planetary systems.
J. Bryan Henderson, Thomas R. Quinn, and Chance Reschke assisted with the simulations presented here. An anonymous referee provided helpful suggestions. This work was funded by NASA’s PG&G program.
Barnes, R. & Greenberg, R. 2006a, ApJ, 647, L163\
————. 2006b, ApJ, 652, L53\
Barnes, R. & Quinn, T.R. 2001, ApJ, 554, 884\
————. 2004, ApJ, 611, 494\
Barnes, R. & Raymond, S.N. 2004 ApJ, 617, 569\
Butler, R.P. 2006, ApJ, 646, 505\
Chambers, J., 1999, MNRAS, 304, 793\
Cochran, W. 2007, ApJ in press\
Correia, A.C.M. 2005, A&A, 440, 751\
Dvorak, R. 2003, A&A, 410, L13\
Érdi, B. 2004, MNRAS, 351, 1043\
Ferraz-Mello 2005, ApJ, 621, 473\
Froeschlé, C. 1997, CeMDA, 67, 41\
Levison, H.F. & Duncan, M.J. 1994, Icarus, 108, 18\
Gladman, B. 1993, Icarus, 106, 247\
Hadjidemetriou, D. 2006, CeMDA, 95, 225\
Laskar, J. 1990, Icarus, 88, 266\
———. 1996, CeMDA, 64, 115\
Lee, M.-H. & Peale, S.J. 2002, 567, 596\
Marchal, C. & Bozis, G. 1982, CeMDA, 26, 311\
Marcy, G. 2002, ApJ, 581, 1375\
Mayor, M. 2004, A&A, 415, 391\
McArthur, B.E. 2004, ApJ, 614, L81\
Menou, K. & Tabachnik, S. 2003, ApJ, 583, 473\
Murray, C.D. & Dermott, S.F. 1999 *Solar System Dynamics*, Cambridge UP, Cambridge\
Pepe, F. 2007, A&A, 462, 769\
Quillen, A.C, & Faber, P. 2006, MNRAS, 373, 1245\
Raymond, S.N. & Barnes, R. 2005, ApJ, 619, 549\
Raymond, S.N., Barnes, R. & Kaib, N.A. 2006, ApJ, 644, 1223\
Rivera, E.J. & Haghighipour, N. 2007, MNRAS, 374, 599\
Veras, D., & Armitage, P. 2004, Icarus, 172, 349\
Sándor, Zs. & Kley, W. 2006, A&A, 451, L31\
Sándor, Zs. 2007, MNRAS, 375, 1495\
Santos, N.C., Israelian, G., & Mayor, M. 2000, A&A, 363, 228\
Wright, J.T. 2007, ApJ, 657, 533\
Voyatzis, G. & Hadjidemetriou, D. 2005, CeMDA, 93, 263\
———. 2006, CeMDA, CeMDA, 95, 259\
Zhou, L. 2004, MNRAS, 350, 1495\
Table 1: Orbital Elements and Errors for HD 82943 and 55 Cnc\
System $m_3$ (M$_\odot$) Planet $m$ (M$_{Jup}$) $P$ (d) $e$ $\varpi$ ($^o$) $T_{peri}$ (JD)
---------- ------------------- -------- ----------------- ------------------- ---------------- ----------------- --------------------------
HD 82943 $1.05 \pm 0.05^a$ b 0.88 $221.6\pm2.7$ $0.54\pm0.05$ $138\pm13$ $2451630.9\pm5.9$
c 1.63 $444.6\pm8.8$ $0.41\pm0.08$ $96\pm7$ $2451620.3\pm12.0$
55 Cnc $0.95\pm0.1^b$ b $0.84\pm0.07$ 14.653$\pm$0.0006 0.02$\pm$0.02 99$\pm$35 2450001.479$\pm 10^{-6}$
c $0.21\pm0.04$ 44.276$\pm$0.021 0.339$\pm$0.21 61$\pm$25 2450031.4$\pm$2.5
d $4.05\pm0.9$ 5360$\pm$400 0.16$\pm$0.06 201$\pm$22 2785$\pm$250
$^a$ Santos (2000); $^b$ Marcy (2002)\
Table 2: Values of $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ for Known Systems\
System Pair $\beta/\beta_{crit}$ Class
-------------------- ------ ---------------------- ---------
HD 202206$^a$ b-c 0.883 R (5:1)
HD 128311$^b$ b-c 0.968 R (2:1)
HD 82943$^b$ b-c 0.946 R (2:1)
HD 73526$^b$ b-c 0.982 R (2:1)
GJ 876$^b$ c-d 0.99$^c$ R (2:1)
47 UMa$^b$ b-c 1.025 S
HD 155358$^d$ b-c 1.043 S
HD 108874$^b$ b-c 1.107 R (4:1)
$\upsilon$ And$^b$ c-d 1.125$^c$ S
HD 12661$^b$ b-c 1.199 S
HIP 14810$^e$ b-c 1.202 T
HD 169830$^b$ b-c 1.280 S
HD 74156$^b$ b-c 1.542 S
HD 190360$^b$ b-c 1.701 T
HD 168443$^b$ b-c 1.939 S
HD 38529$^b$ b-c 2.070 S
HD 217107$^b$ b-c 7.191 T
$^a$ Correia (2005); $^b$ Butler (2006); $^c$ An additional planet is present in this system; $^d$ Cochran (2007); $^e$ Wright (2007)
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'In this paper we study the use of cross-correlations between multiple gravitational wave (GW) data streams for detecting long-lived periodic signals. Cross-correlation searches between data from multiple detectors have traditionally been used to search for stochastic GW signals, but recently they have also been used in directed searches for periodic GWs. Here we further adapt the cross-correlation statistic for periodic GW searches by taking into account both the non-stationarity and the long term-phase coherence of the signal. We study the statistical properties and sensitivity of this search, its relation to existing periodic wave searches, and describe the precise way in which the cross-correlation statistic interpolates between semi-coherent and fully-coherent methods. Depending on the maximum duration over we wish to preserve phase coherence, the cross-correlation statistic can be tuned to go from a standard cross-correlation statistic using data from distinct detectors, to the semi-coherent time-frequency methods with increasing coherent time baselines, and all the way to a full coherent search. This leads to a unified framework for studying periodic wave searches and can be used to make informed trade-offs between computational cost, sensitivity, and robustness against signal uncertainties.'
author:
- Sanjeev Dhurandhar
- Badri Krishnan
- Himan Mukhopadhyay
- 'John T. Whelan'
bibliography:
- 'radiometer.bib'
title: 'The cross-correlation search for periodic gravitational waves '
---
Introduction
============
Long lived quasi-periodic gravitational waves (GWs) from rapidly rotating non-axisymmetric neutron stars are among the promising sources of detectable GWs for ground based detectors such as LIGO, Virgo, GEO600 etc. A number of searches for long-lived periodic GWs have been carried out using data from ground based GW detectors. These include searches using data from the interferometric and bar detectors. These searches are of two kinds depending on the size of the parameter space that is searched:
i.
: Targeted searches for sources whose parameters are well known from other astrophysical observations [@Abbott:2003yq; @Abbott:2004ig; @Abbott:2007ce]. Such searches are not computationally intensive, and use statistically optimal matched filtering techniques.
ii.
: Wide parameter space searches either for neutron stars in binary systems whose parameters are poorly constrained from prior observations [@Abbott:2006vg], or blind searches for as yet unknown neutron stars [@Abbott:2006vg; @Abbott:2005pu; @S4PSH; @S4Radiometer; @Astone:2007iz].
While none of the above searches have yet resulted in a detection, there have been some notable successes. For the searches targeting known pulsars, the limits on the gravitational wave emission and the corresponding limits on the deformation are starting to become astrophysically interesting.
Similarly, a lot of the groundwork has been laid for meeting the computational challenges for the wide parameter space searches. Computationally efficient methods and hierarchical data analysis pipelines have been developed which allow us to vastly improve the ratio of sensitivity to computational cost. Most of these are semi-coherent methods, i.e. combinations of coherent analyses combined together by excess power techniques, and they come in two main flavors. The first combines short segments of simple Fourier transformed data. The baseline of the short Fourier transforms is chosen such that the signal manifests itself as excess power in a single frequency bin, and the excess power is combined by various methods. The simplest is the StackSlide method [@Brady:1998nj] which adds the normalized excess power from the short segments, taking care to “slide” the frequency bins to account for the Doppler shift and intrinsic spindown. The PowerFlux method [@powerflux] is very similar; it performs a weighted sum of the normalized power using weights which take the sky-position and polarization dependent sensitivity of the detector into account; the weights serve to improve the sensitivity. Finally, there is the Hough transform method which performs a weighted sum of binary-number counts calculated by setting a threshold on the normalized excess power. This is more robust and computationally efficient, though at the cost of being somewhat less sensitive. All three methods have been used to analyze LIGO data in all-sky wide frequency band searches for GWs from isolated neutron stars[@Abbott:2005pu; @S4PSH], and these are so far the most sensitive wide parameter space GW searches of their kind published so far; we shall refer to them as the “standard” semi-coherent searches in the rest of this paper.
A variant of these standard semi-coherent techniques are the so-called hierarchical searches which aim to search deeper by increasing the coherent time baseline [@Brady:1998nj; @Krishnan:2004sv; @Cutler:2005pn]. This requires a sky-position (and spindown) dependent demodulation to be performed before calculating the excess power statistic. The extra demodulation step significantly increases the computational cost and such a search pipeline is currently being employed on larger computational platforms such as `Einstein@Home`[^1].
In addition to the above surveys for isolated neutron stars, searches have also been carried out for gravitational waves from neutron stars in binary systems. A plausible argument for why some neutron stars may be emitting detectable GWs applies to neutron stars in binary systems, and in particular, to the Low Mass X-ray Binaries (LMXBs) which consist of a neutron star and a low mass main-sequence star. The observed X-ray flux from these systems is due to the high rates of accretion of matter onto the neutron star. It is observed that the rotation rates of neutron stars in LMXBs is significantly lower than that might be expected on theoretical grounds; the highest theoretically possible rotation rate is significantly larger than that of a $1{\text{\,kHz}}$, while the current observed record is $\sim 620{\text{\,Hz}}$. It was suggested (first by Bildsten [@Bildsten:1998]) that this apparent upper bound on the rotation rate might be due to a balance between the spin-up due to accretion and the spindown due to the emission of gravitational radiation - there is virtually a “wall” created by the flux of GW radiated, which increases as $\Omega^6$, where $\Omega$ is the angular rotational frequency of the spinning neutron star and this limits its spin-up. There are a number of other suggested explanations which do not involve gravitational radiation, but accreting neutron stars are clearly promising sources of detectable gravitational radiation. So far two searches have targeted Sco X-1, the brightest LMXB. These have used very different techniques; [@Abbott:2006vg] used a coherent integration on 6 hours of data from the second science run of the LIGO detectors, while [@S4Radiometer] uses a cross-correlation statistic on data from the more recent fourth science run. The elucidation and generalization of this cross-correlation technique tailored to periodic GW searches, and its relation with the other searches discussed above will occupy us for the rest of this paper.
The results from these searches are starting to become astrophysically interesting. For example, using data from the latest science runs of the LIGO detectors, it is expected that the indirect spindown limit on the amplitude of gravitational waves from the Crab pulsar will be beaten by about a factor of 3. The resulting limits on the ellipticity of the known pulsars are also starting to place constraints on the equations of state of nuclear matter in neutron stars (see e.g. [@Haskell:2007sh; @Owen:2005fn]). A detection would lead to new insights about neutron star physics not obtainable by other means. Searches using large amounts of data from the LIGO detectors operating at design sensitivity are well underway, and the results are expected to become yet more astrophysically interesting in the near future.
Almost all of these searches mentioned above have been based on techniques which look for signals of a given form in a single data stream, i.e. either matched filtering techniques or semi-coherent power summing methods. While both matched filtering and semi-coherent techniques have been generalized and used to analyze data from multiple interferometers [@Cutler:2005hc; @S4PSH], the starting point for these methods is always the analysis of a single data stream. There is however one exception, which is the method used in [@Ballmer:2005uw; @S4Radiometer] and is inherently based on looking at multiple data streams. Let us consider two data segments
\[eq:32\] $$\begin{aligned}
x_1(t)& \quad \textrm{for} \quad t\in [T_1-\Delta{T}/2, T_1+\Delta{T}/2]
\ , \\
x_2(t)& \quad \textrm{for} \quad t\in [T_2-\Delta{T}/2, T_2+\Delta{T}/2]
\ .
\end{aligned}$$
If a signal resulting from the same gravitational wave is present in both streams, it should be possible to cross-correlate the output of two detectors to extract the signal. The basic cross-correlation statistic is $$\label{eq:31}
\int_{T_1 - \Delta{T}/2}^{T_1+\Delta{T}/2} dt_1
\int_{T_2-\Delta{T}/2}^{T_2+\Delta{T}/2} dt_2 \, x_1(t_1)x_2(t_2)Q(t_1,t_2) \,,$$ where $Q(t_1,t_2)$ is an appropriately chosen filter function. This technique was originally developed for the stochastic background searches where the cross-correlation is absolutely essential and is based on the fact that multiple detectors will see the same GW signal [@Allen:1997ad; @Mitra:2007mc], and it has been used extensively to search for a stochastic GW background using LIGO data [@Abbott:2003hr; @Abbott:2005ez; @Abbott:2006zx]. The function $Q(t_1,t_2)$ can be tuned to search for GWs coming from a particular sky position and also polarization [@Mitra:2007mc] and this method has been used to search for periodic waves from the neutron star in Sco X-1. All previous discussions of this method have however been in the context of stochastic searches. In this paper, we investigate in detail its applications for periodic wave searches.
The optimal form of the function $Q(t_1,t_2)$ depends on the kinds of sources that we are looking for. Thus for a stochastic background we use the facts that the statistical properties of the signal are time independent and that the two polarizations are statistically independent. In particular, the optimal $Q$ is time invariant, i.e. a function of only the difference $t_1-t_2$. Furthermore, $Q$ turns out to depend on the expected spectrum of the stochastic background.
For periodic GWs from neutron stars, many of these assumptions do not hold. The signal is deterministic and non-stationary (because of the Doppler shift), and the two polarizations are not independent. There is yet another ingredient present for periodic signals that is not present for stochastic sources. In principle, since the signals we are looking for have long term phase coherence, it should be possible to cross-correlate any pair of data segments to extract the signal, regardless of how far apart the segments are in time and regardless of whether they are from the same interferometer or not. It will turn out that the sky-resolution is much coarser than for the standard periodic searches; the appropriate baseline is not the Earth-Sun distance but rather the distance between the two detectors. This leads to a much lighter computational burden for a blind search. All of these issues will be discussed in detail in the rest of this paper.
The paper is organized as follows. Sec. \[sec:notation\] sets up notation and describes the waveforms that we are looking for; this includes both isolated neutron stars and neutron stars in binary systems. It also discusses the short segment Fourier transforms (SFTs) and the restrictions on their time baseline for the signal power to be concentrated in a single SFT frequency bin. Sec. \[sec:formalism\] motivates and defines the basic cross-correlation statistic for a pair of short data segments; Sec. \[sec:sensitivity\] discusses the statistical properties and the sensitivity of the search; Sec. \[sec:fstat\] elucidates the relation of the cross-correlation method with the ${\mathcal{F}}$ statistic; Sec. \[sec:paramest\] provides estimates of the parameter estimation that can be achieved and Sec. \[sec:params\] investigates the question of resolution of parameters such as sky position, spin-down etc. Sec. \[sec:discussion\] concludes with a summary of our results and suggestions for future work, and finally appendix \[sec:generalstat\] discusses some technical and conceptual issues which have been ignored in the earlier sections for simplicity.
Notation and useful equations {#sec:notation}
=============================
The waveform {#subsec:waveform}
------------
The waveform we are looking for is a tensor metric perturbation $${\aeitensor{h}}(t) = h_+(t) {\aeitensor{e}}_{\!+} + h_\times(t){\aeitensor{e}}_{\!\times}$$ where $\{{\aeitensor{e}}_{\!A}|A=+,\times\}$ is a transverse-traceless polarization basis associated with the GW propagation direction and tailored to the polarization state of the waves so that $$\label{eq:12}
h_+(t) = A_+\cos{\Phi}(t)
\ ,
\qquad
h_\times(t) = A_\times\sin{\Phi}(t)
\ .$$ If $\iota$ is the angle between the line of sight ${{\vec{n}}}$ to the star and its rotation axis, the amplitudes are
\[eq:17\] $$\begin{gathered}
A_+ = h_0 {\mathcal{A}}_+
\ ,
\qquad
A_\times = h_0{\mathcal{A}}_\times
\ ,
\\
{\mathcal{A}}_+ = \frac{1+\cos^2\iota}{2}
\ ,
\qquad
{\mathcal{A}}_\times = \cos\iota
\ .\end{gathered}$$
In the neutron star rest frame with proper time $\tau$, the phase is $$\label{eq:13}
{\Phi}(t(\tau)) = {\Phi}_0 + 2\pi \left\{f_0\tau + \frac{1}{2}f_1\tau^2 \ldots
\right\}
\ .$$ The reference time where all the spindown parameters are defined is taken to be $\tau = 0$, and ${\Phi}_0$ is the phase at $\tau=0$.
A detector’s scalar strain response is the contraction of the tensor metric perturbation with a response tensor[^2] ${\aeitensor{d}}$: $$\label{eq:16}
h(t) = {\aeitensor{h}}(t):{\aeitensor{d}}(t) = \sum_{A=+,\times}F_A(t)h_A(t)$$ where $$F_A(t) = {\aeitensor{e}}_{\!A} : {\aeitensor{d}}(t)$$ The polarization basis $\{{\aeitensor{e}}_{\!A}\}$ is sometimes inconvenient, because its definition involves not only the direction to the source but also the source’s polarization state (specifically the orientation of the neutron star’s spin). For a given sky direction ${{\vec{n}}}$, one can always construct a transverse, traceless polarization basis ${\aeitensor{\varepsilon}}_{\!A}$ by starting e.g., with the vector transverse to ${{\vec{n}}}$ and lying in the Earth’s equatorial plane. The relationship between this reference basis and the preferred polarization basis of the source is described by the polarization angle $\psi$:
$$\begin{aligned}
{\aeitensor{e}}_{\!+} &= {\aeitensor{\varepsilon}}_{\!+} \cos 2\psi +
{\aeitensor{\varepsilon}}_{\!\times} \sin 2\psi \\
{\aeitensor{e}}_{\!\times} &= - {\aeitensor{\varepsilon}}_{\!+} \sin 2\psi +
{\aeitensor{\varepsilon}}_{\!\times} \cos 2\psi
\end{aligned}$$
That means, if we define
\[eq:abdef\] $$\begin{aligned}
a(t; {{\vec{n}}})&={\aeitensor{d}}(t):{\aeitensor{\varepsilon}}_{\!+} ({{\vec{n}}}) \\
b(t; {{\vec{n}}})&={\aeitensor{d}}(t):{\aeitensor{\varepsilon}}_{\!\times} ({{\vec{n}}})
\end{aligned}$$
(which are time-dependent because of the rotation of the detector tensor ${\aeitensor{d}}$), we can decompose the beam pattern functions as
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:29}
F_+(t; {{\vec{n}}}, \psi) &= a(t; {{\vec{n}}})\cos 2\psi + b(t; {{\vec{n}}})\sin 2\psi
\ ,
\\
F_\times(t; {{\vec{n}}}, \psi) &= b(t; {{\vec{n}}})\cos 2\psi - a(t; {{\vec{n}}})\sin 2\psi
\ .
\end{aligned}$$
The polarization angle is a property of the source, but the functions $a(t; {{\vec{n}}})$ and $b(t; {{\vec{n}}})$ depend on both the sky position of the source and the detector in question.
### Isolated neutron stars {#subsubsec:isolated}
The relation between the detector time $t$ and the neutron star time $\tau$ depends on whether the neutron star is isolated or in a binary. For an isolated neutron star, we assume[^3] that the star is at rest with respect to the SSB frame. Let ${\vec{r}}(t)$ be the position of the detector in the SSB frame and ${\vec{v}}(t)$ its velocity. The times of arrival of the wave at the detector and the SSB are $$\label{eq:14}
t = \tau - \frac{{\vec{r}}\cdot{{\vec{n}}}}{c} +
\textrm{relativistic corrections}
\ .$$ The relativistic corrections can be ignored for our purposes. The instantaneous frequency is then, to a very good approximation $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:15}
f(t) &= \hat{f}(t) + \hat{f}(t)\frac{{\vec{v}}\cdot{{\vec{n}}}}{c}
\ ,
\\
\hat{f}(t) &= f_0 + f_1t
\ .\end{aligned}$$ The parameters of the signal from an isolated neutron star are thus the so-called amplitude parameters (or nuisance parameters) $\{h_0,\cos\iota,\psi,{\Phi}_0\}$ and the Doppler parameters $\bm\lambda
= \{{{\vec{n}}},f_0,f_1,\ldots\}$. The Doppler parameters determine the frequency evolution of the signal through . The frequency and spindown ranges will canonically be taken to be $50{\text{\,Hz}} < f_0 < 1000{\text{\,Hz}}$, and $-1\times 10^{-8}{\text{\,Hz/s}} < f_1
< 0$. These were the ranges used in [@S4PSH]. The lowest frequency is determined by the performance of the detector, and it will be lower for the advanced detectors. The upper end of the frequency range could conceivably be as high as $2000{\text{\,Hz}}$ depending on the computational cost.
Written in terms of the detector time $t$, and including first spindowns, the phase is: $$\label{eq:20}
{\Phi}(t) = {\Phi}_0 + 2\pi\left(f_0t + \frac{1}{2}f_1t^2\right) + 2\pi (f_0+f_1t)
\frac{{\vec{r}}\cdot{{\vec{n}}}}{c}
\ .$$ We have ignored the $\frac{1}{2}f_1({\vec{r}}\cdot{{\vec{n}}}/c)^2$ term. In fact, even the term $f_1t({\vec{r}}\cdot{{\vec{n}}}/c)$ will be ignored in most of the calculations below.[^4]
Let us quantify the restrictions on the parameter space due to these approximations adapting the “$1/4$-cycle criterion” used in [@Jaranowski:1998qm]: any physical effect which contributes less than $1/4$ of a cycle to the phase of the signal over a given coherent observation time will be ignored. Since ${\left\lvert{\vec{r}}\cdot{{\vec{n}}}/c\right\rvert} \leq
1{\text{\,AU}}/c \approx 500{\text{\,s}}$, we will have $\frac{1}{2}{\left\lvertf_1\right\rvert}({\vec{r}}\cdot{{\vec{n}}}/c)^2 < 1/4$ if ${\left\lvertf_1\right\rvert} < 2\times 10^{-6}{\text{\,Hz/s}}$. This is much larger than any spindowns we can realistically consider. On the other hand, the $f_1t({\vec{r}}\cdot{{\vec{n}}}/c)$ is, in general not negligible for realistic spindowns and observation times of months. However, we will break up our observation time into shorter segments of duration much less than a day. Over say 1 hour, this term is ignorable if ${\left\lvert
f_1\right\rvert} < 3\times 10^{-7}{\text{\,Hz/s}}$ which is still a very large spindown.
### Neutron stars in binary systems {#subsubsec:binary}
To account for the motion of the neutron star in a binary orbit, we need to add the orbital time delays to . The most important contribution is again the Roemer delay: $$\label{eq:38}
t = \tau - \frac{{\vec{r}}\cdot{{\vec{n}}}}{c} +
\frac{{\vec{r}}_{\rm orb}\cdot{{\vec{n}}}}{c} +\textrm{relativistic corrections}
\ .$$ Here ${\vec{r}}_{\rm orb}$ is the position vector of the neutron star in the binary system’s center of mass frame.
There are four relevant orbital parameters. The first is the orbital period $P_{\rm orb}$, and, if available, its derivative $\dot{P}_{\rm
orb}$. We then need a reference time within the orbit for which we use $T_{\rm asc}$, the time of crossing of the ascending node. The third parameter is the projected semi-major axis of the neutron star, $a_{\rm p} = a_{\rm
x} \sin i$. The final parameter is the orbital eccentricity $e$. In addition, there are 2 parameters specifying the orientation of the orbital plane, i.e. the inclination angle $i$ (not to be confused with the orientation of the neutron star axis $\iota$) and the argument of periapsis $\omega$. Of these 6 parameters, only 5 are required to define the phase model because of the projection along the line of sight ${{\vec{n}}}$; see [@Dhurandhar:2000sd] for further details.
We therefore have a total of 5 parameters of the binary which determine the frequency evolution of the signal: $\bm\lambda_{\rm bin}
= (a_{\rm x}\sin i,e,P_{\rm orb},T_{\rm asc},\omega)$. In the case when the orbit is circular ($e=0$), the argument of periapsis and the initial orbital phase combine additively into a single parameter so that we are left with only 3 search parameters: $\bm\lambda_{\rm bin}
= (a_{\rm p},P_{\rm orb},T_{\rm asc})$. We will not include higher derivatives of ${P}_{\rm orb}$. As an example, for Sco X-1 (the brightest LMXB), some of the orbital parameters are $P_{\rm orb}
\approx 6.8\times 10^4{\text{\,s}}$, and $a_{\rm p}/c \approx 1.44{\text{\,s}}$, and $e < 3\times 10^{-3}$ [@Wright:1975; @Steeghs:2002; @Abbott:2006vg].
Let ${\vec{v}}_{\rm orb}$ be the velocity of the neutron star in the center-of-mass frame of the binary. The observed frequency is, to a very good approximation, given again by the non-relativistic expression, $$\label{eq:11}
f(t) = \hat{f}(t) + \hat{f}(t)\frac{({\vec{v}} - {\vec{v}}_{\rm
orb})\cdot{{\vec{n}}}}{c}
\ .$$ Since ${\vec{v}}_{\rm orb}$ is usually much larger than the Earth’s orbital velocity, ${\vec{v}}_{\rm orb}$ is the dominant contribution to the Doppler shift.
Short-time Fourier transforms {#subsec:sfts}
-----------------------------
Given a time series detector output from a detector, it is convenient to break it up into short segments of length $\Delta{T}$ and to store the Short-time Fourier Transforms (SFTs). The value of $\Delta{T}$ is chosen such that the approximation is valid and as we will see, this leads to different restrictions on $\Delta{T}$ for neutron stars which are isolated or in binary systems. Such SFT databases are commonly used in the LIGO, GEO and Virgo collaborations for periodic wave searches, and we will also base our data analysis strategies mostly on SFTs [@v2SFTs].
Let $x(t)$ be a time series sampled discretely at intervals of $\delta
t$. Let us consider $N$ samples $x_j$ for $j=0\ldots N-1$, and let $\Delta{T} = N\delta t$. Our convention for the discrete Fourier transform will be $$\label{eq:35}
\tilde{x}_k = \delta t \sum_{j=0}^{N-1}x_je^{-i2\pi jk/N}
\ ,$$ where $k=0,1\ldots (N-1)$. For $0\leq k \leq \lfloor N/2 \rfloor$, the frequency index $k$ corresponds to a physical frequency $f_k=
k/\Delta{T}$ with $\lfloor .\rfloor$ denoting the integer part of a given real number. The values $\lfloor N/2 \rfloor < k \leq N-1$ correspond to negative frequencies given by $f_k = (k-N)/\Delta{T}$. Each SFT stores the real and imaginary values of $\tilde{x}_k$ for a range of frequency bin indices $k$. The $I^{\text{th}}$ SFT will span the time interval $[T_I - \Delta{T}/2, T_I + \Delta{T}/2]$. When necessary, we will denote the data at the $k^{\text{th}}$ frequency bin of the $I^{\text{th}}$ SFT by $\tilde{x}_{k,I}$.
Eq. is actually a simplification. In practice, to avoid spectral leakage, a taper $w_j$ is applied while taking the Fourier transform: $$\label{eq:40}
\tilde{x}_k = \sum_{j=0}^{N-1} w_j x_j e^{-i2\pi jk/N}
\ .$$ See e.g. [@Percival-Walden] for details. We will mostly ignore window-related issues in this paper.
The detector output $x(t)$ is the sum of noise $n(t)$ plus a possible gravitational wave signal: $$\label{eq:36}
x(t) = n(t) + h(t)
\ .$$ We will assume the noise to be a real stochastic process of zero mean, stationary and Gaussian; in practice, we only need stationarity over a period $\Delta{T}$, the time baseline of the SFTs. The properties of the noise are thus fully described by a single-sided power spectral density $S_n(f)$ which, in the continuous time case is defined as, $$\label{eq:37}
S_n(f) := 2 \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \langle n(t'+t)n(t')\rangle
e^{-i2\pi ft} dt
\ ,$$ where $\langle \cdot \rangle$ denotes an average over an ensemble of noise realizations. Note that the average $\langle
n(t'+t)n(t') \rangle$ is independent of $t'$ because of the assumption of stationarity. In practice, we are of course only given $x(t)$ and not $n(t)$ itself. So we must take care to ensure that the estimation of $S_n(f)$ is not biased by the presence of a signal. Finally, the following expression for $S_n$ is useful: $$\label{eq:1}
\langle |\tilde{x}_k|^2\rangle \approx \frac{\Delta{T}}{2}S_n(f_k)
\ .$$ This equation relates the variance of the (real and imaginary parts) of $\tilde{n}_k$ to the PSD, thus providing a more intuitive understanding of the PSD. This is a special case of a more general expression which, in the continuous case, reads, $$\label{eq:2}
\langle \tilde{n}^{*}(f) \tilde{n}(f')\rangle =
\frac{1}{2}S_n(f) \delta(f-f')
\ .$$
The short-duration Fourier transform of the signal {#subsec:fourier}
--------------------------------------------------
We now calculate the Fourier transform of the signal over an observation duration $[T-\Delta{T}/2,T+\Delta{T}/2]$ centered at the time $T$. We assume $\Delta{T}$ is small enough so that $\{F_A|A=+,\times\}$ can be treated as constants in this duration; this means $\Delta{T} \ll
1{\text{\,day}}$. We assume that the observation duration is small enough so that the phase of the signal in this duration can be expanded in a power series at the mid-point $T$: $$\label{eq:18}
{\Phi}(t) = {\Phi}(T) + 2\pi f(T)(t-T)
\ .$$ The validity of this approximation sets the limits on how large $\Delta{T}$ can be. If $\dot{f}(t)$ is the time-derivative of the signal frequency at any given time $t$, the above approximation is valid whenever effects of the frequency derivative $\dot{f}$ can be ignored over the duration $\Delta{T}$. Using the $1/4$-cycle criterion, this leads to $\dot{f} \leq \Delta{T}^{-2}$.
For isolated neutron stars, the time variation of $f(t)$ is given by and is due to two effects: the intrinsic spindown of the star, and the Doppler modulation due to the Earth’s motion. Consider first the intrinsic spindown $f_1$. Taking the largest spindown to be $10^{-8}{\text{\,Hz/s}}$, we get $\Delta{T} < 10^4{\text{\,s}}$. For the Doppler shift, we can estimate $\dot{f}$ by keeping $\hat{f}$ fixed and differentiating ${\vec{v}}$ in . The result is worked out in [@Krishnan:2004sv] and yields the following restriction on $\Delta{T}$: $$\label{eq:34}
\Delta{T} < 4\times 10^3 {\text{\,s}} \times
\sqrt{\frac{500{\text{\,Hz}}}{f_0}}
\ .$$ In this paper, for isolated neutron stars, we will mostly use $\Delta{T}=30{\text{\,min}}$ as a canonical reference value. This is well within the above restrictions. The limits on $\Delta{T}$ are far more stringent for neutron stars in binary systems because of the higher Doppler shifts. The Sco X-1 search in [@Abbott:2006vg] used $\Delta{T} =
60{\text{\,s}}$.
With the approximation , in the time interval $[T-\Delta{T}/2,T+\Delta{T}/2]$ we have, $$\label{eq:19}
\begin{split}
h(t) =& F_+A_+\cos({\Phi}(T) + 2\pi f(T)(t-T)) \\
&+ F_\times A_\times\sin({\Phi}(T) + 2\pi f(T)(t-T))
\ .
\end{split}$$ The Fourier transform of $h(t)$ is easily seen to be, $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:21}
\tilde{h}(f) = \int_{T-\Delta{T}/2}^{T+\Delta{T}/2}
h(t)e^{-i2\pi f(t-T+\Delta{T}/2)} dt \\
= e^{i\pi f\Delta{T}}
\Biggl[
e^{i{\Phi}(T)}\frac{(F_+A_+ -iF_\times A_\times)}{2}
\delta_{\Delta{T}}\left( f-f(T)\right) \\
+ e^{-i{\Phi}(T)}\frac{(F_+A_+ +iF_\times A_\times)}{2}
\delta_{\Delta{T}}\left(f+f(T)\right)
\Biggr]
\,,\end{gathered}$$ where we have defined the finite time approximation $\delta_{\Delta{T}}(f) := \sin(\pi f\Delta{T})/\pi f$ to the delta function $\delta(f)$. This definition of the function $\delta_{\Delta{T}}(f)$ leads to significant spectral leakage of the signal power into neighboring frequency bins. This can be improved by using suitable tapers as in . We assume that this has been done and we will henceforth assume that spectral leakage is negligible.
The cross-correlation statistic for a pair of SFTs {#sec:formalism}
==================================================
Let us assume that we have two data streams covering the time intervals ${\mathcal{I}}_I$ and ${\mathcal{I}}_J$ centered on the times $T_I$ and $T_J$ respectively; both intervals have the same duration $\Delta{T}$. The data streams in the two intervals $x_I$ and $x_J$ could come from the same or different detectors, though of course if $T_I=T_J$ then the detectors have to be different. The received signals in the two intervals are denoted by $h_I(t)$ ($t\in{\mathcal{I}}_I$) and $h_J(t)$ ($t\in{\mathcal{I}}_J$) respectively. As before, we assume that the duration $\Delta{T}$ of the time intervals is such that the beam pattern functions are approximately constant. We denote the PSDs of the noise in the two intervals by $S_n^{(I)}(f)$ and $S_n^{(J)}(f)$ respectively.
The basic cross-correlation statistic corresponding to a filter function $Q$ is, $$\label{eq:4}
{\mathcal{S}}_{I\!J} = \int_{T_I-\Delta{T}/2}^{T_I+\Delta{T}/2}dt
\int_{T_J-\Delta{T}/2}^{T_J+\Delta{T}/2}dt'\,
x_I(t)x_J(t')Q_{I\!J}(t,t')
\ .$$ We would like to understand how the optimal $Q_{I\!J}$ can be chosen. The optimal choice depends in fact on the kind of signals we are looking for. The analysis presented in [@Allen:1997ad] describes the optimal choice of $Q$ for stochastic signals, and here we will tailor our discussion to the periodic signals described earlier.
To get some intuition on the nature of ${\mathcal{S}}_{I\!J}$, let us evaluate ${\mathcal{S}}_{I\!J}$ in the frequency domain assuming that $Q_{I\!J}$ is time invariant: $Q(t,t') = Q(t-t')$. Keep in mind however that this will *not* be the optimal solution, and a more detailed analysis will be presented later.
It is easy to evaluate by writing $x_I(t)$ in terms of its Fourier transform. Along the way we approximate $\delta_{\Delta{T}}$ by the delta function, but we however should not take $Q_{I\!J}(\tau)$ to be a rapidly decreasing function of $\tau$ as in [@Allen:1997ad]. Since our signals have long term phase coherence, $Q_{I\!J}(\tau)$ will also turn out to be periodic. In any case, we still end up with the simple expression, $$\label{eq:9}
{\mathcal{S}}_{I\!J} = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}df\,
\tilde{x}_I^{*}(f)\tilde{x}_J(f)\tilde{Q}_{I\!J}(f)
\ .$$ The mean value of ${\mathcal{S}}_{I\!J}$ over an ensemble of noise realizations is, $$\label{eq:10}
\mu_{I\!J} := \langle{\mathcal{S}}_{I\!J}\rangle =
\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}df
\,\tilde{h}_I^{*}(f)\tilde{h}_J(f)\tilde{Q}_{I\!J}(f)
\ .$$ Here we have assumed that the noise has zero mean, and that $n_I$ and $n_J$ are uncorrelated. If we assume further that $h_I \ll n_I$ then the standard deviation is approximately: $$\label{eq:23}
\sigma_{I\!J}^2 = \frac{\Delta{T}}{2}\int_0^\infty
df\,S_{n}^{(I)}(f)S_{n}^{(J)}(f)|\tilde{Q}_{I\!J}(f)|^2
\ .$$ Furthermore, it can also be shown under the same assumptions, that ${\mathcal{S}}_{I\!J}$ and ${\mathcal{S}}_{J\!K}$ are uncorrelated for $K\neq I$: $$\label{eq:3}
\langle {\mathcal{S}}_{I\!J}{\mathcal{S}}_{J\!K}\rangle = \delta_{I\!K}\sigma^2_{I\!J}
\ .$$ Thus, the correlation pairs formed from all pairs of distinct SFTs are statistically independent. Note however that the same is not true for the third order moments; for example $\langle {\mathcal{S}}_{I\!J}{\mathcal{S}}_{J\!K}{\mathcal{S}}_{K\!I}
\rangle \neq 0$ even when the small signal approximation is valid. This is however not a problem for us because we will never need to calculate the third and higher order correlations between the $\{{\mathcal{S}}_{I\!J}\}$.
Eq. clearly demonstrates that taking $Q_{I\!J}(t,t')$ to be time-invariant is, in general, suboptimal for the data analysis problem at hand. The signal frequencies $f_I =
f(T_I)$ and $f_J = f(T_J)$ at the midpoints of the two intervals are given by (for an isolated system) or (for a binary systems). In general, $f_I$ and $f_J$ may be quite distinct from each other, especially if the intervals are far apart in time. Our assumptions on $\Delta{T}$ ensure that the signal power to be concentrated mostly in a single SFT frequency bin. Thus, no matter what we choose for $\tilde{Q}_{I\!J}(f)$, the overlap between $\tilde{h}_I$ and $\tilde{h}_J$ might be quite small. This will lead to a small $\mu_{I\!J}$ and thus a small signal-to-noise ratio $\mu_{I\!J}/\sigma_{I\!J}$. The fix is obvious: we need to shift the frequencies while constructing the cross-correlation statistic. So, if we define $\delta f_{I\!J} = f_J - f_I$ then, $$\label{eq:5}
{\mathcal{S}}_{I\!J} =
\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}df\,\tilde{x}_I^{*}(f)
\tilde{x}_J(f + \delta f_{I\!J})\tilde{Q}_{I\!J}(f + \delta f_{I\!J}/2)
\ .$$ In the time domain, this corresponds to the non-time invariant filter: $$\label{eq:6}
Q_{I\!J}(t,t') = e^{-i\pi (\delta f_{I\!J}) (t+t')}Q_{I\!J}(t-t')
\ .$$ The mean $\mu_{I\!J}$ becomes, $$\label{eq:7}
\mu_{I\!J} := \langle{\mathcal{S}}_{I\!J}\rangle =
\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}df\,\tilde{h}_I^{*}(f)
\tilde{h}_J(f + \delta f_{I\!J})\tilde{Q}_{I\!J}(f + \delta f_{I\!J}/2)
\ ,$$ and the variance $\sigma_{I\!J}^2$ is unchanged.
An important quantity for us is the signal cross-correlation $\tilde{h}^{*}_I(f)\tilde{h}_J(f+\delta f_{I\!J})$. We extract the amplitude term $h_0^2$ and the delta-functions to define for $f > 0$, $$\label{eq:8}
\tilde{h}^{*}_I(f)\tilde{h}_J(f+\delta f_{I\!J}) = h_0^2{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J}\delta^2_{\Delta{T}}(f-f_I)
\ .$$ The signal cross-correlation function ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J}$ is an important quantity, much like the overlap-reduction function for stochastic searches defined in [@Allen:1997ad] (though ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J}$ is not exactly analogous to the overlap reduction function).
Apart from the frequency $f$ and $T_I,T_J$, ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J}$ is a function of the signal parameters, i.e. the amplitude parameters $\{h_0,\iota,\psi,{\Phi}_0\}$, the Doppler parameters $\bm\lambda$, and possibly the binary parameters $\bm\lambda_{\rm bin}$. To avoid clutter, we will often drop the dependence of ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J}$ on the signal parameters and $T_{I}$, $T_{J}$, and just write ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J}$.
Using it is easy to calculate ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J}$. For $ f>0 $, the dominant contribution is:
$$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:25}
{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J} =
\frac{1}{4}e^{-i\Delta{\Phi}_{I\!J}}\left\{(F_{I+}F_{J+}{\mathcal{A}}_+^2 +
F_{I\times}F_{J\times}{\mathcal{A}}_\times^2) - i(F_{I+}F_{J\times} -
F_{I\times}F_{J+}){\mathcal{A}}_+{\mathcal{A}}_\times\right\}
\ ,
\\
\label{eq:22}
\Delta{\Phi}_{I\!J} = {\Phi}_I(T_I) - {\Phi}_J(T_J)
\ .
\end{gathered}$$
Here we have added the subscript $I$ and $J$ to the phase ${\Phi}$ to emphasize that ${\Phi}$ is detector dependent. For isolated neutron stars, with the approximations explained in Sec. \[subsubsec:isolated\], this leads to $$\label{eq:39}
\Delta{\Phi}_{I\!J} = 2\pi \sum_{k=0}^s\frac{f_k}{k!} (T_I^{k+1} - T_J^{k+1}) + 2\pi f_0
\frac{\Delta{\vec{r}}_{I\!J}\cdot{{\vec{n}}}}{c}
\ .$$
We have used , ignored the $f_1t({\vec{r}}\cdot{{\vec{n}}}/c)$ term, and defined $\Delta{\vec{r}}_{I\!J}:=
{\vec{r}}(T_I)- {\vec{r}}(T_J)$. Recall from that ${\mathcal{A}}_{+,\times}$ are the same as $A_{+,\times}$ but without the factor of $h_0$.
We can now also average over $\cos\iota$ using the following relations:
\[eq:26\] $$\begin{gathered}
\langle {\mathcal{A}}_+^2\rangle_{\cos\iota} = \frac{7}{15}
\ ,
\qquad
\langle {\mathcal{A}}_\times^2\rangle_{\cos\iota} = \frac{1}{3}
\ ,
\\
\langle {\mathcal{A}}_+{\mathcal{A}}_\times\rangle_{\cos\iota}= 0
\ .
\end{gathered}$$
The average of ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J}$ over $\cos\iota$ is thus, $$\langle{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J}\rangle_{\cos\iota} =
\frac{1}{60}e^{- i\Delta{\Phi}_{I\!J}}(7F_{I+}F_{J+} +
5F_{I\times}F_{J\times})
\ .
\label{eq:27}$$ We can easily perform another average over the polarization angle $\psi$ using : $$\label{eq:28}
\begin{split}
\langle F_{I+}F_{J+} \rangle_\psi &= \langle F_{I\times}F_{J\times}
\rangle_\psi = \frac{1}{2} (a_I a_J + b_I b_J)
\\
&= d_{Iab}\, P^{\text{TT}{{\vec{n}}}}{}^{ab}_{cd}\, d_J^{cd}
\ ,
\end{split}$$ where, $$P^{\text{TT}{{\vec{n}}}}{}^{ab}_{cd}
=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{A=+,\times}\varepsilon_{A\,ab}\varepsilon_{A}^{cd}
=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{A=+,\times}e_{A\,ab}e_{A}^{cd}
\ ,$$ is a projection onto symmetric traceless tensors transverse to ${{\vec{n}}}$. This leads to: $$\begin{split}
\langle{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J}\rangle_{\cos\iota,\psi} &=
\frac{1}{10}e^{-i\Delta{\Phi}_{I\!J}}(a_Ia_J + b_Ib_J)
\ .
\label{eq:30}
\\
&=
\frac{1}{5}\,d_{Iab}\, d_J^{cd}\, P^{\text{TT}{{\vec{n}}}}{}^{ab}_{cd}
\, e^{-i\Delta{\Phi}_{I\!J}}
\ .
\end{split}$$ In the case of time-[[coïncident]{}]{} SFTs, since $\Delta{\Phi}_{I\!J}$ reduces $\frac{\Delta{\vec{r}}_{I\!J}\cdot{{\vec{n}}}}{c}$, this is just a normalization factor times the overlap reduction function which would be used for a search for a stochastic background coming from a single point on the sky.[@S4Radiometer; @Ballmer:2005uw; @JTWanisotropic; @Whelan:2005sk]
Statistics and sensitivity {#sec:sensitivity}
==========================
For each SFT pair (labeled by an index pair $I\!J$, we define the raw cross-correlation as the complex random variable: $$\label{eq:42}
{\mathcal{Y}}_{k,I\!J} = \frac{\tilde{x}_{k,I}^{*}\tilde{x}_{k',J}}{\Delta{T}^2}
\ .$$ The frequency bin $k'$ is shifted from $k$ by an amount corresponding to $\delta f_{I\!J}$: $k' = k + \lfloor \Delta{T}\delta
f_{I\!J}\rfloor$. Note that ${\mathcal{Y}}_{k,I\!J}$ is computed using only data from single frequency bins in the two SFTs; this works under the assumption that the signal power is mostly concentrated in a single frequency bin. We emphasize that, this is not a fundamental limitation because we could, if we wished, consider the (optimally weighted) power from the neighboring bins as well if necessary. In the rest of this paper, we shall consider $\Delta T$ sufficiently small so that this assumption is valid. See Sec. \[sec:notation\] for quantitative estimates on $\Delta T$.
In this section we initially make two additional simplifying assumptions. First we take the signal to be much smaller than the noise, i.e. $h \ll n$, and second we only consider ${\mathcal{Y}}_{k,I\!J}$ for $I\neq J$.[^5] The results obtained using these assumptions are probably the most relevant for practical applications. Firstly, for the ground based detectors the signal is indeed expected to be much smaller than the noise. Secondly, the number of pairs of distinct SFTs is much more than the number of self pairs; there is thus no significant loss in sensitivity if the self-correlations are not considered in the final detection statistic.
The $\{{\mathcal{Y}}_{k,I\!J}\}$ are random variables with mean and variance given by, $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:24}
\mu_{k,I\!J} = h_0^2 {\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J}
\ ,
\\
\sigma_{k,I\!J}^2 = \sigma_{k,I\!J}^2
= \frac{1}{4\Delta{T}^2}S_n^{(I)}(f_k)S_n^{(J)}(f_{k'})
\ .\end{gathered}$$ To derive the expression for the mean, we have replaced $\delta_{\Delta T}(f-f_I)$ by $\delta_{\Delta{T}}(0) = \Delta{T}$, and for the variance we have assumed that the real and imaginary parts of $\tilde{x}_k$ are uncorrelated and have the same variance. The $\{{\mathcal{Y}}_{k,I\!J}\}$ are not Gaussian variables, but we will only need their mean and standard deviation.
Where convenient, we will replace the pair $I\!J$ with a single lowercase Greek index $\alpha,\beta\ldots$. Thus, ${\mathcal{Y}}_{k,I\!J}$ will often be denoted ${\mathcal{Y}}_{k,\alpha}$. To avoid unnecessary clutter, we also avoid putting the frequency index $k$ explicitly in ${\mathcal{Y}}_{k,\alpha}$. In any case, one expects the signal contribution to be limited essentially to a single frequency bin $k$. Our task is now to combine the ${\mathcal{Y}}_{\alpha}$ in a statistically optimal way to extract the signal amplitude $h_0$. The following analysis is very similar to what is used in [@S4PSH] (see also [@powerflux; @wt-hough]).
We consider detection statistics which are weighted sums of the ${\mathcal{Y}}_\alpha$: $$\label{eq:41}
\rho = \sum_{\alpha} (u_\alpha {\mathcal{Y}}_\alpha + u_\alpha^{*}{\mathcal{Y}}_\alpha^{*})
\ .$$ We are interested in the probability distribution of the random variable $\rho$ because this is required for computing the sensitivity at given false alarm and false dismissal rates. It is simply obtained by examining the behavior of the noise in ${\mathcal{Y}}_{\alpha}$ (of which $\rho$ is made up of) which is derived from by replacing the data $x$ by the noise $n$ in each data segment $I, J$. If we assume that the noise in each detector is Gaussian with mean zero, the noise in $\rho$ is a sum of products of real independent Gaussian variables each having mean zero. Although ${\mathcal{Y}}_{\alpha}$ is complex, the statistic $\rho$ is real. The product of two independent Gaussian variables whose mean is zero, is a random variable whose probability density function (PDF) is essentially $K_0(x)$, where $K_0 (x)$ is the modified Bessel function of the second kind of order zero - more specifically, if $X \sim N(0, \sigma_X)$ and $Y \sim N(0, \sigma_Y)$, then the PDF of $Z=XY$ is $K_0(|z|/\sigma_X \sigma_Y) / \pi \sigma_X \sigma_Y$. This distribution has zero mean and a finite variance, namely, $\sigma_X^2 \sigma_Y^2$. Then a generalization of the central limit theorem states that the sum of a large number of such zero mean variables tends to a Gaussian random variable [@Feller:1965]. Thus $\rho$ is a Gaussian random variable whose mean $\mu$ and variance $\sigma^2$ are given by: $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:44}
\mu = \sum_\alpha (u_\alpha \mu_\alpha + u_\alpha^{*}\mu_\alpha^{*}) = h_0^2\sum_\alpha
(u_\alpha{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha + u_\alpha^{*}{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha^{*})
\ ,
\\
\sigma^2 = 2\, \sum_\alpha |u_\alpha|^2\sigma_\alpha^2
\ .\end{gathered}$$ Let us set a threshold ${\rho_{\rm th}}$ on $\rho$ to select detection candidates based on a false alarm rate $\alpha$. It is easy to show that for Gaussian noise the threshold must be: $$\label{eq:45}
{\rho_{\rm th}}= \sqrt{2}\sigma\operatorname{erfc}^{-1}(2\alpha)
\ ,$$ where $\operatorname{erfc}$ is the complementary error function. The detection rate in the presence of a signal is,
$$\label{eq:46}
\gamma = \frac{1}{2}\operatorname{erfc}\left(\frac{{\rho_{\rm th}}- \mu}{\sqrt{2}\sigma}\right)
\ .$$
Since $\mu \propto h_0^2$, this can be inverted to give the smallest value of $h_0$ that will cross the threshold at given false alarm and detection rates, $$\label{eq:47}
h_0^2 = 2\, \mathcal{S}
\left(
\frac{\sqrt{\sum_\alpha |u_\alpha|^2 \sigma_\alpha^2}}
{\sum_\alpha (u_\alpha{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha + u_\alpha^{*}{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha^{*})}
\right)
\ ,$$ where $\mathcal{S} = \operatorname{erfc}^{-1}(2 \alpha) - \operatorname{erfc}^{-1}(2 \gamma)$. This can also be written in terms of the false dismissal rate $\beta =
1-\gamma$ as $\mathcal{S} = \operatorname{erfc}^{-1}(2 \alpha) + \operatorname{erfc}^{-1}(2
\beta)$.[^6] The solution for $u_\alpha$ which minimizes $h_0$ can then be shown to be[^7], $$\label{eq:48}
u_\alpha \propto \frac{{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha^{*}}{\sigma_\alpha^2}
\ .$$ It is shown in appendix \[sec:generalstat\] that this solution also holds when we include the self-correlations (still assuming $h\ll n$).
Substituting from (\[eq:48\]) into (\[eq:41\]), the optimal detection statistic is: $$\label{eq:54}
\rho \propto
\sum_\alpha \frac{{\mathcal{Y}}_\alpha{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha^{*}+ {\mathcal{Y}}_\alpha^{*}{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha}
{\sigma_\alpha^2}\ .$$ Substituting the expression for $u_\alpha$ from back into , the optimal sensitivity is seen to be, $$\label{eq:49}
h_0 = \left( \frac{\mathcal{S}^2}{\sum_\alpha
|{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha|^2/\sigma_\alpha^2}\right)^{1/4}
\ .$$ In the case when we are correlating data from two distinct interferometers with stationary noise floors $S_n^{(1)}(f)$ and $S_{n}^{(2)}(f)$, then $\sigma_\alpha$ is independent of $\alpha$ and is given by, $$\label{eq:50}
\sigma_\alpha^2 = \frac{1}{4\Delta{T}^2}S_n^{(1)}(f)S_n^{(2)}(f)
\ .$$ We are using the superscripts in $S_n^{(1)}$ and $S_N^{(2)}$ to refer to the two detectors. Similarly, if we denote the average of $|{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha|^2$ over pairs of SFTs by $\langle|{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha|^2\rangle_\alpha$, then, $$\label{eq:55}
\sum_{\alpha} |{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha|^2 = N_{\rm pairs} \langle
|{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha|^2\rangle_\alpha$$ where $N_{\rm pairs}$ is the total number of SFT pairs. This leads to, $$\label{eq:51}
h_0 = \frac{\mathcal{S}^{1/2}}{\sqrt{2}\langle
|{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha|^2\rangle_\alpha^{1/4}} \frac{1}{N_{\rm pairs}^{1/4}}
\sqrt{\frac{\left(S_n^{(1)}S_n^{(2)}\right)^{1/2}}{\Delta{T}}}
\ .$$ Similarly, if we relax the requirement that the pairs have to be from the distinct detectors, and instead assume that the noise floor in all SFTs is the same, $S_n$, then $$\label{eq:92}
h_0 = \frac{\mathcal{S}^{1/2}}{\sqrt{2}\langle
|{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha|^2\rangle_\alpha^{1/4}} \frac{1}{N_{\rm pairs}^{1/4}}
\sqrt{\frac{S_n}{\Delta{T}}}
\ .$$ These are the equation we were after. They give us the sensitivity of the cross-correlation search as a function of the statistical false alarm and false dismissal rates, the SFT baseline $\Delta{T}$, the noise floors of the SFTs, the number of SFT pairs $N_{\rm pairs}$, and the geometrical factors contained in ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha$. They tells us that the sensitivity grows coherently with $\Delta{T}$ and incoherently with $N_{\rm pairs}$. Note however that we can correlate any SFT pair we like, so that $N_{\rm pairs}$ can be made much larger than the number of SFTs $N_{\rm sft}$ (even if we were to exclude self-correlations). In fact, if we believe the signal to maintain phase coherence over the entire observation time (which may be months or years), and if we can afford to do so computationally, then $N_{\rm
pairs} \sim N_{\rm sft}^2$ so that $h_0 \propto (N_{\rm
sft}\Delta{T})^{-1/2}$ which is better than what we would get with the standard semi-coherent searches [@S4PSH].
The relation with the ${\mathcal{F}}$ statistic {#sec:fstat}
===============================================
From , we see that if we use all SFT pairs available, the amplitude sensitivity of the cross-correlation search is proportional to ${T_{\text{obs}}}^{-1/2}$ which is what we would get for a fully coherent search. There must thus be a close relation between the cross-correlation and the coherent matched filter, and in this section we show that this is indeed the case.
A convenient implementation of the matched filter statistic for periodic waves is provided by the so-called ${\mathcal{F}}$-statistic first defined in [@Jaranowski:1998qm] for the single interferometer case, and later generalized to the multi-interferometer case in [@Cutler:2005hc], and a detailed study of the parameter space resolution was presented in [@Prix:2006wm]. Let us start with the single interferometer case.
For defining the ${\mathcal{F}}$-statistic, it is convenient to rewrite the waveform of . We first separate out the initial phase ${\Phi}_0$ from the total phase as, $$\label{eq:60}
{\Phi}(t) = {\Phi}_0 + \varphi(t)
\,.$$ We decompose the total waveform $h(t)$ in terms of four quadratures as, $$\label{eq:61}
h(t) =\sum_{i=1}^{4} {\mathcal{A}}^\mu h_\mu(t)
\ ,$$ where the four amplitudes $\{{\mathcal{A}}^\mu\}$ (not to be confused with ${\mathcal{A}}_+$ and ${\mathcal{A}}_\times$) are time independent and the $\{h_\mu\}$ are $$\begin{split}
\label{eq:63}
h_1(t) = a(t)\cos\varphi(t)
\ ,
&\qquad
h_2(t) = b(t)\cos\varphi(t)
\,,
\\
h_3(t) = a(t)\sin\varphi(t)
\ ,
&\qquad
h_4(t) = b(t)\sin\varphi(t)
\ ,
\end{split}$$ with $a(t)$ and $b(t)$ defined as in . What this decomposition achieves is a separation of the amplitude parameters $\{h_0,\iota,\psi,{\Phi}_0\}$ from the Doppler parameters. The only signal parameters in the quadratures $\{h_\mu\}$ are the Doppler parameters while the amplitudes $\{{\mathcal{A}}^\mu\}$ depend only on the amplitude parameters.
In order to extract the signal $h(t)$ from the noise, the optimal search statistic is the likelihood function $\Lambda$ defined by, $$\label{eq:64}
\ln \Lambda = (x|h)-\frac{1}{2}(h|h)
\ ,$$ where the inner product $(\cdot |\cdot)$ is defined as: $$\label{eq:65}
(x|y) := 2 \int_0^\infty \frac{\tilde{x}(f)\tilde{y}^{*}(f) +
\tilde{x}^{*}(f)\tilde{y}(f)}{S_n(f)} \, df
\ .$$ The quantity $\ln\Lambda$ is essentially the matched filter and is precisely what we should use in order to best detect the waveform $h(t)$. An explicit search over the amplitude parameters $\{{\mathcal{A}}^\mu\}$ is avoided by noting that $\ln\Lambda$ depends quadratically on the $\{{\mathcal{A}}^\mu\}$. We can thus analytically find the maximum likelihood (ML) estimators $\{\widehat{{\mathcal{A}}}^\mu\}$ of the amplitudes $\{{\mathcal{A}}^\mu\}$ by solving the set of four coupled linear equations: $$\label{eq:66}
\left.
\frac{\partial \ln\Lambda}{\partial {\mathcal{A}}^\mu}
\right\rvert_{{\mathcal{A}}^\nu=\widehat{{\mathcal{A}}}^\nu} = 0
\ ,
\qquad
\mu=1,\ldots,4
\ .$$ The ${\mathcal{F}}$-statistic is then defined as the log likelihood ratio with the values of the amplitudes $\{{\mathcal{A}}^\mu\}$ replaced by their ML estimators: $$\label{eq:67}
{\mathcal{F}}:= \left.\ln\Lambda\right\rvert_{{\mathcal{A}}^\mu=\widehat{{\mathcal{A}}}^\mu}
\ .$$ Explicitly, ${\mathcal{F}}$ can be written as $$\label{eq:68}
{\mathcal{F}}= \frac{4}{S_n(f_0)} \frac{B|F_a|^2 + A|F_b|^2 -
C(F_aF_b^{*}+ F_bF_a^{*})}{AB - C^2}
\ ,$$ where
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:62}
F_a &= \int_{0}^{{T_{\text{obs}}}} x(t)a(t)e^{-i\varphi(t)}dt
\ ,
\\
F_b &= \int_{0}^{{T_{\text{obs}}}} x(t)b(t)e^{-i\varphi(t)}dt
\ ,
\\
A &= \int_0^{{T_{\text{obs}}}} a^2(t)\,dt
\ ,
\quad
B = \int_0^{{T_{\text{obs}}}}b^2(t)\,dt
\ ,
\\
C &= \int_0^{{T_{\text{obs}}}} a(t)b(t)\,dt
\ .
\end{aligned}$$
We need to write the $F_a$ and $F_b$ still more explicitly; let us start with $F_a$. We break up the integral for $F_a$ into sub-intervals defined by the SFTs, and assume as we have been doing all along that $a(t)$ is constant over the SFT duration: $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:72}
F_a = \sum_{I} \int_{T_I - \Delta{T}/2}^{T_I +
\Delta{T}/2} x(t)a(t)e^{-i\varphi(t)}dt \\
= \sum_{I} a_I\int_{T_I - \Delta{T}/2}^{T_I +
\Delta{T}/2} x(t)e^{-i\varphi(t)}dt
\ .\end{gathered}$$ Writing the phase in a Taylor series around the SFT mid-time and keeping the linear terms, we get, $$\label{eq:69}
\varphi(t) = \varphi(T_I) + i 2\pi f_I (t-T_I)
\ ,$$ which leads to, $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:70}
F_a = \sum_{I} a_Ie^{-i\varphi(T_I)}
\int_{T_I - \Delta{T}/2}^{T_I + \Delta{T}/2}
x(t)e^{-i2\pi f_I (t-T_I)}dt \\
= \sum_{I} a_Ie^{-i\varphi(T_I)}
e^{-i\pi f\Delta{T}}\tilde{x}_I(f_I)
\ ,\end{gathered}$$ and likewise for $F_b$.
Now we are ready to look at ${\mathcal{F}}$ again. From it is clear that ${\mathcal{F}}$ is quadratic in the data and from it is clear that we will end up with an expansion like, $$\label{eq:71}
{\mathcal{F}}= \sum_{I\!J} {\mathcal{F}}_{I\!J}
\ .$$ In fact, it turns out that is precisely a linear combination of the ${\mathcal{Y}}_\alpha$ defined in . Explicitly, it follows from that: $$\label{eq:73}
|F_a|^2
= \sum_{I\!J} a_I a_J
\left(
e^{i \Delta{\Phi}_{I\!J}} {\mathcal{Y}}_{I\!J}
+ e^{-i \Delta{\Phi}_{I\!J}} {\mathcal{Y}}_{I\!J}^{*}\right)
\ .$$ Similar expressions are obtained for $|F_b|^2$ and the cross term $F_aF_b^{*}+ F_bF_a^{*}$ of the ${\mathcal{F}}$ statistic. Combining all of the results from above, we see that ${\mathcal{F}}$ is a detection statistic of the form with weights, $$u_{I\!J} \propto \left(Ab_Ib_J + Ba_Ia_J - C(a_Ib_J + a_Jb_I)\right)
e^{i\Delta{\Phi}_{I\!J}}
\ .$$ In the case where $A\approx B$ and $C\ll A,B$, this is seen to be proportional to ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J}$ averaged over $\cos\iota$ and $\psi$ . Thus we see that the cross-correlation statistic $\rho$ is indeed roughly equivalent to the $\mathcal{F}$-statistic. In principle, $\rho$ using the full signal cross-correlation function ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha$ from , is a function of the Doppler parameters and also of $\{A_+,A_\times,\psi\}$; this is more like the likelihood-ratio (modulo the dependence on the initial phase ${\Phi}_0$) before maximizing it over the amplitude parameters to obtain the ${\mathcal{F}}$-statistic. The $\rho$ calculated with $\langle{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha\rangle_{\cos\iota,\psi}$ is closer to the matched filter statistic marginalized over $\cos\iota$ and $\psi$.
Estimating the amplitude parameters {#sec:paramest}
===================================
Thus far, we have focused on constructing the cross-correlation statistic which is optimal for the detecting the presence of periodic GWs. Thus, the choice of weights given in is tailored for measurements of excess cross-correlation power, and is not actually an estimator for the signal amplitude. Estimating the Doppler parameters $\{f_0,f_1,\ldots,{{\vec{n}}}\}$ is easy since we are searching over these parameters explicitly. Note also that the signal cross-correlation function ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{\alpha}$ of is a function of $\cos\iota$ and $\psi$. We could thus, in principle, find the values of $\cos\iota$ and $\psi$ which maximize $\rho$, thus yielding estimators of these quantities. In practice however, we expect it to be more convenient to use a single statistic, such as that associated with the averaged ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha$ given in , and then estimate $\{A_+, A_\times,\psi\}$ in a follow-up stage.[^8] In this section, we show that it is indeed possible to estimate $\{A_+,A_\times,\psi\}$. The method presented here is a straightforward generalization of [@Mendell:2007ww] (see also [@powerflux; @S4PSH]) developed for the standard semi-coherent searches.
The basic idea is to note that the two polarizations $h_+$ and $h_\times$ appear in the detector with different amplitude modulations. Therefore, given sufficient measurements of the ${\mathcal{Y}}_\alpha$, it should be possible to extract the signal components with different amplitude modulation patterns thereby estimating the amplitudes $A_+$ and $A_\times$. Let us start by defining the signal cross-correlation functions ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha^+$ and ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha^\times$ for the two polarizations which are analogous to ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha$:
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:75}
{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J}^+ &= \frac{1}{4}e^{-i\Delta{\Phi}_{I\!J}}F_{I+}F_{J+}
\ ,
\\
{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J}^\times &= \frac{1}{4}e^{-i\Delta{\Phi}_{I\!J}}F_{I\times}F_{J\times}
\ .
\end{aligned}$$
These functions are significant because, just as in , they tell us about the mean $\mu_\alpha$ of ${\mathcal{Y}}_\alpha$ for the two independent polarizations. The contributions of $A_+$ and $A_\times$ to the mean are respectively: $$\label{eq:79}
\mu_\alpha^+ = A_+^2{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha^+
\quad \textrm{and} \quad
\mu_\alpha^\times =
A_\times^2{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha^\times
\ .$$ An estimator of $A_+$ is obtained by minimizing the following $\chi^2$-statistic as a function of $A_+^2$, $$\label{eq:76}
\chi^2 = \sum_\alpha \frac{{\left\lvert{\mathcal{Y}}_\alpha -
A_+^2{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha^+\right\rvert}^2}{\sigma_\alpha^2}
\ .$$ The solution of $\partial\chi^2/\partial A_+^2 = 0$ is easily seen to be, $$\label{eq:77}
A_+^2 = \left(\sum_\beta
\frac{2|{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\beta^+|^2}{\sigma_\beta^2}\right)^{-1}
\sum_\alpha \frac{{\mathcal{Y}}_\alpha^{*}{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha^+ +
{\mathcal{Y}}_\alpha{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha^{+{*}}}{\sigma_\alpha^2}
\ .$$ Similarly, the estimator for $A_\times$ is, $$\label{eq:78}
A_\times^2 = \left(\sum_\beta
\frac{2|{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\beta^\times|^2}{\sigma_\beta^2}\right)^{-1}
\sum_\alpha \frac{{\mathcal{Y}}_\alpha^{*}{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha^\times +
{\mathcal{Y}}_\alpha{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha^{\times{*}}}{\sigma_\alpha^2}
\ .$$ Since $\{{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha^A\}$ depend on the polarization angle $\psi$ through the beam pattern functions, both and imply a search over $\psi$. We expect these estimators to be better than the ones used in the standard semi-coherent methods simply because it uses a larger number of measurements including all possible pairs of SFTs. Note that these estimators for $A_+^2$ and $A_\times^2$ are proportional to the optimal excess-power statistic $\rho$ of , with ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha$ replaced by ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha^+$ and ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha^\times$.
Finally, while we do not discuss it here, following [@Mendell:2007ww], this discussion can be generalized to construct a joint $\chi^2$ statistic for $A_+^2$, $A_\times^2$ and $\psi$ for a general elliptically polarized signal.
Parameter space resolution {#sec:params}
==========================
In this section we discuss the parameter space resolution required for the cross-correlation statistic $\rho$. This affects the astrophysical significance of the search in terms of parameter estimation and also the computational requirements for carrying out the search. The parameter space resolution for a detection statistic $\rho$ is usually discussed in terms of the parameter space metric. This is defined as the fractional loss in the signal-to-noise ratio when $\rho$ is calculated at a point in parameter space which is slightly different from the point corresponding to the actual signal parameters [@Sathyaprakash:1991mt; @Dhurandhar:1992mw; @Owen:1995tm]. In our case, we are in principle free to consider any subset of all the possible SFT pairs in calculating the final detection statistic $\rho$. However, without some control on which SFT pairs are chosen, it seems very hard to get a handle on the parameter space metric for the general cross-correlation statistic $\rho$ defined by (\[eq:41\]). Our suggestion is the following: Choose a time duration $T_{\rm max}$ and include only those SFT pairs $\{I,J\}$ for which $|T_I - T_J| \leq T_{\rm max}$. Thus, $T_{\rm max}$ can be viewed as the maximum duration over which we choose to maintain strict phase coherence.
If $T_{\rm max} = T_{\rm obs}$, then we are including all possible pairs, and at the other extreme, if $T_{\rm max}= 0$ then we are including only self-correlations and time-coincident correlations between different detectors. In the intermediate regime the cross-correlation search is closest in spirit to a semi-coherent hierarchical scheme which consists of breaking up the total data available (say from $t=0$ to $t= T_{\rm obs}$ into shorter segments $[0,T_{\rm max}]\,,[T_{\rm max},2T_{\rm max}]\ldots$. One then performs a coherent analysis on each of the segments (using, say, the ${\mathcal{F}}$-statistic) and combines the results semi-coherently [@Brady:1998nj; @Krishnan:2004sv; @Cutler:2005pn]. The pair selection criteria would lead us to choose all possible SFT pairs within each of the segments. Since we have already seen in Sec. \[sec:fstat\] that this is essentially equivalent to the ${\mathcal{F}}$-statistic, the similarities between the two schemes is obvious. The two schemes are however not exactly identical because this SFT pair selection criteria also includes choosing pairs lying in adjacent data segments (assuming the segments are sufficiently close to each other). Thus, the cross-correlation search with coherence time $T_{\rm max}$ will be more sensitive than the semi-coherent search with coherent segments of duration $T_{\rm max}$ but the precise improvement depends on the duty cycle of the detectors, i.e. on the gaps between the SFTs and the coherent segments.
With this criteria of choosing pairs, we will see that the resolution depends on $T_{\rm max}$ the SFT baseline $\Delta{T}$. To make our results concrete, we will focus on the ground based interferometers by taking the frequency range to be from $50{\text{\,Hz}}$ to $1000{\text{\,Hz}}$. Given the similarities with the semi-coherent and hierarchical schemes discussed above, it is clear that a proper discussion of the metric requires a calculation of the parameter space metric for semi-coherent searches. This is a combination of the coherent metric worked out in detail in [@Brady:1997ji; @Prix:2006wm], and the semi-coherent metric obtained by summing ${\mathcal{F}}$-statistic segments. Preliminary calculations have been worked out in [@Brady:1998nj], but a detailed study of its properties is still lacking. We will instead resort to order of magnitude estimates (which, in spite of their approximate nature, have actually turned out to be fairly useful for previous searches; see e.g. [@Krishnan:2004sv]).
We can either use the amplitude modulation of the detection statistic $\rho = \sum_\alpha\rho_\alpha$ by which we mean the variation of $\rho_\alpha$ with $\alpha$, or we can use the frequency modulation reflected in the different frequency bins $k$ and $k^\prime$ used to calculate the cross correlation ${\mathcal{Y}}_\alpha =
\tilde{x}_{k,I}^{*}\tilde{x}_{k^\prime,J}$. Starting with the sky-resolution, we identify three factors which could be relevant: the detector beam pattern functions, the detector-pair baseline $\Delta{\vec{r}}_{I\!J}$, and the Doppler information over a duration $\Delta T$ and $T_{\rm max}$; we discuss all of these in turn. The relative importance of these three factors depends on the search parameters.
i.
: The expectation value of the cross-correlation statistic varies with the SFT pair index $\alpha$, and part of this variation is due to the geometrical factor $a_Ia_J + b_Ib_J$ in . Since this variation depends on the sky-position, it can in principle be used to get sky-position information. The resolution thus obtained is roughly given by the angular scales over which the beam pattern functions vary. Note that this amplitude modulation is due to the rotation of Earth around its axis; this is independent of the signal frequency and gets mostly averaged out if $\Delta{T}$ is comparable or larger than a day.
ii.
: The other reason for the variation of the SNR with $\alpha$ is the $\Delta {\vec{r}}_{I\!J}$ term in . In the case when the two SFTs are [[coïncident]{}]{} in time ($T_I = T_J$), then $\Delta{\vec{r}}_{I\!J}$ is the separation between the two detectors; for the LIGO Hanford and Livingston observatories, this corresponds to a light travel time of about $10{\text{\,ms}}$. More generally, the magnitude of $\Delta {\vec{r}}_{I\!J}$ is the distance between the positions of the two (distinct or same) detectors at different times; it could be as much as $2{\text{\,AU}}$ if $T_I - T_J \sim
6{\text{\,months}}$. On the other extreme, it could be zero if we are correlating the data with itself (which is what the standard semi-coherent methods do); this effect then becomes completely irrelevant. If $\lambda_{\rm gw}$ is the wavelength of the wave we are trying to detect, the sky-resolution associated with $\Delta{\vec{r}}_{I\!J}$ is inversely proportional to the frequency: $$\label{eq:56}
(\Delta \theta)_{\Delta {\vec{r}}} \approx \frac{\lambda_{\rm
gw}}{|\Delta{\vec{r}}|} = \frac{1}{f\cdot|\Delta{\vec{r}}|/c}
\ .$$ For the Hanford-Livingston pair, this corresponds to about $\mathcal{O}(60^{\circ})$ at $100{\text{\,Hz}}$ and about $6^\circ$ at $1000{\text{\,Hz}}$.
iii.
: The third way of getting sky-position information is through the Doppler shift. This is only useful if the frequency resolution of the SFTs is small enough; the maximum Doppler shift is $f |{\vec{v}}|/c $, so for the Doppler shift to be important, we must have, $$\label{eq:57}
\Delta{T} > \frac{\lambda_{\rm gw}}{|{\vec{v}}|}
\ .$$ The magnitude of Earth’s orbital velocity in its orbit is $\sim
10^{-4}c$, so leads to $\Delta{T} > 200{\text{\,s}}$ at $50{\text{\,Hz}}$ and $\Delta{T} > 6.67{\text{\,s}}$ at $1500{\text{\,Hz}}$. One relevant baseline in this case is the distance traveled by the detector in the duration $\Delta{T}$. Thus, the sky resolution is (see [@Krishnan:2004sv] for further details): $$\label{eq:58}
(\Delta\theta)_{\rm doppler} = \frac{\lambda_{\rm gw}}{|{\vec{v}}|
\Delta{T}}
\ .$$ For $1800{\text{\,s}}$ SFTs, this corresponds to $\sim 6^\circ$ at $50{\text{\,Hz}}$ and $0.2^\circ$ at $1500{\text{\,Hz}}$. There is finally the baseline corresponding to $T_{\rm max}$, i.e. the distance $d_{\rm
max}$ traveled by the detector during $T_{\rm max}$. This leads to $$\label{eq:90}
(\Delta\theta)_{\rm doppler} = \frac{\lambda_{\rm gw}}{d_{\rm max}}\ .$$ More generally, the resolution corresponding to $T_{\rm max}$ (for sufficiently large $\Delta T$) is precisely the coherent metric calculated in [@Brady:1997ji; @Prix:2006wm].
We see that the first two items above can be viewed as using the amplitude modulation information (dependence of the SNR on the pair index $\alpha$), while the third uses the frequency modulation.
Let us now discuss the resolution in spindown parameters $f_k$. The spindown term in $\Delta{\Phi}_{I\!J}$ appears in the combination $f_k(T_I^{k+1} - T_J^{k+1})$. Thus, it is clear that for $T_I\neq T_J$ this leads to a spindown resolution of, $$\label{eq:59}
(\delta f_k)_{\rm min} = \frac{1}{{\rm
max}_{I,J}\left\{{\left\lvertT_I^{k+1} - T_J^{k+1}\right\rvert}\right\}}$$ Thus, if we were to consider all possible pairs from a given set of SFTs, and if we define the reference time to be in the mid-point of the observation duration, then we would have $\delta f_k \propto
{T_{\text{obs}}}^{-(k+1)}$.
We can also consider the frequency resolution $(\delta f)_{\rm sft} =
(\Delta T)^{-1}$ of the SFTs themselves. The corresponding resolution in $f_k$ is defined by the smallest change in $f_k$ required to change the frequency by a $(\delta f)_{\rm sft}$ over the full observation time $T_{\rm obs}$. This leads to $\delta f_k =
(\delta f)_{\rm sft}/T_{\rm obs}^k$ for $k=1,2\ldots$.
Let us conclude this section by giving a short numerical example for the case when we correlate data from a pair of spatially separated detectors at the same times. We consider frequencies of $100{\text{\,Hz}}$ and $1000{\text{\,Hz}}$, and two sky positions: one at the celestial equator and one at $45^\circ$ degrees above it. In each case we consider sources with the optimal orientation $\iota=0$, without any spindown parameters, and with $\psi = 0$. The total observation time is taken to be ${T_{\text{obs}}}= 1{\text{\,yr}}$ and the SFT baseline is $\Delta T =
30{\text{\,min}}$. We assume that the two data streams are coming from the LIGO Livingston and Hanford interferometers. For performing the cross-correlations, we use, $$Q (t;f,{{\vec{n}}}) = \lambda(t;{{\vec{n}}}) \langle {\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}({{\vec{n}}}) \rangle_{\cos \iota, \psi},
\label{eq:beam}$$ where, $\lambda(t;{{\vec{n}}})$ is a proportionality constant. We consider essentially identical time segments - same barycentric time - in the two detectors. In a year’s worth of observation time there are little over 17,000 such time segments, each of 30 minutes duration. Thus the time-segment indices $I, J$ each, sequentially run over the full observation time. The relevant quantities $Q, {\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}$ and $\lambda$ in which carry the same indices also do the same over the observation time - thus we may think of each of them as functions of $t$ - the segment time-stamp; thus $I$ or $J$ is replaced by $t$.
For the signal only case, the cross-correlation can be written explicitly as: $$B({{\vec{n}}},{{\vec{n}}}') = \Lambda({{\vec{n}}}) \int_0^{T_obs} dt\,
\langle{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}(t; {{\vec{n}}})\rangle_{\cos \iota, \psi} h_{(1)}(t;{{\vec{n}}}')h_{(2)}(t;{{\vec{n}}}') \,,$$ where the subscripts in $h_{(1)}$ and $h_{(2)}$ refer to the two distinct detectors we are considering. We have chosen, $$\Lambda^{-1}({{\vec{n}}}) = \frac{1}{\Delta T} \int \lambda^{-1}(t;{{\vec{n}}}) \, dt
\ .$$ We choose the proportionality constant $\lambda$ such that it is inversely proportional to square of the average total power accessible to the network for a particular direction of the sky in the interval $\Delta T$ of the SFTs. Thus we have, $$\lambda^{-1}(t;{{\vec{n}}}) = \Delta T \langle{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}(t; {{\vec{n}}})\rangle_{\cos \iota, \psi}^2.$$ This is in the spirit of the normalization scheme adopted in [@Mitra:2007mc]. Figure \[fig:beam\] shows $B({{\vec{n}}}, {{\vec{n}}}')$ evaluated numerically for point sources at different positions. We note that the maximum value of $B$ is 5. This is the result of the average value of ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}$ we have chosen in defining the filter function together with the fact that we have chosen optimally oriented sources for the numerical computation. The sky-resolution is characterized quantitatively by the FWHM (full width at half maximum) of the PSF. From the figures it turns out to be $\simeq 8^\circ$ for $f_0 =
1000{\text{\,Hz}}$ and $\simeq 80^\circ$ for $f_0 = 100{\text{\,Hz}}$. We observe that the agreement between the order of magnitude estimates obtained earlier and the actual values computed from the figure is satisfactory.
{width="\textwidth"}
Discussion {#sec:discussion}
==========
We summarize the main results of this paper. We have generalized the cross-correlation statistic, traditionally used for the stochastic gravitational wave background searches, to periodic gravitational waves. The features of periodic waves, not present in the stochastic background signals, are non-stationarity and long-term coherence. The non-stationarity may need to be taken into account depending on the frequency resolution, and the long-term coherence implies that we can in principle cross-correlate data segments from arbitrary times and arbitrary detectors. This makes the method very flexible, and these are some of the possibilities:
i.
: We can, if we wish, correlate all possible short data segments. If this is done, then we showed that the resulting detection statistic is very close to the ${\mathcal{F}}$-statistic corresponding to a full matched filter statistic. This is ideally the most sensitive method, but it’s computational cost becomes prohibitive for wide parameter space searches.
ii.
: At the other extreme, we can choose to correlate only data segments taken from distinct detectors at the same (or very close) times. This is the closest in spirit to the standard directed stochastic background searches using aperture synthesis. In this mode of operation, the search is not computationally intensive, and is very robust against signal uncertainties. However, this also implies poor resolution in parameter space, and thus more expensive follow-ups to verify possible detections and to estimate the signal parameters.
iii.
: From the perspective of this paper, the standard semi-coherent searches such as PowerFlux, StackSlide and Hough all correspond to the special case in which we consider only self-correlations. The procedure of considering weighted sums of the cross-correlation power is closest to the PowerFlux method. In fact, many of the lessons learnt in the PowerFlux searches should be applicable here with suitable modifications. For example, the estimation of the signal amplitudes developed originally for PowerFlux carries over rather straightforwardly.
iv.
: In intermediate regimes when we correlate data segments separated by a maximum coherence time ${T_{\text{max}}}< {T_{\text{obs}}}$, the cross-correlation search is similar to a hierarchical search in which we combine segments of demodulated data. Though, as discussed in Sec. \[sec:params\], there are differences between the two with the cross-correlation search being somewhat more sensitive.
Conceptually, this method thus provides a unified framework for all the known periodic wave searches, and this might be useful in various calculations and applications. Each of the above modes of operation correspond to tuning the maximum coherence time all the way from small values to the total observation time. The precise value chosen for a specific application depends on the trade-offs between computational cost, sensitivity, and robustness against signal uncertainties. The additional parameter which figures importantly in this trade-off is the length $\Delta T$ of the short data segments.
There are a number of open issues for future work. An important question is to get a detailed understanding of the trade-offs mentioned above for various types of searches including all sky searches for isolated GW pulsars, signals from known binary systems or from interesting areas such as the galactic center etc. This will help us better decide how to best use our computational resources and to maximize our chances of making a detection. Another important issue, which feeds into this optimization problem, is to study the general parameter space metric. To date we only have a proper understanding of the coherent metric, i.e. case (i) above. For the other cases, we have estimates of the parameter space resolution and which are often sufficient for many applications, but a full understanding is still lacking. In addition, it would be interesting to compare the estimation of the amplitude parameters $\{A_+,A_\times\}$ (and $\psi$) obtained from and with the maximum likelihood estimators obtained from the ${\mathcal{F}}$-statistic calculation. In the limit when we consider all possible correlations, we would expect the two estimates to be very close to each other.
We are grateful to Stefan Ballmer for valuable discussions. We also acknowledge all members of the Continuous-Waves working group of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration for numerous discussions and suggestions which were crucial for this paper. BK and JTW acknowledge the support of the Max-Planck-Gesellschaft. BK acknowledges the University of the Balearic Islands for hospitality while this work was being carried out. JTW also acknowledges the support of the German Aerospace Center (DLR). HM thanks the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research of India (CSIR) for providing a research scholarship.
Including self-correlations and $\mathcal{O}(h_0^2)$ corrections {#sec:generalstat}
================================================================
In this section we relax the two assumptions of only looking at ${\mathcal{Y}}_{I\!J}$ for $I\neq J$ and $h \ll n$. We allow self correlations (which, by themselves, are used in the standard semi-coherent searches), and we keep terms of $\mathcal{O}(h_0^2)$ but still neglect $\mathcal{O}(h_0^4)$ terms.
Let us again start from the general statistic $\rho$ defined in , and let us calculate its mean and standard deviation with the two assumptions relaxed. In general, we have ${\mathcal{Y}}_{I\!J}^{*}= {\mathcal{Y}}_{J\!I}$ so that ${\mathcal{Y}}_{I\!I}$ is real and so is the corresponding weight $u_{I\!I}$; ${\mathcal{Y}}_{I\!I}$ is in fact just the power in a single SFT bin. We will denote ${\mathcal{Y}}_{I\!I}$ simply by ${\mathcal{Y}}_I$ and $u_{I\!I}$ by $u_I$.
The mean is easy to calculate: $$\label{eq:80}
\langle{\mathcal{Y}}_{I\!J}\rangle := \mu_{I\!J} = \frac{1}{2\Delta T}
S_n^I\delta_{I\!J} + h_0^2{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J}
\ .$$ Thus, the mean is non-zero in the absence of a signal only for the self-correlation terms. In general, $\rho$ will contain self-correlations, and also correlations of distinct pairs. However, we want to be completely general and we do not assume that it contains *all* the possible pairs. This is then the expression for the mean: $$\label{eq:81}
\langle\rho\rangle := \mu = \frac{1}{\Delta T}\sum_{I} u_I S_n^I +
h_0^2\sum_{\alpha}(u_{\alpha}{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{\alpha} + u_{\alpha}^{*}{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{\alpha}^{*})
\ .$$ It is to be understood that the first sum in this equation only contains the self-correlations and the second sum contains all the SFT pairs we have chosen to include, including the self-correlations.
The variance calculation is somewhat more involved. Before looking at the variance of $\rho$ itself, let us look at $\langle
{\mathcal{Y}}_{I\!J}{\mathcal{Y}}_{K\!L}\rangle$. Note that for the pure noise terms: $$\label{eq:83}
\langle
\tilde{n}_I^{*}\tilde{n}_J\tilde{n}_K^{*}\tilde{n}_L\rangle =
2\delta_{I(J}\delta_{L)K}\langle|\tilde{n}_I|^2\rangle\langle
|\tilde{n}_K|^2\rangle
\ .$$ Here, we use the notation that indices within parentheses are symmetrized over: $X_{(IJ)} = (X_{IJ} + X_{JI})/2$. This also covers the $I=J=K=L$ case, so there is no need to consider that separately.
Consider now the signal. In general, the terms in $\langle
{\mathcal{Y}}_{I\!J}{\mathcal{Y}}_{K\!L}\rangle$ with odd powers of $h$ will vanish because the noise is assumed to have zero mean. Thus, schematically, we will have $$\label{eq:84}
\langle {\mathcal{Y}}_{I\!J}{\mathcal{Y}}_{K\!L}\rangle = A + Bh_0^2 + Ch_0^4
\ .$$ Let us ignore the $h_0^4$ terms and focus only on the second order terms. The reader can convince herself that we only need to keep the following terms in ${\mathcal{Y}}_{I\!J}{\mathcal{Y}}_{K\!L}$: $$\label{eq:85}
\tilde{h}_I^{*}\tilde{h}_J\tilde{n}^{*}_K\tilde{n}_L +
\tilde{h}_K^{*}\tilde{h}_J\tilde{n}^{*}_I\tilde{n}_L +
\tilde{h}_K^{*}\tilde{h}_L\tilde{n}^{*}_I\tilde{n}_J +
\tilde{h}_I^{*}\tilde{h}_L\tilde{n}^{*}_K\tilde{n}_J
\ .$$ Putting together and , we end up with $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:86}
\langle{\mathcal{Y}}_{I\!J}{\mathcal{Y}}_{K\!L}\rangle = \frac{1}{2(\Delta T)^2}
\delta_{I(J}\delta_{L)K}{S_n^{(I)}S_n^{(K)}} \\
+ \frac{h_0^2}{\Delta T}\left[{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I(J}\delta_{L)K} S_n^{(K)} +
\delta_{I(J}{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{L)K} S_n^{(I)}\right]
\ .\end{gathered}$$ We are now ready to look at the variance of $\rho$. Let us define $\rho_\alpha = u_\alpha{\mathcal{Y}}_\alpha + u_\alpha^{*}{\mathcal{Y}}_\alpha^{*}$, so that $\rho = \sum_\alpha\rho_\alpha$. Then, we have $$\label{eq:82}
\operatorname{Var}\left(\rho\right) = \sum_\alpha
\operatorname{Var}\left(\rho_\alpha\right) + \sum_{\alpha,\beta\, (\alpha \neq\beta)}
\operatorname{Cov}\left( \rho_\alpha,\rho_\beta \right)
\ .$$ Let us start with the variances $$\label{eq:88}
\operatorname{Var}\left(\rho_{I\!J}\right) = \langle \rho_{I\!J}^2 \rangle
- \mu_{I\!J}^2
\ .$$ For $I\neq J$, $\mu_{I\!J} = \mathcal{O}(h_0^2)$ so that $\mu_{I\!J}^2$ can be ignored. Thus, in this case we get: $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:89}
\sigma_\alpha^2 = \operatorname{Var}\left(\rho_{I\!J}\right)
= 2|u_{I\!J}|^2 \left\{\frac{S_n^{(I)}S_n^{(J)}}{4\Delta T^2}\right.
\\\left. + \frac{h_0^2}{2\Delta T}\left({\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_IS_n^{(J)} +
{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_JS_n^{(I)}\right)\right\}
\ .\end{gathered}$$ For the $I=J$ case, we can no longer ignore the $\mu_\alpha$ term. Keeping terms up to $\mathcal{O}(h_0^2)$ we end up with $$\label{eq:91}
\sigma_{I}^2 = \operatorname{Var}\left(\rho_{I}\right) = 4u_I^2 \left\{
\left(\frac{S_n^{(I)}}{2\Delta T}\right)^2 + \frac{h_0^2}{\Delta
T}{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_IS_n^{(I)}\right\}
\ .$$ Turning now to the covariances, first note that if $I,J,K,L$ are all distinct, then up to $\mathcal{O}(h_0^4)$ terms, $\operatorname{Cov}\left(\rho_{I\!J},\rho_{K\!L}\right) = 0$; thus we need at least one pair of matching indices to get a non-zero result. Using the expressions for all the non-zero cases are the following ($I\neq J$) ignoring, as always, the $\mathcal{O}(h_0^4)$ terms:
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:93}
\langle{\mathcal{Y}}_{I\!I}{\mathcal{Y}}_{I\!J}\rangle &= \frac{h_0^2}{2\Delta
T}\left({\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J}+{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{J\!I}\right)S_n^{(I)}
\ ,
\\
\langle{\mathcal{Y}}_{I\!I}{\mathcal{Y}}_{J\!I}\rangle &= \frac{h_0^2}{\Delta
T}{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J}S_n^{(I)}
\ ,
\\
\langle{\mathcal{Y}}_{I\!I}{\mathcal{Y}}_{J\!J}\rangle &=
\frac{S_n^{(I)}S_n^{(J)}}{4\Delta T^2} + \frac{h_0^2}{2\Delta
T}\left({\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I}S_n^{(J)} +{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{J}S_n^{(I)}\right)
\ .
\end{aligned}$$
It turns out that the only non-zero covariance is $$\label{eq:94}
\operatorname{Cov}\left(\rho_I,\rho_{I\!J}\right) = \frac{h_0^2}{\Delta
T} u_IS_n^{(I)}\left( u_{I\!J}{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J}^{*}+
u_{I\!J}^{*}{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J} \right)
\ .$$ We are almost done now. Substituting the results of , , and in we get $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:95}
\sigma^2 = 2\sum_{\alpha}
|u_\alpha|^2\sigma_{(0),\alpha}^2 + \frac{h_0^2}{\Delta T}\Biggl\{
\sum_I4u_I^2{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_IS_n^{(I)} \\
+ \sum_{\alpha,I\neq J}|u_{I\!J}|^2\left({\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_IS_n^{(J)} +
{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_JS_n^{(I)}\right) \\
+ \sum u_I(u_{I\!J}{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J}^{*}+
u_{I\!J}^{*}{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{I\!J})S_n^{(I)}\Biggr\}
\ .\end{gathered}$$ Here we have defined the variances in the absence of a signal:
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:96}
\sigma_{(0),I} &= \frac{\left(S_n^{(I)}\right)^2}{2\Delta T^2}
\ ,
\\
\sigma_{(0),I\!J} &= \frac{S_n^{(I)}S_n^{(J)}}{4\Delta T^2}
\ ,
\quad
I\neq J
\ .
\end{aligned}$$
It is convenient to write in the abbreviated form $$\label{eq:97}
\sigma^2 = \sigma_{(0)}^2 + h_0^2\sigma_{(1)}^2
$$ where the definitions of $\sigma_0$ and $\sigma_{(1)}$ are obvious from .
We are finally ready to derive the equation for the sensitivity, i.e. the analogs of and . for the threshold is unchanged as long as we use $\sigma_{(0)}$ instead of $\sigma$ in that equation[^9]. for the false dismissal rate becomes: $$\label{eq:98}
\gamma = \frac{1}{2}\operatorname{erfc}\left(
\frac{\rho_{\rm th} - \mu}{\sqrt{2}\sigma}
\right)
\ .$$ Keeping terms linear in $h_0^2$, we get $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:99}
\operatorname{erfc}^{-1}(2\gamma) = \frac{\rho_{\rm th} -
\mu}{\sqrt{2}\sigma_{(0)}}\left(1-\frac{h_0^2\sigma_{(1)}^2}{2\sigma_{(0)}^2}\right) \\
= \operatorname{erfc}^{-1}(2\alpha) - \frac{h_0^2}{\sqrt{2}\sigma_{(0)}}
\sum_\alpha(u_\alpha{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha + u_\alpha^{*}{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha^{*}) \\
- \frac{h_0^2\sigma_{(1)}^2}{2\sigma_{(0)}^2}\operatorname{erfc}^{-1}(2\alpha)
\ .\end{gathered}$$ Solving for $h_0$ leads to the generalization of : $$\label{eq:100}
h_0^2 = 2\mathcal{S}
\left(
\frac{\sqrt{\sum_\alpha |u_\alpha|^2\sigma_{(0),\alpha}^2}}
{\sum_\alpha(u_\alpha{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha + u_\alpha^{*}{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha^{*})
+ \sigma_{(1)}^2\operatorname{erfc}^{-1}(2\alpha)/\sqrt{2}\sigma_{(0)}}
\right)$$ Finding the optimal weights is now not as straightforward as before. However, we note that when $\sigma_{(1)}$ is ignored, then the optimal weights are again given by except that now it holds also for the self-correlations. In the general case when we do not ignore $\sigma_{(1)}$, it is simpler to continue using the optimal weights derived earlier in , and to substitute it in to derive the corresponding sensitivity.
[^1]: http://einstein.phys.uwm.edu
[^2]: For an interferometer with arms along the unit vectors ${{\vec{u}}}$ and ${{\vec{v}}}$, ${\aeitensor{d}}=\frac{1}{2}({{\vec{u}}}\otimes{{\vec{u}}}-{{\vec{v}}}\otimes{{\vec{v}}})$.
[^3]: As it turns out, so long as the neutron star is moving inertially, this assumption is not necessary; the frequencies involved are all simply offset by the constant Doppler shift between the neutron star rest frame and the SSB.
[^4]: All of these approximations are used only for our calculations in this paper. The actual searches do not make any of these approximations, and nor do they ignore the relativistic Einstein and Shapiro corrections.
[^5]: Both of these assumptions will be relaxed in Appendix \[sec:generalstat\].
[^6]: This is proved by using the following property of the complementary error function: $\operatorname{erfc}(-x)= 2-\operatorname{erfc}(x)$. Setting $x = -\operatorname{erfc}^{-1}(2\gamma)$, we get $2-2\beta=2\gamma = \operatorname{erfc}(-x) =
2-\operatorname{erfc}(x)$, which yields $x=\operatorname{erfc}^{-1}(2\beta)$.
[^7]: This is perhaps easiest to see if we define a positive-definite inner-product over vectors $\mathbf{x} = \{x_\alpha\}$ as $\mathbf{x}\cdot\mathbf{y} := \sum_{\alpha}\textrm{Re}\left[
x_\alpha^{*}y_\alpha\right] \sigma_\alpha^2$. In terms of this inner product (\[eq:47\]) can be written as $h_0 =
\mathcal{S}\frac{||\mathbf{u}||}{\mathbf{u}\cdot\mathbf{H}}$ where $H_\alpha = {\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_\alpha^{*}/\sigma_\alpha^2$. $h_0$ is then minimum when $\mathbf{u}$ is parallel to $\mathbf{H}$.
[^8]: Note that the cross-correlations ${\mathcal{Y}}_\alpha$ are independent of the initial phase ${\Phi}_0$. Thus, it is not possible to estimate ${\Phi}_0$ if we restrict ourselves to measurements of ${\mathcal{Y}}_\alpha$.
[^9]: The mean of $\rho$ is now no longer necessarily zero in the absence of a signal (see . But this only leads to an additive correction to the threshold $\rho_{\rm th}$, and we assume this correction has been made.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We obtain the memory kernel of the generalized Langevin equation, describing a particle interacting with longitudinal phonons in a liquid. The kernel is obtained analytically at $T=0^oK$ and numerically at $T>0^oK$. We find that it shows some non-trivial structural features like negative correlations for some range of time separations. The system is shown to have three characteristic time scales, that control the shape of the kernel, and the transition between quadratic and linear behavior of the mean squared distance (MSD). Although the derivation of the structure in the memory kernel is obtained within a specific dynamical model, the phenomenon is shown to be quite generic.'
author:
- 'G. Frenkel , M. Schwartz'
title: 'The structure of Langevin’s memory kernel from Lagrangian dynamics'
---
euromacr
€
The Generalized Langevin equation is a powerful tool for the study of dynamic properties of many interesting physical systems. It is widely believed that the memory kernel is some decaying function of time, with no interesting features, except for the characteristic decay time. An example is the simple Gaussian form used in the literature [@wan; @rey]. Some molecular dynamics simulations yield, on the other hand, non trivial structure of the memory kernel [@posch; @benj]. A result of the same nature was obtained analytically by Chow and Hermans [@chow]. Their memory kernel is positive only at t=0 and negative elsewhere. The derivation assumes, however, that the Brownian particle interacts with a viscous fluid and therefore it is not a first principle derivation. Furthermore the final form of the kernel obviously violates the requirement that its Fourier transform be positive for all $\omega$.
The history of attempts to actually derive the memory kernel of a generalized Langevin equation from a first principle underlying Lagrangian or Hamiltonian description starts with the paper of Feynman and Vernon [@feynman]. Feynman and Vernon couple the Brownian particle linearly to a system of harmonic oscillators, obtaining an exactly solvable problem. Then the memory kernel is derived from the microscopic parameters. As explained by Schwartz and Brustein [@schwartz], it is difficult to envisage a situation where the Brownian particle is not bound to some small region in space, where a linear coupling could be justified. A number of authors followed in this direction. Zwanzig [@zwan] and Lindenberg [@lind] developed general formalisms to obtain the memory kernel, but their actual implementation, in obtaining the memory kernel in terms of the parameters of the Hamiltonian, is restricted to systems with linear coupling of the Brownian particle to the degrees of freedom of the thermal bath. The formalism of Zwanzig, combined with the work of Mori [@mori1; @mori2], has been extensively used in the research that followed (for examples see: Goodyear and Stratt [@good], Guenza [@guen], Heppe [@hepp] and lee [@lee]). It is clear that a microscopic derivation of the memory kernel is needed, for the cases where the particle is not bound, to determine whether and under what conditions the kernel has some interesting structure. In this paper we derive the memory kernel for a particle interacting in a realistic way with the longitudinal density waves of the system in which it is immersed. (The interaction has the same form as the electron-phonon interaction). We find that the structure of the memory kernel has interesting features. The most interesting is the existence of a region of time for which the memory kernel is negative. Although our result is obtained for a specific model, we show later that it must be generic.
Former work by Munakata considers a Lagrangian describing an impurity interacting with an elastic periodic lattice and obtains from it the shape of the memory kernel [@munakata]. His derivation is based, however, on the long time form of the MSD, that is linear in time. To refine his result to be also valid at very short times, one needs to obtain the full time dependence of the MSD. In this article we present a method that yields the mean squared distance and the memory kernel, both over the full time range. Our starting point is the Lagrangian describing the interaction of a particle with longitudinal phonons in a liquid; considered in refs. [@schwartz; @brus].
We consider a system of a particle immersed in an infinite idealized liquid and interacting with it’s longitudinal phonons through a general two body interaction, u(q).
The Lagrangian of the system is [@brus]:
$$\begin{aligned}
L =& & \int d\vec{q}\left(\frac{1}{2}
\frac{m}{\overline{\rho}}\vec{J}(\vec{q})\cdot\vec{J}(-\vec{q})-\frac{1}{2}V( \vec{q})\rho(\vec{q})\rho(-\vec{q})-\mu(\vec{q})\left[\stackrel{\cdot}{\rho}(-\vec{q})-i\vec{q}\cdot\vec{J}(-\vec{q})\right]\right)\\ \nonumber -& &\int d\vec{q}\left(u(\vec{q})\rho(-\vec{q})exp(i\vec{q}\cdot\vec{x})\right) + \frac{1}{2}M\stackrel{\cdot}{x}^{2} \end{aligned}$$
where m is the mass of the liquid particles, $\overline{\rho}$ is its average number density, $\vec{J}(\vec{q})$ and $\rho(\vec{q})$ are the Fourier transforms of the current density and the number density respectively, the Fourier transform (FT) of the two body (effective) potential between particles of the liquid is $V(\vec{q})$ and the FT of the interaction between the Brownian particle and the liquid is $u(\vec{q})$. The Lagrange multiplier $\mu(\vec{q})$ is introduced to impose the eq. of continuity, $\vec{x}$ is the coordinate of the particle and M is its mass.
Assuming that in the absence of the particle the distribution of the degrees of freedom of the liquid is given by a Gibbs distribution at temperature T, Brustein [*et al.*]{} found [@brus] that the particle obeys a generalized Langevin eq. .$$\begin{aligned}
M\stackrel{..}{\vec{x}}(t)=-\int_{-\infty}^{t}dt'\gamma(t-t')\stackrel{.}{\vec{x}}(t')+\vec{F}(t)\end{aligned}$$ The average of the random force $\vec{F}$ is zero, and the force - force correlation is related to the memory kernel.
$$\begin{aligned}
& &\left\langle\vec{F}\right\rangle=0\\
& &\left\langle\vec{F}(t)\cdot\vec{F}(t')\right\rangle=3K_BT\gamma(t-t') \end{aligned}$$
The memory kernel was also given in terms of the interactions, phonon frequencies, $\omega(q)$ and the MSD. $$\begin{aligned}
\gamma(t-t')= \frac{1}{3} \int
d \vec{q}\, q^2 \frac{u^2(q)}{V(q)}cos\left[\omega(q)(t-t')\right]e^{-\frac{q^2}{6}\left\langle (\Delta x(t-t'))^2 \right\rangle}\end{aligned}$$ In ref. [@brus] a numerical method for calculating the kernel was suggested. The numerical method was based on iterations. To calculate the MSD one had to evaluate four dimensional integrals, involving Laplace transforms, a difficult numerical procedure. In this article, we suggest a slightly different approach that involves only one dimensional integrations\
The first step is to obtain the MSD from a generalized Langevin eq. with a given memory kernel $\gamma$. To solve eq.(2), we transform it to Fourier space. We do it by inserting a step function: $$\begin{aligned}
M\stackrel{..}{\vec{x}}+\int^\infty_{-\infty}\gamma(t-t')\Theta(t-t')\stackrel{.}{\vec{x}}(t')dt'=\vec{F}(t)\end{aligned}$$ Solving directly for $\stackrel{\wedge}{\vec{x}}(\omega)$, we obtain: $$\begin{aligned}
\left\langle \Delta x(t)^2
\right\rangle=& &\frac{1}{2\pi}\int^\infty_{-\infty}d\omega\int^\infty_{-\infty}d\omega
'\frac{\langle\stackrel{\wedge}{\vec{F}}(\omega)\cdot\stackrel{\wedge}{\vec{F}}(\omega
')\rangle(e^{i\omega t}-1)(e^{i \omega 't}-1)}{(\sqrt{2\pi}i\omega\Gamma
(\omega)-M\omega^2)(\sqrt{2\pi}i\omega '\Gamma (\omega ')-M\omega
'^2)},\end{aligned}$$ where $\Gamma(\omega)$ is the Fourier transform of $\gamma(t)\Theta(-t)$, and $\stackrel{\wedge}{\vec{F}}(\omega)$ is the Fourier transform of $\vec{F}(t)$.\
Using the fluctuation dissipation relation (4):\
$\langle\stackrel{\wedge}{\vec{F}}(\omega)\cdot\stackrel{\wedge}{\vec{F}}(-\omega')\rangle=3K_BT\sqrt{2\pi}\stackrel{\wedge}{\gamma}(\omega)\delta(\omega-\omega')$, a straightforward calculation yields $$\begin{aligned}
\left\langle \Delta x(t)^2
\right\rangle=\frac{6K_BT}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int_{-\infty}^\infty d\omega\frac{\stackrel{\wedge}{\gamma}(\omega)(1-cos(\omega
t))}{\omega^2((M\omega)^2+2\pi\Gamma(\omega)\Gamma(-\omega))},\end{aligned}$$ where $\stackrel{\wedge}{\gamma}(\omega)$ is the Fourier transform of $\gamma(t)$.\
Rescaling the integral on the right hand side of the above by defining $y=\omega t$, it is clear that the long time dependence of $\left\langle \Delta x(t)^2
\right\rangle$ is linear in t. The short time dependence is quadratic in t as expected and given by $$\begin{aligned}
\left\langle \Delta x(t)^2 \right\rangle
=\left[\frac{3K_BT}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int_{-\infty}^\infty
d\omega\frac{\stackrel{\wedge}{\gamma}(\omega)}{(M\omega)^2+2\pi\Gamma(\omega)\Gamma(-\omega)}\right]t^2\equiv\varphi
t^2\end{aligned}$$ The two required quantities $\gamma(t)$ and $\left\langle \Delta x(t)^2
\right\rangle$ are obtained now by an iterative procedure from the two coupled eqs. (5) and (8). In order to be specific we need, however, to determine the potentials u(q) and V(q). We take for V(q) a constant, V(0), corresponding to a $\delta$ function in real space. For u(q), the potential between the immersed particle and the fluid particles we take a potential that has a finite range of the order of the size of the particle. We choose a Gaussian form $u(0)e^{-a^2q^2}$. The choice of V(q) yields for $\omega(q)$, the phonon spectrum $$\begin{aligned}
\omega(q)=\sqrt{\frac{\stackrel{-}{\rho}V(0)}{m}}|q|\equiv c|q|\end{aligned}$$ where c is the sound velocity.\
The iteration procedure is defined by the following eqs. $$\begin{aligned}
& &G^{(n)}(q,t)= e^{-\frac{1}{6}q^2\langle(\Delta x(t))^2\rangle^{(n)}}\\
& &\gamma^{(n)}(t)= \frac{4\pi}{3}\int dq\,q^4\frac{u^2(q)}{V(q)}cos[\omega(q)(t)]G^{(n)}(q,t)\\
&
&\Gamma^{(n)}(\omega)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int_{-\infty}^0\gamma^{(n)}(t)e^{-i
\omega t}dt\\
& &\stackrel{\wedge}{\gamma}^{(n)}(\omega)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int\gamma^{(n)}(t)e^{-i\omega
t}dt\end{aligned}$$ and finally $$\begin{aligned}
\left\langle \Delta x(t)^2
\right\rangle^{(n+1)} = \frac{6K_BT}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int_{-\infty}^\infty d\omega\frac{\stackrel{\wedge}{\gamma}^{(n)}(\omega)(1-cos(\omega
t))}{\omega^2((M\omega)^2+2\pi\Gamma^{(n)}(\omega)\Gamma^{(n)}(-\omega))}\end{aligned}$$ For the specific potentials we chose, the memory kernel is: $$\begin{aligned}
\gamma(t)=\frac{1}{3}\frac{u^2(0)}{V(0)}\int d\vec{q}q^2
e^{-2a^2q^2}cos\left[ cqt\right]e^{-\frac{1}{6}q^2\left\langle \Delta x(t)^2
\right\rangle}\end{aligned}$$ Calculating the integral while paying attention to the fact that $\left\langle \Delta x(t)^2 \right\rangle$ does not depend on q ,we obtain: $$\begin{aligned}
\gamma(t)=\frac{\pi u^2(0)}{48V(0)}\frac{\sqrt{\pi}\left(12A^2-12B^2A+B^4\right)e^{-\frac{B^2}{4A}}}{A^{4.5}}\end{aligned}$$ where: $$\begin{aligned}
\nonumber A&=&2a^2+\frac{1}{6}\left\langle \Delta x(t)^2 \right\rangle\\
\nonumber B&=&ct\end{aligned}$$
Since the MSD vanishes with temperature, the calculation yields an explicit analytic expression for $\gamma(t)$ at $T=0^oK$, with $A=2a^2$. In ref. [@brus] it was found that the friction coefficient, $\gamma$, vanishes at $T=0^oK$. It is interesting to note that indeed $$\begin{aligned}
\int_0^\infty \gamma(t,T=0)dt=0\end{aligned}$$ The results at finite temperatures can be described in terms of three natural time scales: $t_0$, $t_1$, and $t_2$. The time $t_0$ is the time needed by sound to traverse the distance a, that is the size of the particle; $t_0=\frac{a}{c}$. The time $t_1$ is also related to the size of the particle and is proportional to the mean time that takes the particle to move its own size in the short time behavior regime. It is given by $t_1=\frac{a}{\sqrt{\varphi}}$ (eq. 8). The third characteristic time $t_2$ is given by $t_2=\frac{M}{\gamma}$, where $\gamma=\stackrel{\wedge}{\gamma}(\omega=0)$ (Notice that the friction coefficient of the regular Langevin eq. is $\frac{\sqrt{2\pi}}{2}$ times $\gamma$). In fig.(1) we depict a typical kernel that exhibits non-trivial structure. A fast decay is followed by a negative region, a small positive peak and then a final decay. The most interesting feature, in the structure of the memory kernel, is the negative region, of course. The shape of the memory kernel depends on the two dimensionless parameters $\tau_1=\frac{t_1}{t_0}$ and $\tau_2=\frac{t_2}{t_0}$. Fig.(2) gives the dependence of the kernel on $\tau_2$ for fixed $\tau_1<<1$. We see a very weak dependence of the structure on $\tau_2$ ranging from much below to much above unity, without any particular interesting features. When $\tau_1$ is kept fixed at values above 1 and $\tau_2$ is varied, we see (Fig.(3)) that although the structure of the memory kernel is very different from the structure for $\tau_1<<1$ the dependence on $\tau_2$ is still weak. In fig.(4) on the other hand, we see the dependence of the kernel on $\tau_1$ with $\tau_2$ fixed. The striking feature is the transition from a simple decay at small $\tau_1$ to an interesting structure with a negative region that becomes more pronounced as $\tau_1$ is increased. The origin of the negative region can be traced back to the discussion in refs. [@schwartz] and [@brus] that shows that at zero temperature $\int_0^\infty \gamma(t,T=0)dt$ vanishes. Therefore, it is clear that at zero temperature $\gamma(t)$ must have a negative region to compensate for the contribution of the positive region. It is clear therefore, that for low enough temperature we must also have a negative region. We are dealing in this paper with a specific model describing a particle interacting with longitudinal phonons in an idealized liquid. We would like to stress at this point that the fact that the memory kernel has a negative region at low temperature is generic and not just an artifact of the specific model we consider. The reason is that the fact that at zero temperature $\int_0^\infty \gamma(t,T=0)dt=0$ is independent of the model and quite general. Therefore, the above conclusions concerning the existence of a negative region apply to the general case. In fact, this result is supported by molecular dynamics simulations that show similar behavior of the memory kernel [@posch; @benj]. Returning now to our model, we have to define low enough temperature in term of a dimensionless quantity. A careful inspection reveals that the relevant dimensionless parameter is $\frac{K_BT}{Mc^2}$ and it is easy to show that $\tau_1=d\cdot\left(\frac{K_BT}{Mc^2}\right)^{-\frac{1}{2}}$. Indeed d is a function of $\tau_1$ and $\tau_2$, but it does not vanish or diverge as $\tau_1$ or $\tau_2$ tend to infinity. It is obvious now why when $\tau_1$ is increased a negative region develops in the kernel. The parameter $\tau_2$, on the other hand, can be increased without increasing $\tau_1$ (or equivalently, decreasing $\frac{K_BT}{Mc^2}$). This explains the weak dependence on $\tau_2$ when $\tau_1$ is fixed. The physical origin of the negative region is the finite size of the particle and as result, the interaction of the particle at one point with phonons emitted earlier at another point. (The emission of phonons is the mechanism by which the particle looses energy. The interaction with phonons can contribute to the energy of the particle).
It is interesting to work out the times t where the kernel vanishes. This will tell us also when a negative region exists. We will demand that $\gamma(t)$ given by eq.(17) vanishes and will assume that $\gamma(t)$ vanishes when t is small enough, so that the expression to be used for the MSD is $\Delta x^2(t)=\varphi
t^2$ (eq.9). Using the short time form of the MSD is reasonable since at zero temperature the MSD vanishes, and therefore we are interested at finite temperature in the region where the MSD is still small. Solving the system of eqs. $$\begin{aligned}
\nonumber& &12A^2-12B^2A+B^4=0\\
\nonumber& &A\approx 2a^2+\frac{1}{6}\varphi t^2\\
\nonumber& &B=ct\end{aligned}$$ we find that the kernel vanishes at two points, one point, or none at all; depending on $\tau_1$. $$\begin{aligned}
t(\gamma=0)=\sqrt{\frac{2a^2}{\frac{2}{12\pm\sqrt{96}}c^2-\frac{1}{6}\varphi}}=t_0\sqrt{\frac{2\tau_1^2}{\frac{2}{12\pm\sqrt{96}}\tau_1^2-\frac{1}{6}}}\end{aligned}$$ When $\tau_1>>1$ a negative region will exist; however, when $\tau_1<<1$, the negative region will disappear. In fig.(4), curves (1)-(3) correspond to large $\tau_1$ and indeed the memory kernel vanishes at two points; the calculation shows that curves (4) and (5) should have only one zero point as can be seen in the fig.; and curve (6) should have no negative region at all.
In fig.(5) we present a typical dependence of the MSD on time. As expected, the MSD is quadratic for short times, and linear for long times. It is easy to show, from eq.(8), that the linear long time dependence is $
\left\langle \Delta x(t)^2 \right\rangle
=\frac{12K_BT}{\sqrt{2\pi}\cdot\stackrel{\wedge}{\gamma}(\omega=0)}
\cdot t$, and we have shown the short time dependence to be $\left\langle \Delta x(t)^2 \right\rangle\equiv\varphi t^2$; therefore we can easily show that the transition between them occurs at a typical time scale which depends only on the three known time scales. When $\tau_1<1$ the transition time is roughly $t_2$.\
Our calculation is classical and clearly at zero temperature quantum mechanics prevails. Nevertheless it is obvious that $\frac{K_BT}{Mc^2}$ can be made small enough while the system still is not quantum mechanical. Therefore, this generic effect should be experimentally observable.
[99]{} S. Z. Wan , C. X. Wang and Y. Y. Shi, Mol. Phys. 93 No.6 (1998) 901 Rossend Rey, J. Chem. Phys. 104 (1996) 1966 H.A. Posch , U. Balucani and R. Vallauri Physica A 123 (1984) 516 I. Benjamin , Lloyd L. Lee, Y.S. Li , Antonio Liu and Kent R. Wilson, Chem. Phys. 152 (1991) 1 T. S. Chow and J. J. Hermans, J. Chem. Phys. 56 (1972) 3150 R. P. Feynman and V. L. Vernon, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 24 (1963) 118 Schwartz M. and Brustein R. (1982), J. Stat. Phys. 51 (1988) 585 R. Zwanzig J. Stat. Phys. 9 (1973) 215 K. Lindenberg and E. Cortes, Physica A 126 (1984) 489 H. Mori, Prog. Theor. Phys. 33 (1965) 423. H. Mori, Prog. Theor. Phys. 34 (1965) 399. G. Goodyear and R. M. Stratt, J. Chem. Phys. 105 (1996) 10050 M. Guenza, J. Chem. Phys. 110 (1999) 7574 B. M. O. Heppe, J. Fluid Mech. 357 (1998) 167 M. H. Lee, J. Phys.: Cond. Mat. 4 (1992) 10487 T. Munakata, Progress of Theoretical Phys. 73, No. 3 (1985) 570. Brustein, R.; Marianer, s. and Schwartz, M., Physica A 175 (1991) 47
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Many methods have been developed for data clustering, such as k-means, expectation maximization and algorithms based on graph theory. In this latter case, graphs are generally constructed by taking into account the Euclidian distance as a similarity measure, and partitioned using spectral methods. However, these methods are not accurate when the clusters are not well separated. In addition, it is not possible to automatically determine the number of clusters. These limitations can be overcome by taking into account network community identification algorithms. In this work, we propose a methodology for data clustering based on complex networks theory. We compare different metrics for quantifying the similarity between objects and take into account three community finding techniques. This approach is applied to two real-world databases and to two sets of artificially generated data. By comparing our method with traditional clustering approaches, we verify that the proximity measures given by the Chebyshev and Manhattan distances are the most suitable metrics to quantify the similarity between objects. In addition, the community identification method based on the greedy optimization provides the smallest misclassification rates.'
author:
- 'Francisco A. Rodrigues'
- Guilherme Ferraz de Arruda
- Luciano da Fontoura Costa
bibliography:
- 'paper.bib'
title: A Complex Networks Approach for Data Clustering
---
Introduction
============
Classification is one of the most intrinsic activities of human beings, being used to facilitate the handling and organization of the huge amount of information that we receive every day. As a matter of fact, the brain is able to recognize objects in scenes and also to provide a categorization of objects, persons, or events. This classification is performed in order to cluster objects that are similar with respect to common attributes. Actually, humans have by now classified almost all known living species and materials on earth. Due to the importance of the classification task, it is fundamental to develop methods able to perform this task automatically. Indeed, many methods for categorization have been developed with application to life sciences (biology, zoology), medical sciences (psychiatry, pathology), social sciences (sociology, archaeology), earth sciences (geography, geology), and engineering [@Anderberg; @Jain99].
The process of classification can be performed in two different ways, *i.e.* *supervised classification*, where the previously known class of objects are provided as prototypes for classifying additional objects; and *unsupervised classification*, where no previous knowledge about the classes is provided. In the latter case, the categorization is performed in order to maximize the similarity between the objects in each class while minimizing the similarity between objects in different classes. In the current work, we introduce a method for unsupervised classification based on complex networks.
Unsupervised classification may be found under different names in different contexts, such as clustering (in pattern recognition), numerical taxonomy (in ecology) and partition (in graph theory). In the current work, we adopt the term “clustering”. Clustering can be used in many tasks, such as *data reduction*, performed by grouping data into cluster and processing each cluster as a single entity; *hypothesis generation*, when there is no information about the analyzed data; *hypothesis testing*, *i.e.* verification of the validity of a particular hypothesis; and *prediction based on classes*, where the obtained clusters are based on the characteristics of the respective patterns. As a matter of fact, clustering is a fundamental tool for many research fields, such as machine learning, data mining, pattern recognition, image analysis, information retrieval, and bioinformatics [@Jain99; @Everitt].
Many methods have been developed for data clustering [@theodoridispattern], many of which are based on graph theory [@Jain1999]. Graphs-based clustering methods take into account algorithms related to minimum spanning trees [@Zahn06], region of influence (e.g. [@Urquhart1982]), direct trees [@Koontz06] and spectral analysis [@Koontz06]. These methods are able to detect clusters of various shapes, at least for the case in which they are well separated. However, these algorithms present some drawbacks, such as the spectral clustering, which only divides the graph into two groups and not in an arbitrary number of clusters. Division into more than two groups can be achieved by repeated bisection, but there is no guarantee of reaching the best division into three groups [@theodoridispattern]. Also, these methods give no hint about how many clusters should be identified. On the other hand, methods for community identification in networks are able to handle these drawbacks [@Newman04PRE]. Moreover, these methods provide more accurate partitions than the traditional method based on graph, such as the spectral partition [@Newman04PRE]. Actually, methods based on complex networks are improvements of clustering approaches based on graphs.
Only recently, a method has been developed for data clustering based on complex networks concepts [@Oliveira08]. In this case, the authors proposed a clustering method based on graph partitioning and the Chameleon algorithm [@Karypis02]. Although this method is able to detect clusters in different shapes, it presents some drawbacks. The authors considered a method for community identification very particular which does not provide the most accurate network division [@Fortunato10]. In addition, it considered only a single metric to establish the connections between every pair of objects, *i.e.* the Euclidian distance. On the other hand, the method introduced in the current work overcomes all these limitations. We adopt the most accurate community identification methods and use the most traditional metrics to define the similarity between objects, including the Euclidian, Manhattan, Chebyshev, Fu and Tanimoto distances [@theodoridispattern]. The accuracy of our methodology is evaluated in artificial as well as two real-world databases. Moreover, we compare our methodology with some traditional clustering algorithms, i.e. k-means, cobweb, expectation maximization and farthest first. We verify that our approach provides the smallest error rates. So, we concluded that complex networks theory seems to provide the tools and concepts able to improve the clustering methods based on graphs, potentially overcoming the most traditional clustering methods.
Concepts and Methods
====================
Complex networks
----------------
Complex networks are graphs with non-trivial topological features, whose connections are distributed as a power-law [@Barabasi:survey]. An undirected network can be represented by its adjacency matrix $A$, whose elements $a_{ij}$ are equal to one whenever there is a connection between the vertices $i$ and $j$, or equal to zero otherwise. A more general representation takes into account weighted connections, where each edge $(i,j)$ presents an associated weight or strength $\omega(i,j)$.
Different measures have been developed to characterize the topology of network structures, such as the clustering coefficient, distance-related measurements and centrality metrics [@Costa:survey]. By allowing the different network properties to be quantified, these methods have revealed that most real-world networks are far from purely random [@Newman10].
In addition to this highly intricate topological organization, complex networks also tend to present modular structure. In this case, these modules are clusters whose vertices present similar roles, such as in the case of the brain of mammals, where cortical modules are associated to brain functions [@Bullmore2009]. Communities have the same principle as clusters in pattern recognition research. In this way, the algorithms developed for community identification can also be used to partition graph and finding clusters.
Different methods have been developed in order to find communities in networks. Basically, these methods can be grouped as spectral methods (e.g. [@Newman0:PNAS]), divisive methods (e.g. [@Girvan02:PNAS]), agglomerative methods (e.g. [@Clauset:04PRE]), and local methods (e.g. [@Clauset:2005]). The choice of the best method depends of the specific application, including the network size and number of connections. This is due to the fact that the most precise methods, such as the extremal optimization algorithm, are quite time expensive. Here, we take three different methods that provide accurate results, but have different time complexities. These methods are described in the next section.
The quality of a particular network division can be evaluated in terms of the *modularity measure*. This metric allows the number of communities to be automatically determined according to the best network partition. For a network partitioned into $m$ communities, a matrix $E$, $c \times c$, is constructed whose elements $e_{ij}$, represent the fraction of connections between communities $i$ and $j$. The modularity $Q$ is calculated as $$\label{Eq:modularity}
Q = \sum_i [ e_{ii} - ( \sum_j e_{ij} )^2 ] = \mathrm{Tr} E - ||E^2||.$$ The highest value of modularity is obtained for the best network division. In particular, networks that present high values of $Q$ have modular structure implying that clusters are identified with high accuracy [@Newman04PRE; @Newman10].
Clustering based on network
---------------------------
In literature, there are many definitions of clusters [@theodoridispattern], such as that provided by Everitt *et al.* [@Everitt], where clusters are understood as continuous regions of the feature space containing a high density of points, separated from other high density regions by low density regions. This definition is similar to that of network communities, *i.e.* a community is topologically defined as a subset of highly inter-connected vertices which are relatively sparsely connected to nodes in other communities [@Fortunato10].
Let each object (also denominated pattern) be represented by a feature vector $\vec{x} = [x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n]$. These features, $x_i$, are scalar numbers and quantify the properties of objects. For instance, in case of the Iris database, the objects are flowers and the attributes are the length and the width of the sepal and the petal, in centimeters [@Fisher1936]. The clustering approach consists of grouping the feature vectors into $m$ clusters, $C_1,C_2,\ldots,C_m$, in such a way that objects belonging to the same cluster exhibit higher similarity with each other than with objects in other groups.
The process of clustering based on networks involves the definition of the following concepts:
1. *Proximity measure*: each object is represented as a node, where each pair of nodes are connected according to their similarity. These connections are weighted in the sense so as to quantify how similar each pair of vertices is, in terms of their feature vector. In this way, the most similar objects are connected by the strongest edges.
2. *Clustering criterion*: modularity is the most traditional measure used to quantify de quality of a network division [@Fortunato10], see Equation \[Eq:modularity\]. Here, we adopt this metric to automatically choose the best cluster partition. In problems in which the number of clusters is known, it is not necessary to consider the modularity.
3. *Clustering algorithms*: Complex networks theory provides many algorithms for community identification, which act as the clustering algorithms [@Fortunato10]. The choice of the most suitable method for a particular application should take into account the error rate and the execution time.
4. *Validation of the results*: The validation of the clustering methods based on networks can be performed in two different ways: (i) by considering databases in which the clusters are known (or at least expected), such as the Iris database [@Fisher1936], and (ii) by taking into account artificial data with cluster organization, which allows to control the level of the data modular organization.
Proximity measures can be classified into two types, *similarity measures*, that is $s(\vec{x},\vec{y}) = s_0$ only if $\vec{x}=\vec{y}$ and $-\infty<s(\vec{x},\vec{y})\leq s_0 < +\infty$; and *dissimilarity measures*, where $d(\vec{x},\vec{y}) = d_0$ only if $\vec{x}=\vec{y}$ and $-\infty<d_0 \leq d(\vec{x},\vec{y})< +\infty$. To construct networks, it is more natural to adopt similarity measures, since it is expected that the edges with the strongest weights should be verified between the vertices with the most similar feature vectors. In this way, we adopt the following similarity measures to develop the network-based clustering approach [@theodoridispattern]:
1. Inverse of Euclidian distance: $$D_E^{-1}(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y}) = \frac{1}{d_2(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y})},$$ where $d_2(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y})$ is the traditional Euclidian distance. This metric results in values in the interval $[0, \infty)$.
2. Exponential of Euclidian distance: $$S_E(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y}) = \alpha \exp \left(-\alpha d_2(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y}) \right),$$ where this metric results in values in the interval $[0, \alpha]$.
3. Inverse of Manhattan distance: $$D_M^{-1}(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y}) = \left(\sum_{i=1}^n |x_i-y_i|\right)^{-1},$$ which assumes values in $[0, \infty)$.
4. Exponential of Manhattan distance: $$S_{M}(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y}) = \alpha \exp \left( -\alpha D_M \right),$$ assuming values in the interval $[0, \alpha]$.
5. Inverse of Chebyshev distance: $$D_C^{-1}(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y}) = \frac{1}{\max_{i=1}^n |x_i-y_i|}.$$ This metric results in values in $[0, \infty)$.
6. Exponential of Chebyshev distance: $$S_{C}(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y}) = \alpha \exp \left( -\alpha D_C \right),$$ assuming values in the interval $[0, \alpha]$.
7. Metric proposed by Fu, $$F(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y}) = 1 - \frac{d_2(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y})}{\parallel\textbf{x}\parallel+\parallel\textbf{y}\parallel}.$$ This metrics results in values in the interval $[0, 1]$
8. Exponential of the metric proposed by Fu: $$S_F(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y}) = \alpha \exp \left( -\alpha \frac{1 - F}{2} \right).$$ If $F(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y})=1$, then $S_F(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y}) = \alpha$. If $F(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y})=0$, then $S_F(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y}) = \alpha \exp \left(\frac{- \alpha}{2} \right)$. Therefore, $S_F$ assumes values in this limited interval.
9. Exponential of the Tanimoto mesure: $$S_T = \alpha \exp \left( -\alpha \frac{1 - T}{2} \right),$$ where $$T(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y}) = \frac{\textbf{x}^T\textbf{y}}{{\parallel\textbf{x}\parallel}^2 + {\parallel\textbf{y}\parallel}^2 - \textbf{x}^T\textbf{y}}.$$ This metric assumes values in $(-\infty, 1]$. Therefore, if $T(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y})=1$, then, $s_T(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y}) = \alpha$, if $T(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y}) \rightarrow - \infty$, then, $S_T(\textbf{x}, \textbf{y}) \rightarrow 0$
In order to divide networks into communities and therefore obtain the clusters, we adopt three methods, namely the maximization of the modularity method, which is based on the greedy algorithm [@Clauset:04PRE], here called *fastgreedy* algorithm; the extremal optimization approach [@Duch:2005] and the *waltrap* method [@Pons05:CIS]. In both former methods, two communities $i$ and $j$ are joined according to the increase of the modularity $Q$ of the network. Thus, starting with each vertex disconnected and considering each of them as a community, we repeatedly join communities together into pairs, choosing at each step the merging that results in the greatest increase (or smallest decrease) of the modularity $Q$. The best division corresponds to the partition that resulted in the highest value of $Q$. The difference between these two methods lies in the choice of the optimization algorithm. On the other hand, the walktrap method is based on random walks, where the community identification uses a metrics that considers the probability transition matrix [@Pons05:CIS]. The time of execution of the walktrap method run as $O(N^2\log N)$. While the fastgreedy method is believed to be the fastest one, running in $O(N\log^2 N)$, the extremal optimization provides the most accurate division [@Danon:2005]. On the other hand, the extremal optimization method is not particularly fast, scaling as $O(N^2\log
N)$.
The validation of the network-based clustering method is performed with respect to artificial (*i.e.* computer generated clusters) and real-world databases. In the case of artificial data, we use two different configurations, *i.e.* (i) two separated clouds of points with a Gaussian distribution in a two dimensional space, and (ii) two semi-circles with varying density of points, as presented in Figure \[Fig:bases\]. In the former case, the validation set consists of two set of points (clusters) generated according to a gaussian distribution with covariance matrix equals to identity, ($\Sigma = I$). The median of one set of points is moved from the origin $(0,0)$ until (0,15), in steps of 0.75, while the other cluster remains fixed at the origin of axis. In this way, the distance between clusters is varied from $d=0$ to $d=15$. Figure \[Fig:bases\](a) to (c) shown three cases considering three distances, *i.e.* $d=0$, $3$ and $15$. Observe that as $d$ increases, the cluster identification becomes easier. The second artificial database corresponds to a classic problem in pattern recognition [@theodoridispattern]. It consists of two sets of points uniformly generated in two limited semi-circle areas. In this case, the density of points, *i.e.* the number of points by unit of area, defines the cluster resolutions, with higher density producing more defined clusters. In our analysis, this density is varied from 1 to 32, in steps of 1.6. Figures \[Fig:bases\](d) to (f) show three configurations of this artificial database generated by taking into account three different densities, $\rho = 1$, 6.4 and 14.4.
{width="0.9\linewidth"}
With respect to real-world databases, we take into account two datasets, *i.e.* the Iris database [@Fisher1936], and the Breast Cancer Wisconsin database [@Wolberg94]. The Iris database is composed by three species of Iris flowers (*Iris setosa*, *Iris virginica* and *Iris versicolor*). Each class consists of 50 samples, where four features were measured from each sample, *i.e.* the length and the width of the sepal and the petal, in centimeters. On the other hand, the cancer database is composed by features of digitized image of a fine needle aspirate from a breast mass, where 30 real-valued features are computed for each cell nucleus [@Wolberg94]. This database is composed by 699 cells, where 241 are malignant and 458 are benign.
Results and discussion
======================
The accuracy of the clustering method based on networks is compared with four traditional clustering methods, namely k-means, cobweb, farthest first and expectation maximization (EM) [@Witten05]. These methods present different properties, such as the k-means tendency to find spherical clusters [@theodoridispattern]. Moreover, we consider three methods for community identification, namely fastgreedy, extremal optimization and walktrap [@Fortunato10]. However, in this work, since the fastgreedy and extremal optimization result in the same error rates for all considered databases, we discuss only the results of the fastgreedy method, which is faster than the extremal optimization approach.
We start our analysis by taking into account the Iris and the Breast Cancer Wisconsin databases. As a preliminary data visualization, we project the patterns into a two dimensional space by taking into account principal component analysis. Figure \[Fig:pca\] shows the projections. It is clear that there is no clear separation between the clusters for both databases.
Since the attributes in the Iris data present different ranges, having values such as 0.1 for the petal width and 7.2 for the sepal length, it is necessary to take into account a feature standardization procedure [@theodoridispattern]. In this case, each attribute is transformed in order to present mean equals to zero and standard deviation equals to one. This transformation, called standardization, is performed as, $$y_f = \frac{x_f - \overline{x_f}}{\sigma_{x_f}}$$ where $\overline{x_f}$, $\sigma_{x_f}$ are the average and standard deviation of the values of attribute $f$, respectively. The obtained results considering the four clustering algorithm is presented in Table \[Tab:iris\]. The EM and k-means exhibit the smaller errors among the traditional classifiers. However, note that this performance is obtained when the number of clusters is known. On the other hand, EM provides an error of 40% when the number of clusters is unknown. This is a limitation of these methods, since in most of the cases, the information about the number of classes is not available.
Table \[Tab:iris\] also presents the results with respect to the cluster-based on complex networks approaches. Only combinations between metric and community algorithm which result in the smallest error rates are shown in this table. The smallest error was obtained by taking into account the inverse of the Chebyshev distance and the fastgreedy community identification algorithm. The obtained error for this case is equal to 4.7%. The second best performance is obtained by considering the inverse of the Euclidian distance and the fastgreedy or the walktrap algorithms, which provide an error of 6%. In addition to the smallest error rates, network-based clustering present other important feature, *i.e.* it is not necessary to specify the number of clusters present in the database. Indeed, the maximum value of the modularity suggests the most accurate partition. Nevertheless, for some proximity measures, the modularity is not able to determine the best partition. In this case, the knowledge about the number of clusters implies in a reduction of the error rates, as in the case of exponential of the Tanimoto distance, where the error is reduced from 33.3% to 6%, and the exponential of the Chebyshev distance, where the error is reduced from 33.3% to 7.3%. Therefore, for the Iris data, such metrics are not appropriated for network-based clustering. We also analyze the clustering error without standardization. In this case, the error rates are larger than those obtained considering the normalization, for some cases. However, for the best results, we verify that the errors are similar in both cases. Figure \[Fig:dendrogram\] presents the dendrogram obtained for the best separation, *i.e.* by taking into account the inverse of Chebyshev distance and the fastgreedy community identification method. Observe that the best partition is obtained for the highest value of the modularity measure.
\
Method % error ($k=?$) % error ($k = 3$)
------------------------- ----------------- -------------------
k-means – 11.3
cobweb 33.3 –
farthest first – 14.0
EM 40.0 9.3
$D_E^{-1}$ - fastgreedy 6.0 6.0
$D_E^{-1}$ - walktrap 6.0 6.0
$S_E$ - walktrap 33.3 14.7
$S_T$ - walktrap 33.3 6.0
$S_F$ - walktrap 33.3 7.3
$D_M^{-1}$ - fastgreedy 33.3 6.0
$D_M^{-1}$ - walktrap 33.3 6.0
$S_M$ - walktrap 33.3 6.0
$D_C^{-1}$ - fastgreedy 4.7 4.7
$D_C^{-1}$ - walktrap 9.3 9.3
$S_C$ - Walktrap 33.3 7.3
: Clustering errors for the Iris database considering the cases in which the number of classes $k$ is known ($k=3$) or unknown ($k = ?$). EM and k-means are the only methods that need to specify the number of clusters $k$.[]{data-label="Tab:iris"}
![Dendrogram obtained by taking into account the inverse of Chebyshev distance and the fastgreedy community identification algorithm for the Iris data. The cut in the dendrogram results in three classes, where the error rate is equal to 4.7%.[]{data-label="Fig:dendrogram"}](dendrogram.eps){width="1\linewidth"}
The cancer database also needs to be pre-processed by the standardization. The obtained clustering errors are presented in Table \[Tab:cancer\]. Only combinations between metric and community algorithm which result in the smallest error rates are shown in this table. In this case, the smallest clustering error is obtained by the k-means method, which produces an error rate of 7.2%. However, the complex networks-based method taking into account the inverse of Manhattan distance and walktrap algorithm for community identification provides an error rate of 7.9%. Observe that when the number of clusters is known, all methods result in smaller error rates. Nevertheless, the $D_M^{-1}$-walktrap produces the same error rate of 7.9% even when $k=2$. Therefore, the highest value of the modularity accounts for the separation for this method. Although our proposed method implied in an higher error than the k-means methodology, it presents the advantage that it is not necessary to known the number of clusters. In this way, our methodology is also more suitable to determine the clusters for the Breast Cancer Wisconsin database.
Method % error (k=?) % error (k = 3)
------------------------- --------------- -----------------
k-means – 7.2
cobweb 37.2 –
farthest first – 35.3
EM 75.9 8.8
$D_E^{-1}$ - walktrap 52.9 9.8
$S_F$ - fastgreedy 17.6 17.6
$D_M^{-1}$ - walktrap 7.9 7.9
$D_C^{-1}$ - fastgreedy 50.8 15.3
$S_C$ - walktrap 15.9 15.9
: Clustering errors for the Breast Cancer Wisconsin database considering the cases in which the number of classes $k$ is known ($k=3$) or unknown ($k = ?$). EM and k-means are the only methods that need to specify the number of clusters $k$.[]{data-label="Tab:cancer"}
In order to provide a more comprehensive evaluation of the proposed complex networks-based clustering approach, we generated two set of artificial data into a two dimensional space, as discussed in the last section. This artificial data allows to control the cluster separability of the generated databases. Initially, we consider two clusters of points with Gaussian distribution in an two-dimensional space separated by a distance $d$. Figure \[Fig:gaussian\_kauto\] presents the best obtained results for the complex networks-based approach taking into account different proximity measures. For all cases, the number of clusters is determined automatically by the maximum value of the modularity. Note that the error rate goes to zero for $d \geq 5$. Figure \[Fig:gaussian\_kauto\](f) shows the comparison between the traditional clustering method which resulted in the best results, *i.e.* the cobweb, and the best complex networks approach. In this case, the method based on the exponential of the Chebyshev distance and fastgreedy algorithm provides the smallest error rate. Observe that the variation of the error rate is also small for this method, compared with the cobweb.
![Error rates obtained according to the separation of two clusters composed by sets of points with gaussian distribution in a two-dimensional space. We show the best results for each proximity measure, i.e. (a) Euclidian, (b) Tanimoto, (c) Fu, (d) Manhattan and (e) Chebyshev distances. The number of clusters is determined automatically by the maximum value of the modularity for all cases. In (f) the most accurate network-based method is compared with the best traditional clustering approach. Each point is an average over 10 simulations.[]{data-label="Fig:gaussian_kauto"}](gaussian_kauto.eps){width="1\linewidth"}
![Error rates obtained according to the separation of two clusters composed by sets of points with Gaussian distribution in a two-dimensional space for the case where the number of clusters is known. We show the best results for each proximity measure, *i.e.* (a) Euclidian, (b) Tanimoto, (c) Fu, (d) Manhattan and (e) Chebyshev distances. The number of clusters is set as $k=2$ for all methods. In (f) it the most accurate network-based method is compared with the best traditional clustering approach. Each point is an average over 10 simulations.[]{data-label="Fig:gaussian_kfix"}](gaussian_kfix.eps){width="1\linewidth"}
The k-means algorithm cannot be used in the comparison where the number of clusters $k$ is known. Thus, we consider the case where $k$ is determined for all methods. Figure \[Fig:gaussian\_kfix\] presents the obtained results. In all cases, the error rate goes to zero for $d
\geq 5$. As in the case of unknown number of clusters, the method based on the exponential of the Chebyshev distance and fastgreedy algorithm provides the smallest error rate. Among the traditional algorithms, the k-means allows the most accurate results. In fact, for $d \geq 3$, both k-means and network-based clustering method provide similar error rates. For this database, accurate results were expected for the k-means method, since the clusters are symmetric around the means, being equally distributed among the two clusters. Observe that the other approaches of the complex networks-based method also imply in an small error rate. Comparing with the cases where the number of clusters is unknown, *i.e.* Figure \[Fig:gaussian\_kauto\] shows that the error rate is similar for both approaches. Therefore, the network-based methods result in the most accurate cluster partitions and have the advantage that it is not necessary to know the number of clusters.
The second artificial database used to evaluate the classification error rates is given by the two semi-circle with varying density of points (see Figures \[Fig:bases\](d) – (f)). Figure \[Fig:art\_kauto\] presents the obtained results for unknown number of clusters considering fastgreedy algorithm. Only the best results are shown in this figure. The higher the density of points, the smaller the error rate, since the clusters become more defined. The error rate does not tend to zeros only for the inverse of the Chebyshed distance (Figure \[Fig:art\_kauto\](c)). The most accurate clustering is obtained by taking into account the exponential of the Manhattan distance (Figure \[Fig:art\_kauto\](b)). Figure \[Fig:Res\_art\_kfixo\] presents the obtained errors when the number of clusters is known, *i.e.* $k=2$. Again, the complex networks-based method which takes into account the exponential of the Manhattan distance produces the smallest error. It is interesting to note that the traditional clustering methods, i.e. k-means and cobweb, result in higher error rates than the methods based on complex networks. In addition, the error does not tend to zero when the density of points is increased for these traditional methods. Figure \[Fig:ex\] presents an example of the best clustering for the k-means and complex networks-based methods. Observe that k-means cannot identify the correct clusters.
 – (f)). The error rates are determined according to the density of points. The adopted proximity measures are (a) the exponential of the Euclidian distance, (b) the exponential of the Manhattan distance, (c) the inverse of the Chebyshev distance and (d) the exponential of the Chebyshev distance. The number of clusters is obtained automatically by the maximum value of the modularity. []{data-label="Fig:art_kauto"}](artificial_kauto.eps){width="0.9\linewidth"}
 – (f)). The error rates are determined according to the density of points. The adopted proximity measures are (a) the exponential of the Euclidian distance, (b) the exponential of the Manhattan distance, (c) the inverse of the Chebyshev distance and (d) the exponential of the Chebyshev distance. The number of clusters is fixed as $k=2$. The k-means (e) and cobweb (f) are the traditional clustering methods that produce the smallest errors.[]{data-label="Fig:Res_art_kfixo"}](artificiais_k2.eps){width="0.9\linewidth"}
![Example of the best performance for the (b) k-means, complex network-based methods method using (c) the best modularity value and (d) fixing $k=2$. The original data is shown in (a).[]{data-label="Fig:ex"}](ex_art2.eps){width="1\linewidth"}
Conclusion
==========
In this work, we study different proximity measures to represent a data set into a graph and then adopt community detection algorithms to perform respective clustering. Our obtained results suggest that complex networks theory has tools to improve graph-based clustering methodologies, since this new area provides more accurate algorithms for community identification. In fact, comparing with traditional clustering methods, the network-based approach finds clusters with the smallest error rates for both real-world and artificial databases. In addition, this methodology allows the identification of the number of clusters automatically by taking into account the maximum value of the modularity measurement. Among the considered proximity measures, the inverse of the Chebyshev distance and the inverse of the Manhattan distance are the most suitable metric for the considered real-world databases. With respect to the artificial databases, the exponential of the Chebyshev and exponential of the Manhattan distance produces the smallest error rates. Therefore, metrics based on the Chebyshed and Manhattan distances are the most suitable to quantify the similarity between objects in terms of their feature vectors. Among the community identification algorithms, the fastgreedy revealed to be the most suitable, due to its accuracy and the smallest time for processing.
The analysis proposed in this work can be extended by taking into account other real-world databases as well as other approaches to generate artificial clusters. The application to different areas, such as medicine, biology, physics and economy constitute other promising research possibilities.
Acknowledgement {#acknowledgement .unnumbered}
===============
Luciano da F. Costa thanks CNPq (301303/06-1) and FAPESP (05/00587-5) for sponsorship.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
[**V.V. Borzov [^1], E.V. Damaskinsky [^2]**]{}
**Invariance of the generalized oscillator**
**under linear transformation of**
**the related system of orthogonal polynomials**
> We consider two families of polynomials $\mathbb{P}=\polP$ and $\mathbb{Q}=\polQ$[^3] orthogonal on the real line with respect to probability measures $\mu$ and $\nu$ respectively. Let $\polQ$ and $\polP$ connected by the linear relations $$Q_n(x)=P_n(x)+a_1P_{n-1}(x)+...+a_kP_{n-k}(x).$$ Let us denote $\mathfrak{A}_P$ and $\mathfrak{A}_Q$ generalized oscillator algebras associated with the sequences $\mathbb{P}$ and $\mathbb{Q}$. In the case $k=2$ we describe all pairs ($\mathbb{P}$,$\mathbb{Q}$), for which the algebras $\mathfrak{A}_P$ and $\mathfrak{A}_Q$ are equal. In addition, we construct corresponding algebras of generalized oscillators for arbitrary $k\geq1$.
Introduction
============
Let $\mathbb{P}=\polP$ is a family of polynomials orthogonal on the real line with respect to the probability measure $\mu$. Consider the sequence of polynomials $\mathbb{Q}=\polQ$ such that $$Q_n(x)=P_n(x)+a_1P_{n-1}(x)+...+a_kP_{n-k}(x), \quad n>k-1.$$ The family of orthogonal polynomials associated with such linear relation was discussed in several works (see e.g. [@1] - [@5]). In particular the necessary and sufficient conditions for the orthogonality of the sequence $\polQ$ with respect to a positive Borel measure $\nu$ on the real line are given in the article [@5].
It is known [@6] that every sequence of polynomials $\polP$ orthogonal with respect to positive Borel measures $\mu$ on the real line generates the generalized oscillator algebra $\mathfrak{A}_P$. In this work, we investigate the question under what conditions algebras $\mathfrak{A}_P$ and $\mathfrak{A}_Q$, generated by such linearly related polynomials, coincide $$\mathfrak{A}_P=\mathfrak{A}_Q.$$ This problem was considered in [@8] for the simplest case $k=1$. In this paper we discuss the case $k=2$.
Below we will need the following results ([@5]-[@7]). Let $u$ is a linear functional on the linear space of polynomials with real coefficients. The polynomials $\polP$ are called orthogonal with respect to $u$, if $$\langle u, P_nP_m\rangle=0,\, \forall n\neq m \quad\text{and}\quad
\langle u, P_n^{\,\,2}\rangle\neq 0,\, \forall n=0,1,\ldots .$$ Let $H=\left\{ u_{i+j}\right\}_{i,\,j\geq 0}$ is the Hankel matrix associated with the functional $u$, where $u_k=\langle u, x^{k}\rangle,k\geq 0$. The linear functional $u$ is called the quasi-definite (positive definite) functional, if the leading submatrices $H_n$ of the matrix $H$ are nonsingular (positive definite) for all $n\geq0$.
Favard’s theorem gives a description of quasi-definite (positively definite) linear functional in terms of the three-term recurrence relations that satisfied by the polynomials $\polP$: $$xP_{n}(x)=P_{n+1}(x)+\beta_n P_{n}(x)+\gamma_nP_{n-1}(x)$$ $$P_{0}(x)=1,\qquad P_{1}(x)=x-\beta_0,$$ where $\gamma_n\neq0$ (respectively $\gamma_n>0$).
If $u$ is a positive definite linear functional, then there exists the positive Borel measure $\mu$ (supported by an infinite subset of $\mathbb{R}$) such that $$\langle u, q\rangle=\int_{\mathbb{R}} q \rm{d}\mu, \qquad \forall q\in\mathbb{R}.$$
Bellow we will use the following theorem.
\[38\][[@5]]{} Let $\polP$ is the sequence of orthogonal polynomials with recurrence relations $$\label{01}
xP_n(x)=P_{n+1}(x)+\beta_nP_{n}(x)+\gamma_nP_{n-1},\quad (\gamma_n\neq0)$$
$P_0(x)=1,\quad P_1(x)=x-\beta_0.$
Let $a_1$ and $a_2$ are real numbers such that $a_2\neq0$, and $Q_n(x)$ are polynomials defined by the relations $$\label{02}
Q_n(x)=P_n(x)+a_1P_{n-1}(x)+a_2P_{n-2},\quad n\geq 3.$$ Then the orthogonality of the sequence $\polQ$ depends on the choice of the coefficients $a_1$ and $a_2$. More precisely, $\polQ$ is a family of orthogonal polynomials with recurrence relations $$\label{03}
xQ_n(x)=Q_{n+1}(x)+\widetilde{\beta}_nQ_{n}(x)+\widetilde{\gamma}_nQ_{n-1},\quad n\geq1,\quad
(\gamma_n\neq0)$$ if and only if $\gamma_3+a_1(\beta_2-\beta_3)\neq0$and
(${i}$) if $a_1=0$, then for $n\geq4$,$\beta_n=\beta_{n-2}$,$\gamma_n=\gamma_{n-2}$;
(${ii}$) if $a_1\neq0$ and $a_1^{\,\,2}=4a_2$, then for $n\geq2$ $$\beta_n=A+Bn+Cn^2,\quad \gamma_n=D+En+Fn^2,$$ with $a_1C=2F$, $a_1B=2E-2F$,$(A,B,C,D,E,F\in\mathbb{R})$;
(${iii}$) if $a_1\neq0$ and $a_1^{\,\,2}>4a_2$, then for $n\geq2$ $$\beta_n=A+B\lambda^n+C\lambda^{-n},\quad \gamma_n=D+E\lambda^n+F\lambda^{-n}$$ with $a_1C=(1+\lambda)F$, $a_1\lambda B=(1+\lambda)E$,$(A,B,C,D,E,F\in\mathbb{R})$, where $\lambda$ is the unique solution in $(-1,1)$ of the equation
$a_1^{\,\,2}\lambda=a_2(1+\lambda)^2$;
(${iv}$) if $a_1\neq0$ and $a_1^{\,\,2}<4a_2$, and we let $\lambda=e^{i\theta}$, $\theta\in (0,\pi)$ be the unique solution of the equation $a_1^{\,\,2}\lambda=a_2(1+\lambda)^2$, then for $n\geq2$ $$\beta_n=A+Be^{in\theta}+\overline{B}e^{-in\theta},\quad
\gamma_n=D+Ee^{in\theta}+\overline{E}e^{-in\theta},$$ with $a_1\lambda B=(1+\lambda)E$$(A,D\in\mathbb{R},\, B,F\in\mathbb{C})$.
Let us give the definition of the generalized oscillator connected with the family of orthogonal polynomials [@6]. Let $\mu$ is a probability measure on $\mathbb{R}$ with finite moments of all orders $$\mu_n=\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} x^n\rm{d}\mu <\infty, \quad n\geq0.$$ These moments define uniquely two sequences of real numbers $\left\{a_n\right\}_{n=0}^{\infty}$, $\left\{b_n\right\}_{n=0}^{\infty}$ and the system of orthogonal polynomials $\polpsi$ which satisfy recurrence relations $$\label{06}
x\Psi_{n}(x)=b_n\Psi_{n+1}(x)+a_n \Psi_{n}(x)+b_{n-1}\Psi_{n-1}(x),$$ for $n\geq0$ and also initial conditions $$\Psi_{0}(x)=1,\qquad \Psi_{1}(x)=\frac{x-a_0}{b_0}.$$ These polynomials form an orthonormal basis in the Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}=\rm{L}_2(\mathbb{\mathbb{R}};\mu)$.
It is necessary to distinguish two cases
1. $a_n=0$ - symmetric case;
2. $a_n\neq0$ - nonsymmetric case.
In the Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}$ we define the ladder operators $a^{\pm}$ and the number operator $N$ by the formulas $$\begin{aligned}
a^+\Psi_{n}(x)&=\sqrt{2}b_n\Psi_{n+1}(x),\\
a^-\Psi_{n}(x)&=\sqrt{2}b_{n-1}\Psi_{n-1}(x),\\
N\Psi_{n}(x)&=n\Psi_{n}(x),\quad n\geq0.\end{aligned}$$ Let $B(N)$ be an operator-valued function such that $$\begin{aligned}
B(N)\Psi_{n}(x)&={b_{n-1}}^2\Psi_{n}(x), \\
B(N+\mathbb{I})\Psi_{n}(x)&={b_{n}}^2\Psi_{n}(x),\quad n\geq0.\end{aligned}$$
The next theorem is faithful.
\[07\] [[@6]]{} The operators $a^{\pm}$, $N$, $\mathbb{I}$ satisfy the following relations $$a^-a^+=2B(N+\mathbb{I}), \quad a^+a^-=2B(N), \quad
[N,a^{\pm}]=\pm a^{\pm}.$$
[**Definition**]{}. .
We will give one useful consequence of the previous theorem. Let $\mathfrak{A}_s$ is the algebra of generalized oscillator corresponding to recurrence relations in the symmetric case ($a_n=0$) and $\mathfrak{A}_a$ is the algebra of generalized oscillator corresponding recurrence relations in an asymmetric case ($a_n\neq0$). Then $\mathfrak{A}_s=\mathfrak{A}_a$.
Now we are ready to formulate the problem under consideration. We suppose that there are two families of polynomials $\mathbb{P}=\polP$ and $\mathbb{Q}=\polQ$ orthogonal with respect to probability measures $\mu$ and $\nu$ respectively. We suppose that these polynomials satisfy the conditions of [**theorem 1.1**]{} and $\beta_n, \widetilde{\beta_n}, \gamma_n, \widetilde{\gamma_n}\in \mathbb{R}$. Let us denote $\mathfrak{A}_P$ and $\mathfrak{A}_Q$ the corresponding algebra of generalized oscillators.
[**Problem**]{}. [*We want to describe all pairs of families of orthogonal polynomials $(\mathbb{P}, \mathbb{Q})$ for which $\mathfrak{A}_P=\mathfrak{A}_Q$*]{}.
Jacobi matrices and the main result
===================================
Let $\mathbb{P}$ and $\mathbb{Q}$ are defined in Hilbert spaces $\mathcal{H}_{\mu}=\rm{L}^2(\mathbb{R};\mu)$ and $\mathcal{H}_{\nu}=\rm{L}^2(\mathbb{R};\nu)$, respectively. Let these polynomials satisfy the recurrence relations and , respectively. In addition, we assume that these polynomials are related to each other by the relation . We will also suppose that $\beta_n, \widetilde{\beta_n}, \gamma_n, \widetilde{\gamma_n}\in \mathbb{R}$ and the coefficients $\beta_n, \gamma_n$ satisfies the conditions of [**theorem 1.1**]{}.
The Jacobi matrices $J_P$, $J_Q$ corresponding to the RR , , respectively, can be written in the form $$J=\begin{bmatrix} A&I_1\\ I_2&B\end{bmatrix},\quad
I_1=\begin{bmatrix} 0&0&0&\cdots\\ 0&0&0&\cdots\\ 1&0&0&\cdots\end{bmatrix},\quad
I_2=\begin{bmatrix}
0&0&\gamma_3\\ 0&0&0\\ 0&0&0\\ \cdots&\cdots&\cdots
\end{bmatrix}$$ where the matrix $A$ for sequences $\mathbb{P}$ and $\mathbb{Q}$ have the following form $$A_P=\begin{bmatrix}
\beta_0&1&0\\
\gamma_1&\beta_1&1\\
0&\gamma_2&\beta_2
\end{bmatrix},\quad
A_Q=\begin{bmatrix}
\widetilde{\beta}_0&1&0\\
\widehat{\gamma}_1&\widetilde{\beta}_1&1\\
0&\widetilde{\gamma}_2&\widetilde{\beta}_2
\end{bmatrix},$$ and the matrix $B$ equals to $$B=\begin{bmatrix}
\beta_3&1&0&0&0&0&\cdots\\
\gamma_2&\beta_2&1&0&0&0&\cdots\\
0&\gamma_3&\beta_3&1&0&0&\cdots\\
0&0&\gamma_2&\beta_2&1&0&\cdots\\
\cdots&\cdots&\cdots&\cdots&\cdots&\cdots&\cdots
\end{bmatrix}.$$
Let us note that elements $(\beta_0,\beta_1,\beta_2,\beta_3)$ and $(\gamma_1,\gamma_2,\gamma_3)$ of the matrix $J_P$ are given, while the elements $(\widetilde{\beta}_0,\widetilde{\beta}_1,\widetilde{\beta}_2)$ as well as coefficients $a_1,a_2$ in the equation should be defined.
We will consider all 4 cases of the [**theorem 1.1**]{}. General relations valid for all four cases have the following form:
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{11}
\widetilde{\gamma}_n&=\gamma_n, \, n\geq1;&\quad & \widetilde{\beta}_n=\beta_n, \, n\geq3; \nonumber \\
\beta_{2n+1}&=\beta_3, \, n\geq1;&\quad & \gamma_{2n}=\gamma_2, \, n\geq1; \\
\beta_{2n}&=\beta_2, \, n\geq1;&\quad & \gamma_{2n+1}=\gamma_3, \, n\geq1; \nonumber \\
&\gamma_{n}\neq 0;&\quad & \qquad a_2\neq 0. \nonumber\end{aligned}$$
We use the following notation $$\begin{gathered}
\label{15}
s_1=\frac{\gamma_3-\gamma_1-(\beta_2-\beta_1)(\beta_3-\beta_1)}{\gamma_3},\nonumber \\
s_2=\frac{\gamma_2}{\beta_3-\beta_1},\quad s_3=\frac{\gamma_3}{\beta_3-\beta_1},\\
w=\frac{a_1}{4s_3}-\frac{\gamma_2}{\gamma_3},\quad
w_{\lambda}=\frac{\lambda}{(1+\lambda)^2}\, \frac{a_1}{s_3}-\frac{\gamma_2}{\gamma_3}.\nonumber\end{gathered}$$
We now formulate our main result in terms of Jacobi matrices. Namely, we can prove that all pairs of orthogonal polynomial systems $\polP$ and $\polQ$ connected by the linear relation , which generate the same algebra of generalized oscillator, can be divided into following eight groups:
[**The case I**]{}$a_1=0$, $\beta_1\neq\beta_3$;
In this case the matrix $A_Q$ and the coefficient $a_2$ are defined uniquely by the relations $$\begin{gathered}
\label{16}
\widetilde{\beta}_0=\beta_0+\frac{(\beta_3-\beta_1-\beta_0)\gamma_1}{\gamma_2\gamma_3}\,a_2,\quad
a_2=-s_1s_3^{\,\,2},\nn \\
\widetilde{\beta}_1=\beta_1+\frac{a_2}{s_3}-\widetilde{\beta}_0,\quad \widetilde{\beta}_2=- \frac{a_2}{s_3},\\
\widetilde{\gamma}_n=\gamma_n,\, n\geq1, \quad \widetilde{\beta}_n=\beta_n,\, n\geq3.\nn\end{gathered}$$
[**The case II**]{}$a_1=0$, $\beta_1=\beta_3$, $\gamma_3=\gamma_1$, $\beta_2\neq\beta_0$.
In this case the matrix $A_Q$ and the coefficient $a_2$ are defined uniquely by the relations $$\begin{gathered}
\label{17}
\widetilde{\beta}_0=\beta_1-\frac{\gamma_2}{\beta_2-\beta_0},\quad
\widetilde{\beta}_1=\beta_0+\frac{\gamma_2}{\beta_2-\beta_0},\nn \\
\widetilde{\beta}_2=\beta_2,\, a_2=\gamma_2\,\frac{\beta_1-\beta_0}{\beta_2-\beta_0}-
\frac{\gamma_2^{\,\,2}}{(\beta_2-\beta_0)^2},\\
\widetilde{\gamma}_n=\gamma_n,\, n\geq1, \quad \widetilde{\beta}_n=\beta_n,\, n\geq3. \nn\end{gathered}$$
[**The case III**]{}$a_1\neq0$, $\beta_1\neq\beta_3$, $a_2=\frac{1}{4}a_1^{\,\,2}$.
We denote by $w$ the solution of the equation $$\begin{gathered}
\qquad 16s_3^{\,\,2}w^4+32s_2s_3w^3+(16s_2^{\,\,2}+4s_3^{\,\,2})w^2+\\
(4s_2+s_1s_3)w+s_1s_2+\frac{\gamma_2}{\gamma_3}(\beta_2-\beta_1)=0 \qquad\end{gathered}$$ such that $a_1=(4s_3w+4s_2)\in\mathbb{R}$ and introduce the quantity $$\begin{gathered}
\label{08}
C_{\beta,\gamma}=a_2\left[- \frac{\gamma_1}{\gamma_3}\left(\beta_2-a_1(w+1)\right)+\beta_0(4w^3+4w+1)\right]-\\
a_1w\left[\beta_0(\beta_1+\beta_2)+\gamma_1\right].\qquad\quad\end{gathered}$$ In this case, for given $w$, the matrix $A_Q$ and the coefficients $a_1,\,a_2$ are defined uniquely by the relations $$\begin{gathered}
\label{09}
\widetilde{\beta}_0=\beta_0-\frac{C_{\beta,\gamma}}{\gamma_2},\quad
\widetilde{\beta}_1=\beta_1+\frac{C_{\beta,\gamma}}{\gamma_2}+a_1w,\nn\\
\widetilde{\beta}_2=\beta_2-a_1(w+1),\\
a_1=4s_3w+4s_2,\quad a_2=\frac{1}{4}a_1^{\,\,2}.\end{gathered}$$
[**The case IV**]{}$a_1\neq0$, $\beta_1=\beta_3$, $a_2=\frac{1}{4}\,a_1^{\,\,2}$.
Let $a_1$ be a real solution of the equation $$\frac{\gamma_2^{\,\,2}}{\gamma_3^{\,\,2}}\,a_1^{\,\,2}-
a_1\left(\frac{\gamma_2}{\gamma_3}+\frac{\gamma_1}{4\gamma_3}-\frac{1}{4}\right)+
\frac{\gamma_2}{\gamma_3}(\beta_2-\beta_1)=0.$$ In this case, the matrix $A_Q$ is defined uniquely by the relations $$\begin{gathered}
\label{10}
\widetilde{\beta}_0=\beta_0-\frac{D_{\beta,\gamma}}{\gamma_2},\quad
\widetilde{\beta}_1=\beta_1+\frac{D_{\beta,\gamma}}{\gamma_2}+a_1w,\\
\widetilde{\beta}_2=\beta_2-a_1(w+1), \nn\end{gathered}$$ where $w=- \ds\frac{\gamma_2}{\gamma_3}$ and $D_{\beta,\gamma}$ is defined by at $w=- \ds\frac{\gamma_2}{\gamma_3}$.
[**The case V**]{}$a_1\neq0$, $a_1^{\,\,2}>4a_2$, $a_2=\ds\frac{\lambda}{(1+\lambda)^2}\,a_1^{\,\,2}$, $\beta_1\neq\beta_3$, $\lambda\in(-1,1)$.
Let $w_{\lambda}$ be a solution of the equation $$\begin{gathered}
\label{18}
\frac{(1+\lambda)^4}{\lambda^2}\,s_3^{\,\,2}w_{\lambda}^{\,\,4}+
2\frac{(1+\lambda)^2}{\lambda}\,s_2s_3w_{\lambda}^{\,\,3}+\\
\left(\frac{(1+\lambda)^4}{\lambda^2}\,s_2^{\,\,2}+\frac{(1+\lambda)^2}{\lambda}\,s_3\right)w_{\lambda}^{\,\,2}+\\
\left(\frac{(1+\lambda)^2}{\lambda}\,s_2+s_1s_3\right)w_{\lambda}+s_1s_2+\frac{\gamma_2}{\gamma_3}(\beta_2-\beta_1)=0,\end{gathered}$$ such that $$a_1=\frac{(1+\lambda)^2}{\lambda}(s_3w_{\lambda}+s_2)\in\mathbb{R}.$$ In this case, the matrix $A_Q$ is defined uniquely by the relations $$\begin{gathered}
\label{12}
\widetilde{\beta}_0=\beta_0-\frac{C_{\lambda}}{\gamma_2},\quad
\widetilde{\beta}_1=\beta_1+\frac{C_{\lambda}}{\gamma_2}+a_1w_{\lambda},\quad
\widetilde{\beta}_2=\beta_2-a_1(w_{\lambda}+1),\end{gathered}$$ where $$\begin{gathered}
\label{13}
C_{\lambda}\!=\!a_2\left[-\frac{\gamma_1}{\gamma_3}\left(\beta_2-a_1(w_{\lambda}\!+\!1)\right)+
\beta_0\left(\frac{(1+\lambda)^2}{\lambda}(w_{\lambda}^{\,\,2}+w_{\lambda})+1\right)\right]\\
-a_1w_{\lambda}\left[\beta_0(\beta_1+\beta_2)+\gamma_1\right]\qquad\quad\end{gathered}$$ $$a_1=\frac{(1+\lambda)^2}{\lambda}(s_3w_{\lambda}+s_2),\quad a_2=\frac{\lambda}{(1+\lambda)^2}a_1^{\,\,2},$$ and $\lambda$ is a free parameter.
[**The case VI**]{}$a_1\neq0$, $a_1^{\,\,2}>4a_2$, $a_2=\ds\frac{\lambda}{(1+\lambda)^2}\,a_1^{\,\,2}$, $\beta_1=\beta_3$, $\lambda\in(-1,1)$.
Let $a_1$ be a real solution of the equation $$\frac{\gamma_2^{\,\,2}}{\gamma_3^{\,\,2}}a_1^{\,\,2}-
a_1\left[\frac{\gamma_2}{\gamma_3}+\frac{\lambda}{(1+\lambda)^2}\left(\frac{\gamma_1}{\gamma_3}-1\right)\right]+
\frac{\gamma_2}{\gamma_3}(\beta_2-\beta_1)=0,$$ $$a_2=\frac{\lambda}{(1+\lambda)^2}a_1^{\,\,2}.$$ In this case, the matrix $A_Q$ is defined uniquely by the relations $$\begin{gathered}
\label{14}
\widetilde{\beta}_0=\beta_0-\frac{D_{\lambda}}{\gamma_2},\quad
\widetilde{\beta}_1=\beta_1+\frac{D_{\lambda}}{\gamma_2}+a_1w_{\lambda},\quad
\widetilde{\beta}_2=\beta_2-a_1(w_{\lambda}+1),\end{gathered}$$ where $w_{\lambda}=-\ds\frac{\gamma_2}{\gamma_3}$ and $D_{\lambda}$ is defined by the relation for $C_{\lambda}$ with $w_{\lambda}=-\ds\frac{\gamma_2}{\gamma_3}.$
[**The cases VII and VIII**]{}$a_1\neq0$, $a_1^{\,\,2}<4a_2$, $a_2=\ds\frac{\lambda}{(1+\lambda)^2}\,a_1^{\,\,2}$, $\lambda=e^{i\theta}$, $\theta\in (0,\pi).$
The other relations in the case VII are the same as in the case V, and in the case VIII are the same as in the case VI.
Possibility of generalization to the case of $k>2$
====================================================
We give few comments about construction all possible pairs of polynomial systems connected by the general linear relation $$\label{19}
Q_n(x)=P_n(x)+a_1P_{n-1}(x)+\ldots+a_kP_{n-k},\quad k\geq 2$$ for which $\mathfrak{A}_P=\mathfrak{A}_Q$.
From results of the paper [@5] we have
1)$\widetilde{\gamma}_n=\gamma_n$,$n\geq1$;
2)$a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_k\in\mathbb{R}$, $a_k\neq0$, $\gamma_n\neq0$, $n\geq1$;
3\) $\widetilde{\beta}_n=\beta_n$, $\widetilde{\gamma}_n=\gamma_n+a_1(\beta_{n-1}-\beta_n)\neq0$,$n\geq k+1$;
4\) $\gamma_n-\gamma_{n-k}=a_1(\beta_{n-1}-\beta_n)$, $n\geq k+2$.
You should consider two alternative cases: $$A)\quad a_1=0;\qquad B)\quad a_1\neq0,\, \beta_n=\beta_k,\, n\geq k.$$ In both cases we have $\gamma_n=\gamma_{n-k},\, n\geq k+2$.
Then we have to consider all possible cases when some of the coefficients $a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_{k-1}$ are not equal to zero and all others equal to zero. We recall that $a_k\neq0$. The number of such variants is equal to $$C_{k-1}^0+C_{k-1}^1+\cdots+C_{k-1}^{k-1}=2^{k-1}.$$
The generalized oscillator algebra corresponding to the pair $(\mathbb{P},\mathbb{Q})$
======================================================================================
We discuss the generalized oscillator algebra $\mathfrak{A}_\mathbb{P}=\mathfrak{A}_\mathbb{Q}$ for considered above pair $(\mathbb{P},\mathbb{Q})$ of orthogonal polynomials systems connected with each other by the linear relation . For the construction of the generalized oscillator algebra $\mathfrak{A}_\mathbb{P}$ in the Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}_\mu=\text{L}^2(\mathbb{R};\mu)$ should be symmetrize the recurrence relations (see [@6]) $$\label{41}
xP_{n}(x)=P_{n+1}(x)+\beta_nP_{n}(x)+\gamma_nP_{n-1}(x),\, P_0=1,$$ with $\gamma_0=0$.
With this purpose let us proceed from the system of polynomials $\mathbb{P}$ to the system of polynomials $\Phi=\left\{\varphi_n(x)\right\}_{n=0}^{\infty}$ by the formulas $$P_n(x)=\alpha_n\varphi_n(x),\,\, \alpha_0=1,\, \alpha_n=\sqrt{\gamma_1}(\gamma_2...\gamma_s)^{\,\,\frac{m}{2}} (\gamma_{s+1}...\gamma_{k+1})^{\,\,\frac{m-1}{2}},$$ where $n=(m-1)k+s,\, m\geq 1,\, s=2,...k+1$ and $k\geq 1$ is a fixed integer. This is only possible if $\gamma_1\neq0,...,\gamma_{k+1}\neq0 $. Then recurrence relations take the form $$x\varphi_{n}(x)=b_{n}\varphi_{n+1}(x)+\beta_n\varphi_{n}(x)+b_{n-1}\varphi_{n-1}(x),$$ where $$\varphi_{0}=1,\quad b_{-1}=0,\quad b_{n}=\sqrt{\gamma_{n+1}},\quad n\geq0,$$ and $$\begin{gathered}
\label{44}
\gamma_n= \left\{\begin{aligned}\gamma_1&\quad\text{if}\quad n=1,\\
\gamma_s&\quad\text{if}\quad n=km+s,\quad m\geq0,\quad s=2,...{k+1}.\end{aligned}\right.\end{gathered}$$
We define the ladder operators $a^{\pm}_{\Phi}$ and the number operator $\mathbb{N}_\Phi$ in $\mathcal{H}_\mu$ by formulas $$\begin{aligned}
a^{+}_{\Phi}\varphi_n=\sqrt{2\gamma_{n+1}}\varphi_{n+1},\\
a^{-}_{\Phi}\varphi_n=\sqrt{2\gamma_{n}}\varphi_{n-1},\\
\mathbb{N}_\Phi \varphi_n=n\varphi_n,\quad n\geq0.\end{aligned}$$ Let $B_\Phi(\mathbb{N}_\Phi)$ be an operator-valued function defined by the following equalities $$\quad B_\Phi(\mathbb{N}_\Phi)\varphi_n=\gamma_n\varphi_n,\quad n\geq0.$$ $$B_\Phi(\mathbb{N}_\Phi+I_\mu)\varphi_n=\gamma_{n+1}\varphi_n,\quad n\geq0.$$
Then the generalized oscillator algebra $\mathfrak{A}_{\mathbb{P}}$ is generated by the operators $a^{\pm}_{\Phi}$, $\mathbb{N}_\Phi$, $I_\mu$ satisfying the relations $$\label{21}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
&a^{-}_{\Phi}a^{+}_{\Phi}=2B_\Phi(\mathbb{N}_\Phi+I_\mu),\quad
a^{+}_{\Phi}a^{-}_{\Phi}=2B_\Phi(\mathbb{N}_\Phi),\\
&\qquad\qquad\qquad [\mathbb{N}_\Phi, a^{\pm}_{\Phi}]=\pm a^{\pm}_{\Phi}
\end{aligned}
\right.$$ and by the commutators of these operators.
In this case, the quadratic Hamiltonian $$H_\Phi = a^{-}_{\Phi}a^{+}_{\Phi}+a^{+}_{\Phi}a^{-}_{\Phi}$$ is a selfadjoint operator in the Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}_\mu$.
Orthonormal polynomials $\left\{\varphi_n(x)\right\}_{n=0}^{\infty}$ are eigenfunctions of the operator $H_\Phi$. The corresponding eigenvalues are equal to $$\lambda_0=2\gamma_1,\quad
\lambda_n=2(\gamma_n + \gamma_{n+1}),\quad n\geq1.$$
In conclusion, let us note that since in our case $$b_n^{\,\,2}\neq (a_0+a_2n)(1+n),$$ then according to the results of [@9], [@10] $$\dim\mathfrak{A}_\mathbb{P}=\dim\mathfrak{A}_\mathbb{Q}=\infty .$$
Note also that it would be interesting to study the relation of the orthogonality measures $\mu$ and $\nu$ in the spaces $\mathcal{H}_\mu$ and $\mathcal{H}_\nu$ respectively.
[**Acknowledgment.**]{} EVD grateful to RFBR for financial support under the grant 15-01-03148.
[19]{}
V.B.Uvarov, [*The connection between systems of polynomials orthogonal with respect to different distribution function*]{}, U.S.S.R. Comput. Math.and Math. Phys., [**9**]{}, no.6, 25-36 (1969). K.H. Kwon, J.H. Lee, F. Marcellan, [*Orthogonality of linear combinations of two orthogonal sequences*]{}, Journ. Comput. Appl. Math., [**137**]{}, 109-122 (2001). E. Berriochoa, A. Cachafiero, J.M. Garcia-Amor, [*A characterization of the four Chebyshev orthogonal families*]{}, Int. J. Math and Math. Sci. 2005:13, 2071-2079 (2005). Z.S. Grinshpun, [*Differential equation for the Bernstein-Szego orthogonal polynomials*]{}, Differ.Equ. [**26**]{}, no.5, 545-550 (1990). M. Alfaro, F. Marcellan, Ana Pena, M.L. Rezola, [*When do linear combinations of orthogonal polynomials yield new sequences of orthogonal polynomials?*]{}, J. Comput. Appl. Math, [**233**]{}, 1146-1452 (2010). V.V. Borzov, [*Orthogonal polynomials and generalized oscillator algebras*]{}, Integral Transf. and Special Functions, [**12**]{}(2), 115-138 (2001). T.S. Chihara, [*An Introduction to Orthogonal Polynomials*]{}, Gordon and Breach, New York, 1978. V.V. Borzov, E.V. Damaskinsky, [*On representations of generalized oscillator for two sequences of linearly related orthogonal polynomials*]{} Proc. Int. Conf. DAYS on DIFFRACTION 2015, pp.30-33 (2015). G. Honnouvo, K. Thirulogasanthar, [*On the dimensions of the oscillator algebras induced by orthogonal polynomials*]{} J. Math. Phys. [**55**]{}, 093511 (2014). V.V. Borzov, E.V. Damaskinsky, [*On dimensions of oscillator algebras*]{} Proc. Int. Conf. DAYS on DIFFRACTION 2014, pp.48-52 (2014).
[^1]: St.Petersburg State University of Telecommunications, 191065, Moika 61, St.Petersburg, Russia. E-mail: [email protected]
[^2]: VI(IT) affilated to VA MTO, Russia, 191123, Zacharievskaya 22, St.Petersburg, Russia. E-mail: [email protected]
[^3]: Here and below we consider only monic polynomials.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Recent experiments find the signal of giant nonlocal resistance $R_{NL}$ in H-shaped graphene samples due to the spin/valley Hall effect. Interestingly, when the Fermi energy deviates from the Dirac point, $R_{NL}$ decreases to zero much more rapidly compared with the local resistance $R_L$, and the well-known relation of $R_{NL}\propto R_L^3$ is not satisfied. In this work, based on the non-equilibrium Green’s function method, we explain such transport phenomena in the H-shaped graphene with Rashba spin-orbit coupling. When the Fermi energy is near the Dirac point, the nonlocal resistance is considerably large and is much sharper than the local one. Moreover, the relationship between the Rashba effect and the fast decay of $R_{NL}$ compared with $R_L$ is further investigated. We find that the Rashba effect does not contribute not only to the fast decay but also to the peak of $R_{NL}$ itself. Actually, it is the extremely small density of states near the Dirac point that leads to the large peak of $R_{NL}$, while the fast decay results from the quasi-ballistic mechanism. Finally, we revise the classic formula $R_{NL}\propto R_L^3$ by replacing $R_{NL}$ with $R_{Hall}$, which represents the nonlocal resistance merely caused by the spin Hall effect, and the relation holds well.'
author:
- Zibo Wang
- Haiwen Liu
- Hua Jiang
- 'X. C. Xie'
date:
-
-
title: 'Numerical study of the giant nonlocal resistance in spin-orbital coupled graphene'
---
[^1]
Introduction
============
Nonlocal measurement refers to the detection of a voltage signal outside the path, along which charge current is expected to flow. One way to generate the nonlocal voltage is to modify the charge current path away from the classic Ohmic mode[@Andreas; @Chang; @Parameswaran]. For instance, in the quantum Hall regime, the current transports along edges while the bulk is insulating[@McEuen]. Another important way for the generation of the nonlocal voltage is to induce current with other degrees of freedom (i.e. spin/valley), so that the current direction will deviate from the exciting field. Since the nonlocal voltage always originates from nontrivial physics that is not easy to detect directly, the nonlocal measurement has now become a powerful tool to discover such kinds of electromagnetic phenomena in many novel materials [@Abanin1; @Balakrishnan; @Gorbachev; @Shimazaki; @Sui; @Michihisa].
Spin Hall effect (SHE) is a phenomenon arising from the spin-orbit coupling in which charge current passing through a sample leads to spin transport in the transverse direction [@Hirsch; @Murakami; @Sinova; @Kato; @Kimura; @Brune]. Since only the electron spin, rather than the electron charge, accumulates during the spin transport process, it is always difficult to observe the SHE with local measurements. Fortunately, with the method of nonlocal measuring, a large nonlocal resistance $R_{NL}$ was reported near the Dirac point in H-shaped graphene sample [@Abanin1; @Balakrishnan], which confirms the existence of the SHE. Moreover, the nonlocal measurement was also used to detect valley Hall effect (VHE) [@Gorbachev; @Shimazaki; @Sui; @Michihisa], whose transport mechanism is similar to the SHE, and a giant nonlocal resistance can be observed as well.
Abanin et al. developed a theory to discuss the origin of the above-mentioned nonlocal resistance[@Abanin2]. In their paper, they demonstrated that the relationship between the nonlocal resistance $R_{NL}$ and the local resistance $R_L$ can be described by a simple function of $R_{NL}\propto \sigma_{xy}^2R_L^3$, where $\sigma_{xy}$ is the spin Hall conductance. However, this equation remains difficult to explain some experimental results. Specifically, besides the giant peak of $R_{NL}$, people also find another interesting phenomenon that, compared with $R_L$, $R_{NL}$ decays much more rapidly when Fermi energy deviates from the Dirac point. We consider Fig.1(b) of Ref.\[\] as an example. When $V_g=1$V, the red line of $R_{NL}$ has already collapsed to zero, whereas the black line of $R_L$ is still finite. This novel phenomenon seems to be inconsistent with Ref.\[\], because the zero value of $R_{NL}$ can not be proportional to $R_L^3$, which deserves further explanations.
Recently, with an extrinsic perpendicular electric field, Chen’s group at Peking University also detected a nonlocal voltage signal in an H-shaped graphene sample[@Chen]. When the Fermi energy deviates from the Dirac point, the nonlocal resistance shows analogous behavior that $R_{NL}$ decreases to zero much more quickly than $R_L$. This experimental work motivates us to study the nonlocal resistance numerically by considering standard monolayer graphene with an extrinsic Rashba effect. Firstly, in an H-shaped four-terminal system, we obtain $R_L$ and $R_{NL}$ by means of the non-equilibrium Green’s function method, where the numerical results exhibits the same properties as the experimental findings, namely, a giant peak and an obviously fast decay of the nonlocal resistance by tuning the Fermi energy. Secondly, we find that $R_{NL}$ can be negative in a certain region. This phenomenon implies the existence of the quasi-ballistic transport mechanism, which was observed previously[@Mihajlovic]. Therefore, we conclude that $R_{NL}$ consists of three parts: $R_{ballistic}$ due to the ballistic mechanism, $R_{classic}$ from the classic diffusion and $R_{Hall}$ from the SHE. Since the negative value of $R_{ballistic}$ locates around the Dirac point, it is possible that the quasi-ballistic mechanism contributes to the fast decay of $R_{NL}$. Thirdly, in order to further investigate the relationship between this fast decay and the Rashba effect, we study a six-terminal system and obtain the nonlocal resistance $R_{Hall}$ which is only caused by the SHE. Surprisingly, the results show that $R_{Hall}$ equals to zero at the Dirac point. Since the SHE always makes a nonnegative contribution to $R_{NL}$, we conclude that there is not any relationship between the Rashba effect and the fast decay of $R_{NL}$. In fact, it is the extremely small density of states (DOS) near the Dirac point and the quasi-ballistic mechanism that lead to the large peak and the fast decay of $R_{NL}$, respectively. Moreover, the Rashba effect itself actually plays a negative role in the fast decay of $R_{NL}$. Finally, with the spin Hall conductance $\sigma_{xy}$ calculated in a four-terminal system, we modify the previous theoretical formula $R_{NL}\propto \sigma_{xy}^2R_L^3$ by replacing $R_{NL}$ with $R_{Hall}$, and find that this revised formula holds well for the present case.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Sec.II, we numerically calculate the local and nonlocal resistance in an H-shaped four-terminal system. Then, in Sec.III, we study a six-terminal system to obtain the nonlocal resistance which is merely caused by the SHE, and compare it with the previous theoretical prediction. Finally, a conclusion is presented in Sec.IV.
H-shaped four-terminal system to study nonlocal resistance
==========================================================
![(Color online) The schematic diagram of the proposed H-shaped four-terminal system. The current is injected into lead 1 and flows out of lead 2. The voltage signal is obtained between leads 1 and 2 for the local resistance, and is derived between leads 3 and 4 for the nonlocal resistance. The rectangle, denoted by the black dashed line, is the center region. []{data-label="fig:fourdiagram1"}](fourdiagram1.eps){width="\columnwidth"}
We first consider an H-shaped four-terminal system to simulate the nonlocal measurement[@foot1], where the schematic diagram is shown in Fig. \[fig:fourdiagram1\]. Due to the strong external electric field, the tight-binding Hamiltonian can be written as: $$\begin{aligned}
H=\sum_i\epsilon_ic_i^\dagger c_i+t\sum_{\langle ij\rangle} c_i^\dagger c_j+i\lambda_R\sum_{\langle ij\rangle}c_i^\dagger({\bm{s}}\times\hat{{\bm{d}}}_{ij})_zc_j,
\label{eq:Hamiltonian}\end{aligned}$$ where $c_i^\dagger$ and $c_i$ are the creation and annihilation operators, respectively, at site $i$, $\epsilon_i$ is the on-site energy, and $\lambda_R$ is the strength of the external Rashba effect. The on-site energies of the four terminals are chosen as $\epsilon_{1,2,3,4}=\epsilon_{UD}$ to simulate metallic leads, which can be controlled by the gate voltage. The disorder only exists in the central region and is modeled by Anderson disorder with the on-site energies being uniformly distributed in $[-w/2,w/2]$, where $w$ is the disorder strength. The schematic diagram of the central region is described by parameters $M,N,P$ and $Q$. For instance, figure \[fig:fourdiagram1\] shows a system with $M=3,N=2,P=4$ and $Q=3$. Therefore, the system has $2Q[(2N+2)+(2P+1)+(2M+1)+(2P+1)+(2N+2)]$ carbon atoms in total.
The current flowing through the four-terminal system can be calculated from the Landauer-Büttiker formula: $I_i=\frac{e}{h}\sum_j\int {\rm d}\epsilon T_{ij}(\epsilon)[f_i(\epsilon)-f_j(\epsilon)]$, where $f_i(\epsilon)=1/\{ 1+{\rm exp}[(\epsilon-\mu_i)/k_BT]\}$ is the Fermi distribution function in the $i$th lead. After applying a small electric field between the leads, the chemical potential of lead i becomes $\mu_i=E_F+eV_i$. At zero temperature, the former formula can be simplified as: $$\begin{aligned}
I_i & = & \frac{e}{h}\sum_j\int {\rm d}\epsilon T_{ij}(\epsilon)[\theta(E_F+eV_i-\epsilon)-\theta(E_F+eV_j-\epsilon)]\nonumber\\
& = & \frac{e}{h}\sum_j\int^{E_F+eV_i}_{E_F+eV_j}{\rm d}\epsilon T_{ij}(\epsilon) \nonumber \\
& = & \frac{e^2}{h}\sum_j T_{ij}(E_F)(V_i-V_j),
\label{eq:current}\end{aligned}$$ where $T_{ij}(\epsilon)={\rm Tr}(\Gamma_iG^r\Gamma_jG^a)$ is the transmission coefficient with the linewidth functions $\Gamma_i=i(\Sigma^r_i-\Sigma^a_i)$, and the Green’s function $G^r(\epsilon)=[G^a(\epsilon)]^\dagger=1/(\epsilon-H_{center}-\Sigma^r_i-\Sigma^r_j)$. Here, $\Sigma^r_i$ is the retarded self-energy due to the coupling to the lead $i$, and $H_{center}$ is the Hamiltonian in the central region. After obtaining $T_{ij}$, the current $I_1$ and the voltage $V_{3,4}$ can be further deduced according to Eq. (\[eq:current\]) under the conditions of $V_1=-V_2=V$ and $I_3=I_4=0$. At last, the local and nonlocal resistance can be calculated[@book; @Jiang]. To be specific, the local resistance is defined as: $R_L=(V_1-V_2)/I_1$, and the nonlocal resistance is defined as: $R_{NL}=(V_3-V_4)/I_1$.
Throughout this work, we take the nearest hopping energy $t\approx2.75{\rm eV}$ as the energy unit. In the following calculation, the value of the on-site energy $\epsilon_{UD}$ is testified in the energy bands of zigzag ribbons, in order to simulate four metallic leads. The size parameters $M$, $N$, $P$ and $Q$ are chosen as $M=30$, $N=30$, $P=100$ and $Q=100$. This indicates that the size of the model we calculated is about $73nm\times42nm$.[@footnote] In the presence of Anderson disorder, the resistance has been averaged over 50 times.
![(Color online) The local $R_L$ and nonlocal resistance $R_{NL}$ are drawn in the blue and red line, respectively. (a) $\lambda_R=0$; (b) $\lambda_R=0.1$; (c) $\lambda_R=0.2$; (d) $\lambda_R=0.3$. The Anderson disorder strength is chosen as $w=1$. In order to make the comparison clear enough, the value of $R_{NL}$ is amplified by $7.5$ times. []{data-label="fig:nonlocal1"}](nonlocal1.eps){width="\columnwidth"}
In Fig. \[fig:nonlocal1\], we show the local resistance (blue lines) and the nonlocal resistance (red lines) as a function of the Fermi energy $E_F$. From Fig. \[fig:nonlocal1\](a) to \[fig:nonlocal1\](d), the Rashba spin-orbit strength $\lambda_R$ increases from $\lambda_R=0$ to $\lambda_R=0.3$, while the other parameters remain unchanged. As we can see, there are three main features in these four figures.
Firstly, the nonlocal resistance exhibits negative value in Fig. \[fig:nonlocal1\](a). Such “negative” means that when the current flows from lead 1 to lead 2, the voltage detected on lead 3 is surprisingly lower than that on lead 4. A similar behavior can also be found in Fig. \[fig:nonlocal1\](b) that a pair of dips exist at about $E_F=\pm0.1$, though their values are not negative. This phenomenon can be explained by the quasi-ballistic transport mechanism which was first predicted in experiments[@Mihajlovic]. Specifically, the charge carriers injected into lead 1 can flow directly to lead 4 without returning back to lead 2. This indicates that we can detect a positive voltage on lead 4 and a negative voltage on lead 3, which means the value of the nonlocal resistance is negative. Therefore, as shown in Fig. \[fig:fourdiagram2\], we conclude that the nonlocal resistance $R_{NL}$ consists of three terms: $$\begin{aligned}
R_{NL}=R_{ballistic}+R_{classic}+R_{Hall}.
\label{eq:ballistic}\end{aligned}$$ Here, the first part $R_{ballistic}$ stands for the ballistic transport mechanism we discussed above. The second part $R_{classic}$ represents the classical diffusion. And the third part $R_{Hall}$ originates from the spin-orbit coupling term of Eq. (\[eq:Hamiltonian\]), where the electron current flowing along the left vertical wires generates a perpendicular spin current due to the SHE, and is finally converted to the electron current in the right vertical wires due to the inverse spin Hall effect (ISHE).
Secondly, both the local and nonlocal resistance are symmetric about the line of $E_F=0$ and reach their maxima at $E_F=0$. Importantly, similar to the findings in previous experiments, the nonlocal resistance $R_{NL}$ collapses to zero much more rapidly compared with the local resistance $R_L$. In other words, the full width at half maximum (FWHM) of the nonlocal resistance is much smaller than that of the local resistance. For example, we can see from Fig. \[fig:nonlocal1\](c) that the nonlocal resistance is decreased to nearly zero and is maintained at about $R_{NL}=0.04h/e^2$ when $|E_F|>0.2$, while the local resistance $R_L$ is still decreasing. This phenomenon is contradictory to the known formula[@Abanin2]: $$\begin{aligned}
R_{NL}\propto\sigma_{xy}^2R_L^3,
\label{eq:Abanin}\end{aligned}$$ where $\sigma_{xy}$ is the spin Hall conductance. In fact, it seems that this contradiction can be partially explained by our analysis on the negative nonlocal resistance. Specifically, the original value of the nonlocal resistance is $R_{Hall}$, which satisfies Eq. (\[eq:Abanin\]). And $R_{classic}$ may result in a large peak near $E_F=0$ due to the extremely small DOS at the Dirac point. Moreover, according to Eq. (\[eq:ballistic\]), there must exist an additional term $R_{ballistic}$ to $R_{NL}$. Since the value of $R_{ballistic}$ is negative, it is natural that $R_{NL}$ decays to zero much more rapidly than the theoretical prediction as shown Eq. (\[eq:Abanin\]).
Thirdly, according to the known literatures, most of them attribute the fast decay of the nonlocal resistance to the SHE or the VHE. Although our model is not exactly the same as those in the known literatures, it is reasonable for us to make the same assumption. However, by inspecting Fig. \[fig:nonlocal1\], the only phenomenon we can find between the nonlocal resistance and the SHE is that the negative nonlocal resistance becomes weaker and weaker, and gradually disappears with the increase of the spin-orbit coupling strength $\lambda_R$. Correspondingly, the shrinking speed slows down as well. Namely, we can only expect that the SHE mainly affects the value of $R_{NL}$ around $E_F=\pm0.1$. Therefore, only Fig. \[fig:nonlocal1\] itself is not enough for us to fully understand the underlying mechanism between the nonlocal resistance and the SHE. Actually, we do not even know whether the fast decay of the nonlocal resistance has any relationship to the SHE. Therefore, it is necessary for us to obtain pure $R_{Hall}$ besides $R_{NL}$ shown in Fig. \[fig:nonlocal1\]. One simple way is to take $R_{NL}$ in Fig. \[fig:nonlocal1\](a) with $\lambda_R=0$ as a reference line, and we then subtract this reference line from $R_{NL}(\lambda_R)$ to obtain $R_{Hall}(\lambda_R)=R_{NL}(\lambda_R)-R_{NL}(0)$. However, after making this attempt, we find that the result is messy and disordered, indicating that the ballistic transport and the classic diffusion are also affected by the SHE. Therefore, we cannot simply take Fig. \[fig:nonlocal1\](a) as a reference line to calculate $R_{Hall}$, and we further consider a different system to investigate the Rashba effect in the next section.
Newly designed six-terminal system to study the external Rashba effect
======================================================================
![(Color online) The schematic diagram of the proposed six-terminal system. Newly added lead 3’ and lead 4’ locate at a mirror symmetry to lead 3 and lead 4. If the spin up (down) current injected into lead 1 transports along the red line, the spin down (up) current must follow the yellow line. []{data-label="fig:sixdiagram"}](sixdiagram.eps){width="\columnwidth"}
In order to further study how the external Rashba effect affects the nonlocal resistance, we investigate the transport properties of a six-terminal system, as shown in Fig. \[fig:sixdiagram\], instead of the H-shaped four-terminal one. The only difference between Fig. \[fig:sixdiagram\] and Fig. \[fig:fourdiagram1\] is that we add two leads (lead 3’ and lead 4’) at the left side of lead 1 and lead 2, and keep them at the mirror sites of lead 3 and lead 4. If a spin up current is injected into lead 1, e.g., by adding a ferromagnetic lead, we can detect voltage signals $V_{34\uparrow}$ on lead 3 and lead 4. Then the nonlocal resistance is written as: $$\begin{aligned}
R_{NL\uparrow}=R_{ballistic\uparrow}+R_{classic\uparrow}+R_{Hall\uparrow}.\end{aligned}$$ Similarly, regarding a spin down current, the voltage $V_{34\downarrow}$ is detected and the nonlocal resistance is expressed as: $$\begin{aligned}
R_{NL\downarrow}=R_{ballistic\downarrow}+R_{classic\downarrow}+R_{Hall\downarrow}.\end{aligned}$$ Since the ballistic transport and the classic diffusion have no relationship to the spin direction, the nonlocal resistance $R_{ballistic}$ and $R_{classic}$ caused by these two mechanisms must be the same along the two different spin directions, i.e., $R_{ballistic\uparrow}=R_{ballistic\downarrow}$ and $R_{classic\uparrow}=R_{classic\downarrow}$. Therefore, with the detected $R_{NL\uparrow}$ and $R_{NL\downarrow}$, we can easily remove the perturbations of the ballistic transport and the classic diffusion based on this two-step proposal. Finally, we can obtain the pure result caused by the Rashba effect as: $$\begin{aligned}
R_{Hall\uparrow}-R_{Hall\downarrow}=R_{NL\uparrow}-R_{NL\downarrow}.\end{aligned}$$ Although we have not obtained $R_{Hall\uparrow\downarrow}$, we will prove that $|R_{Hall\uparrow}-R_{Hall\downarrow}|$ itself demonstrates the value of $R_{Hall\uparrow\downarrow}$ in the next paragraph. In fact, the most advantage of this six-terminal system is that when the spin up current is injected into lead 1, we can also detect voltage signals $V_{3'4'\uparrow}$ between leads 3’ and 4’, besides that between leads 3 and 4. According to the symmetric analysis, $V_{3'4'\uparrow}$ should be equal to the voltage $V_{34\downarrow}$ between leads 3 and 4 with the spin down current. Therefore, we can easily obtain $R_{Hall\uparrow}-R_{Hall\downarrow}$ by one step without changing the magnetization direction of lead 1, which is very important in the realistic experiments. From now on, for clarity, we always consider the spin currents along the two directions, though both the numerical calculations and experiments need only one kind of spin currents in reality.
![(Color online) (a) The local resistance $R_L$ for two spin directions. (b) The nonlocal resistance $R_{NL}$ for two spin directions. And the inset is the spin Hall conductance $\sigma_{xy}$. (c) The black line is calculated based on $R_{NL\uparrow}-R_{NL\downarrow}$. Since the numerical error results in dramatic oscillation of $R_{NL\uparrow}-R_{NL\downarrow}$ near $E_F=0$, we add a red dashed line to describe the accurate behavior of $R_{NL\uparrow}-R_{NL\downarrow}$ near the Dirac point. At last, the blue line represents $R_{Hall}$ that equals to the absolute value of the black line, and the fix in red line is also considered. (d) $R_{Hall}$ calculated based on Eq. (\[eq:Abanin\]). []{data-label="fig:nonlocal2"}](nonlocal2.eps){width="\columnwidth"}
In Fig. \[fig:nonlocal2\](a), we first show the local resistance $R_L$ calculated according to the above proposal. Since the local resistance has no relationship to the SHE and is not sensitive to the spin direction, the local resistances in the two different spin directions exhibit almost the same behavior. Then, in Fig. \[fig:nonlocal2\](b), we show the nonlocal resistance $R_{NL\uparrow}$ and $R_{NL\downarrow}$, which reflect the nonlocal resistance purely caused by the SHE. It is clear that both $R_{NL\uparrow}$ colored by blue and $R_{NL\downarrow}$ colored by red are asymmetric. $R_{NL\uparrow}$ with $E_F<0$ is smaller than that with $E_F>0$, and $R_{NL\downarrow}$ shows the opposite behavior. According to the discussion of the Hall effect part in Eq. (\[eq:ballistic\]), the above phenomenon can be explained by the spin Hall conductance $\sigma_{xy}$[@Sheng], which is calculated in a four-terminal system and is shown in the inset of Fig. \[fig:nonlocal2\](b). Specifically, $\sigma_{xy}$ is antisymmetric about the original point: $\sigma_{xy}(E_F)=-\sigma_{xy}(-E_F)$ and $\sigma_{xy}>0$ when $E_F>0$. As we all know, the sign reversing of $\sigma_{xy}$ denotes the direction conversing of the SHE. That is to say, if we assume that the spin up current turns left with a positive $\sigma_{xy}$ through the SHE (other conditions can be analyzed similarly), the spin up current injected into lead 1 will turn left as described by the red line in Fig. \[fig:sixdiagram\] when $E_F>0$. Thus, the spin up current will contribute to $V_{34}$ and be reflected in $R_{NL}$ through the SHE. This also tells us that, when $E_F<0$, the spin up current will turn right as descried by the yellow line in Fig. \[fig:sixdiagram\], which means we can hardly detect its signal caused by the SHE on leads 3 and 4. While for Fig. \[fig:nonlocal2\](b), since $R_{NL\uparrow}$ of $E_F<0$ is smaller than that of $E_F>0$, we can conclude that it is spin up current that turns left when $E_F>0$ as described by the red line in Fig. \[fig:sixdiagram\]. Correspondingly, the spin down current will turn left when $E_F<0$, just as the red line in Fig. \[fig:nonlocal2\](b). Therefore, the nonlocal resistance for the spin up current in the region of $E_F<0$ and the spin down current for $E_F>0$ can be regarded as the reference line without the SHE. In other words, we can obtain $R_{Hall}$ just by subtracting $R_{NL\uparrow}$ from $R_{NL\downarrow}$ when $E_F<0$ and subtracting $R_{NL\downarrow}$ from $R_{NL\uparrow}$ when $E_F>0$: $$\begin{aligned}
R_{Hall}=|R_{Hall\uparrow}-R_{Hall\downarrow}|=|R_{NL\uparrow}-R_{NL\downarrow}|.\end{aligned}$$
Since Eq. (\[eq:Abanin\]) only considers the SHE without any other effects, $R_{NL}$ in Eq. (\[eq:Abanin\]) should be replaced by $R_{Hall}$ actually. In Fig. \[fig:nonlocal2\](c), we first draw the nonlocal resistance $R_{Hall}$ colored in black based on $R_{Hall\uparrow}-R_{Hall\downarrow}$. The drastic oscillation around $E_F=0$ mainly results from the numerical errors, because the values of $R_{NL\uparrow\downarrow}$ around $E_F=0$ shown in Fig. \[fig:nonlocal2\](b) are very sharp, and a small error seems aggravating in Fig. \[fig:nonlocal2\](c). According to Fig. \[fig:nonlocal2\](b), $\sigma_{xy}$ equals to zero at $E_F=0$, which means there exists no SHE at the Dirac point. Thus, $R_{NL}$ should not be sensitive to the spin direction, and $R_{NL\uparrow}$ must be equal to $R_{NL\downarrow}$ at $E_F=0$. Hence, the accurate value of $R_{Hall\uparrow}-R_{Hall\downarrow}$ should follow the red dashed line drawn in Fig. \[fig:nonlocal2\](c), which connects the two peaks and passes through the origin. Then, in order to further justify our results, we also calculate $R_{Hall}$ with the local resistance $R_L$ and the spin Hall conductance $\sigma_{xy}$ according to Eq. (\[eq:Abanin\]) in Fig. \[fig:nonlocal2\](d), and compare these two figures obtained by the two different methods. As we can see, after folding Fig. \[fig:nonlocal2\](c) by calculating the absolute value of $R_{Hall\uparrow}-R_{Hall\downarrow}$, as shown by the blue line in Fig. \[fig:nonlocal2\](c), the general behaviors of the two blue lines in Fig. \[fig:nonlocal2\](c) and \[fig:nonlocal2\](d) look the same. The minor difference may be caused by the proportional signal in Eq. (\[eq:Abanin\]), which may contain parameters sensitive to the Fermi energy. Importantly, we find that $R_{Hall}=0$ for $E_F=0$, which means the peak of the nonlocal resistance shown in Fig. \[fig:nonlocal1\] has no relationship to the SHE. In contrast to our previous prediction, this phenomenon also means the rapid shrinking of $R_{NL}$ with the deviation of $E_F$ compared to $R_L$ is not caused by the Rashba effect. Moreover, in Fig. \[fig:nonlocal2\](c) and \[fig:nonlocal2\](d), we find there exist a pair of peaks around $E_F=\pm0.1$, which originates from the Rashba effect. Thus, it is natural that the stronger the Rashba effect is, the more obvious the peaks become. Now, we can explain the third feature of Fig. \[fig:nonlocal1\] in Sec.II. As shown in Fig. \[fig:nonlocal1\], the negative nonlocal resistance appears around $E_F=\pm0.1$, which is exactly where the peaks of $R_{Hall}$ locate. Thus, it is the peak of $R_{Hall}$ that counteracts the negative value of the nonlocal resistance $R_{NL}$. As a result, we find that the negative value of $R_{NL}$ gradually disappears with the increasing Rashba effect, as shown in Fig. \[fig:nonlocal1\].
To summarize, with the calculated $R_{Hall}$ and further analysis, we first conclude that the large peak of the nonlocal resistance at $E_F=0$ has no relationship to the Rashba effect. Actually, it is possible that this large peak mainly originates from the extremely small DOS of the monolayer graphene at the Dirac point. Similar to our results, not long ago, several groups also doubted the direct connection between the peak of $R_{NL}$ and the SHE as assumed in early papers[@Wang2015; @Kaverzin2015; @Tuan2016]. Then, we know that the fast decay of the nonlocal resistance is not caused by the Rashaba effect as predicted. Considering Sec.II, it is the negative $R_{ballistic}$ caused by the ballistic transport that leads to this interesting phenomenon. Moreover, since there exists one pair of $R_{Hall}$ peaks at $E_F=\pm0.1$ where the negative dip of $R_{ballistic}$ locates, the Rashba effect itself actually plays a negative role to the fast decay of the nonlocal resistance. That is also why we find the tendency of the rapid shrinking of $R_{NL}$ becomes weaker and weaker in Fig. \[fig:nonlocal1\].
Conclusion and discussion
=========================
In conclusion, using the non-equilibrium Green’s function method, we obtain the local and nonlocal resistance in an H-shaped graphene, similar to the real experiments. Specifically, there does exist a large peak of the nonlocal resistance $R_{NL}$ at the Dirac point. In particular, we do find $R_{NL}$ decreasing much more quickly than $R_L$ when the Fermi energy deviates from the Dirac point. Besides, we have proven that the total nonlocal resistance $R_{NL}$ stems from three kinds of mechanisms: the ballistic transport $R_{ballistic}$, the classic diffusion $R_{classic}$ and the SHE $R_{Hall}$. After a further calculation of a six-terminal system, we conclude that the peak of $R_{NL}$ and its rapid decrease do not result from the Rashba effect, but originate from the small DOS near the Dirac point and the ballistic transport, respectively. Moreover, the Rashba effect itself actually plays a negative role in this rapid decrease. The whole physical pictures behind can be concluded as: first, because of the extremely small DOS, there exists a giant peak of the nonlocal resistance at the Dirac point; then, due to the ballistic transport mechanism, the negative value of $R_{ballistic}$ leads to the fast decay of $R_{NL}$; and finally, $R_{Hall}$ originating from the SHE will offset this fast decay somewhat.
Though lots of experiments found the signal of giant nonlocal resistance $R_{NL}$, which decreases much more rapidly compared with the local resistance $R_{L}$, in an H-shaped graphene, and attributed them to the spin/valley Hall effect, we give a numerical simulation presenting an explanation different from the previous prediction. Here, we have to emphasize that this difference does not mean that all previous conclusions obtained from the experiments are incorrect, because the model, the sample size and the spin-orbit coupling we use might be different. Finally, the six-terminal method proposed in this work is very helpful to study the underlying mechanism of transport with the SHE, because the SHE itself is always mixed with and not easy to be separated from other mechanisms, such as the classical diffusion etc.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
We thank the insightful discussions with Jie Liu, Ai-min Guo, Qing-feng Sun, Jianhao Chen, Xi Lin and Wei Han. This work was financially supported by NBRPC (Grant No. 2015CB921102, 2014CB920901) and NSFC (Grants Nos. 11534001, 11374219, 11504008).
[10]{} , ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
J.H. Chen, private communication, and the experimental work will be online soon.
, ****, ().
The calculation process is actually based on a six-terminal system. That is to say, there exist additional two leads at the left and right side of the center region, marked by lead L and lead R, because the definition of $R_L$ in some experiments requires these two leads. However, the deduction of the nonlocal resistance $R_{NL}$ and the local resistance $R_L$ in our paper doesn’t need any information from lead L and lead R. Therefore, we just claim that it is a four-terminal system that we use for simplicity.
Electronic Transport in Mesoscopic Systems, edited by S. Datta (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1995).
, ****, ().
Actually, we have also calculated another condition with $M=100$, which seems more like the real experiments. However, the results are nearly the same between $M=30$ and $M=100$, except the order of magnitude. Therefore, we just show the condition with $M=30$ in order to simplify our calculation.
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
,
[^1]: `[email protected]`
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
=1
Introduction
============
Preliminaries {#prelim}
-------------
Let $E={\mathbb R}^d$ be the $d$-dimensional Euclidean space, $d\geq2$, and consider the $N$-body problem with Newtonian potential function $U\colon E^N\to{} ]0,+\infty]$, $$\begin{gathered}
U(x)=\sum_{i<j}\frac{m_im_j}{r_{ij}},\end{gathered}$$ where $x=(r_1,\ldots,r_N)\in E^N$ is a configuration of $N$ points having positive masses $m_1,\ldots,m_N$ in $E$, and $r_{ij}=|r_i-r_j|$. Here $|\cdot|$ denotes the Euclidean norm. We will denote by $\|\cdot\|$ to the norm induced by the mass inner product given by $$\begin{gathered}
x\cdot y=\sum_{i=1}^Nm_i\langle r_i, s_i\rangle,\end{gathered}$$ with $x=(r_1,\ldots,r_N)$, $y=(s_1,\ldots,s_N)\in E^N$, and $\langle \cdot, \cdot\rangle$ is the Euclidean inner product. We also introduce the moment of inertia: $$\begin{gathered}
I(x)= \|x\|^2.\end{gathered}$$
In this section we introduce the variational setting of the problem. The Lagrangian function $L\colon E^{2N}\to {} ]0,\infty]$ is given by $$\begin{gathered}
L(x,v)=\frac12I(v)+U(x)=\frac 12\sum_{i=1}^Nm_i|v_i|^2+U(x)\end{gathered}$$ and the action of an absolutely continuous curve ${\gamma}\colon [a,b]\to E^N$ by $$\begin{gathered}
A_L({\gamma})=\int_a^bL({\gamma}(t),{\dot{\gamma}}(t)){\rm d}t,\end{gathered}$$ so that the solutions of the problem are the critical points of the action functional.
For two given configurations $x,y\in E^N$, we will consider minima taken over the set ${\mathcal C}(x,y)$ of absolutely continuous curves binding $x$ and $y$ without any restriction on time, $$\begin{gathered}
{\mathcal C}(x,y):= \bigcup_{\tau>0}\big\{{\gamma}\colon [a,b]\to E^N \text{ absolutely continuous }
b-a=\tau,\,{\gamma}(a)=x,\, {\gamma}(b)=y\big\}.\end{gathered}$$ The [*Mañé critical action potential*]{} $\phi\colon E^n\times E^n\to[0,+\infty)$ is defined as $$\begin{gathered}
\phi(x,y):=\inf\{A({\gamma}) \,\vert\, {\gamma}\in{\mathcal C}(x,y)\}.\end{gathered}$$
Here the infimum is achieved if and only if $x\neq y$, this is essentially due to the lower semi-continuity of the action. Marchal’s theorem asserts that minimizers avoid collisions in the interior of their interval of definition [@Ch; @Fe; @Mar].
Let us define the set of configurations without collision $$\begin{gathered}
\label{nocol}
{\Omega}:=\big\{x=(r_1,\dots,r_N)\in E^N\,|\, \text{if } r_i=r_j, \text{ then } i=j\big\},\end{gathered}$$ and let $M:=m_1+\dots+m_N$ the total mass of the system.
Given a configuration $x=(r_1,\dots,r_N)\in E^N$, the center of mass of $x$ is defined by $$\begin{gathered}
G(x)=\frac{1}{M}\sum_{i=1}^{N}m_ir_i,\end{gathered}$$ it is a standard fact that if ${\gamma}\colon J\to E^N$ is a minimizer of the action, then $G({\gamma}(t))$ has constant velocity.
A [*free time minimizer*]{} defined on an interval $J\subset{\mathbb R}$ is an absolutely continuous curve ${\gamma}\colon J\to E^N$ which satisfies $A({\gamma}|_{[a,b]})=\phi({\gamma}(a),{\gamma}(b))$ for all compact subinterval $[a,b]\subset J$.
An important example is given by A. Da Luz and E. Maderna in [@DM] where they proved that if $a$ is a *minimal configuration*, i.e., a minimum of the potential restricted to the sphere $I(x)=1$, then the parabolic homothetic ejection with central configuration $a$ is a free time minimizer. It is not known if there are other central configurations with this property. A. Da Luz and E. Maderna also proved that free time minimizers cannot be defined in the whole line. On the other hand it is also proved that this minimizers are completely parabolic motions.
Weak KAM solutions
------------------
Weak KAM solutions of the Hamilton–Jacobi equation related to the problem are useful tools to study free time minimizers. The Hamiltonian associated to the problem is given by $$\begin{gathered}
H(x,p)=\tfrac12||p||_*^2-U(x),\end{gathered}$$ where $||p||_*=\sum\limits_{i=1}^Nm_i^{-1}|p|$.
A [*weak KAM solution*]{} of the Hamilton–Jacobi equation $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:hj}
\|Du(x)\|_*^2=2U(x)\end{gathered}$$ is a function $u\colon E^N\to{\mathbb R}$ that satisfies the following conditions:
- $u$ is [*dominated*]{}, i.e., $u(y)-u(x)\le\phi(x,y)$ for all $x,y\in E^N$,
- for any $x\in E^N$ there is an absolutely continuous curve ${\alpha}\colon [0,\infty)\to E^N$ such that ${\alpha}(0)=x$ and ${\alpha}$ [*calibrates*]{} $u$, i.e., $u(x)-u({\alpha}(t))=A({\alpha}|_{[0,t]})$ for any $t>0$.
Notice that calibrating curves of weak KAM solutions are indeed free time minimizers. On the other hand, existence of weak KAM solution is proved in [@M], where solutions are characterized as fixed points of the so called Lax–Oleinik semigroup. A variety of weak KAM solutions is also obtained by means of Busemann functions used in Riemannian geometry and introduced in weak KAM theory by G. Contreras [@G] in the case of regular Hamiltonians; in [@PS] it is proved the following proposition
\[asymps\] Let $a$ a minimal central configuration with $\|a\|=1$, define $U(a)=U_0$ and $c:=\big(\frac 92 U_0\big)^{\frac 13}$, consider the parabolic homothetic ejection with central configuration $a$ given by ${\gamma}_0(t)=ct^{\frac 23}a$. Then the Busemann function $$\begin{gathered}
\label{Bus}
u_a(x) =\lim_{t\to+\infty} [\phi(x,{\gamma}_0(t))-\phi(0,{\gamma}_0(t)) ]
\end{gathered}$$ is a weak KAM solution of the Hamilton–Jacobi equation . Moreover, for any $x\in E^N$ there is a curve ${\alpha}\colon [0,\infty)\to E^N$ with ${\alpha}(0)=x$ that calibrates $u$ and $$\begin{gathered}
\lim_{t\to+\infty}\big\|{\alpha}(t) t^{-\frac 23}-cx_0\big\|=0.\end{gathered}$$
A solution defined by identity , will be called *Busemann solution*. It is an open problem to determine if there are central configurations, different from minimal configurations, defining Busemann solutions.
On the other hand, due to the symmetries of the potential function, it is interesting to determine if weak KAM solutions are invariant under this symmetries. In the case of translation invariance, E. Maderna proved in [@M1] that given a weak KAM solution $u$ of , then $$\begin{gathered}
u(r_1,\dots,r_N)=u(r_1+r,\dots,r_N+r)\end{gathered}$$ for any configuration $x=(r_1,\dots,r_N)\in E^N$ and every $r\in E$. The proof is achieved by showing that calibrating curves of weak KAM solutions have constant center of mass.
An important question is to determine if weak KAM solutions are rotation invariant, the main goal of this article is to study this problem. Notice that, there are solutions which are not rotation invariant, Busemann solutions given in for instance. Therefore the problem is to give conditions so that a weak KAM solution is rotation invariant; we achieve this goal by studying the angular momentum for the calibrating curves of rotation invariant solutions and characterizing invariant solutions as those where calibrating curves have zero angular momentum. We obtain rotation invariant solutions by setting $$\begin{gathered}
\hat u_a=\inf_{R\in {\rm SO}(d)}u_{R a}(x),\end{gathered}$$ where $a$ is a minimal central configuration and $u_{R a}(x)$ is the Busemann function associated to $Ra$.
Main theorems {#teos}
-------------
We consider the diagonal group action on $E^N$ defined by the special orthogonal group ${\rm SO}(d)$, more precisely, the rotation on $E^N$ by an element ${\theta}\in {\rm SO}(d)$ is[$$\begin{gathered}
R_{{\theta}}\colon \ E^N \to E^N, \qquad x=(r_1,\dots,r_N) \mapsto({\theta}r_1,\dots,{\theta}r_N),\end{gathered}$$ where ${\theta}r_i $ is the usual group action of ${\rm SO}(d)$ on $E$.]{}
The *Angular momentum* is a first integral closely related to the action of ${\rm SO}(d)$ on $E^N$. If $x=(r_1,\dots,r_N)\in E^N$ and a vector $v=(v_1,\dots,v_N)\in E^N$ the angular momentum $C(x,v)$ is defined as $$\begin{gathered}
C(x,v)=\sum_{j=1}^Nm_j r_j\wedge v_j.\end{gathered}$$ If $d=3$ the $\wedge$ product becomes the usual cross product in $E$. If $d=2$, by identifying ${\mathbb R}^2$ with ${\mathbb C}$, if $x,v\in{\mathbb C}$ then $r\wedge v=\operatorname{Im}(v\bar r)$, and $r\wedge v$ is a real number.
Let $u\colon E^N\to{\mathbb R}$ a continuous function, we say that $u$ is *rotation invariant* if for any $x\in E^N$ and any ${\theta}\in {\rm SO}(d)$ we have $$\begin{gathered}
u(R_{\theta}(x))=u(x).\end{gathered}$$
We have the following characterization of invariant weak KAM solutions of in terms of the angular momentum of their calibrating curves.
\[Main1\] Let $u$ be a weak KAM solution of the Hamilton–Jacobi equation $$\begin{gathered}
\|Du(x)\|_*^2=2U(x).\end{gathered}$$ Then $u$ is rotation invariant if and only if all of its calibrating curves have zero angular momentum. That is to say, for any ${\theta}\in {\rm SO}(d)$ and any $x\in E^N$, the identity $$\begin{gathered}
u(x)=u(R_{{\theta}}x)\end{gathered}$$ holds if and only if for any ${\gamma}\colon [0,+\infty[{}\to E^N$ calibrating $u$, we have $$\begin{gathered}
C({\gamma}(t),{\dot{\gamma}}(t))=0.\end{gathered}$$
We can give a more general result by considering $G$ a Lie group acting properly on $E$. Thus we can consider the diagonal action $S\colon G\times E^N\to E^N$ of $G$ on $E^N$, defined by $$\begin{gathered}
S_gx=(g r_1,g r_2, \dots, g r_N),\end{gathered}$$ where $g\in G$, $x=(r_1,\dots,r_N)\in E^N$ and $g r$ is the action of $g$ on $r$. Let us denote by $\mathfrak g$ to the Lie algebra of $G$. We denote by $[\,,\,]$ to the pairing between $\mathfrak g$ and $\mathfrak g^*$.
Notice that the action $S$ can be lifted to $E^N\times E^N$ by $g(x,v)=(S_gx, T_xS_g v)$ where $T_xS_g$ is the differential of $S_g$ at $x$. Assume that the Lagrangian is $G$-invariant, i.e., $g^*L=L$, $g\in G$ and assume also that the action lifts to $E^N\times E^N$ by isometries of the mass inner product.
Under such conditions, the group action defines an *equivariant momentum map* $$\begin{gathered}
\mu\colon \ E^N\times E^N\to \mathfrak g^*,\end{gathered}$$ given by $$\begin{gathered}
\label{equi:mom}
[\mu(x,v),\xi]=v\cdot X_{\xi}(x),\end{gathered}$$ where $X_{\xi}(x)=\frac{{\rm d}}{{\rm d}t}\bigr|_{t=0}S_{\exp(t\xi)}x$ is the infinitesimal generator of the one-parameter subgroup action on $E^N$, associated to $\xi\in\mathfrak g$.
A continuous function $u\colon E^N\to{\mathbb R}$ is *$G$-invariant* if for any $g\in G$ and any $x\in E^N$ we have $$\begin{gathered}
u(S_gx)=u(x).\end{gathered}$$ In a similar way to Theorem \[Main1\] we can give a characterization to $G$-invariant weak KAM solutions in terms of the equivariant momentum map.
\[Main2\] Let $G$ a connected Lie group acting diagonally on $E^N$ and suppose that the group action satisfies the assumptions above, and let $u$ be a weak KAM solution of the Hamilton–Jacobi equation . Then $u$ is $G$-invariant if and only if for any ${\gamma}\colon [0,+\infty[{}\to E^N$ that calibrates $u$, for any $t>0$, we have $$\begin{gathered}
\mu({\gamma}(t),{\dot{\gamma}}(t))=0.\end{gathered}$$
Rotation invariance
===================
Given $x\in E^N$, consider the orbit of $x$ under ${\rm SO}(d)$ given by $$\begin{gathered}
M_x:=\{R_{\theta}x\,|\,{\theta}\in {\rm SO}(d)\},\end{gathered}$$ let us remind that $$\begin{gathered}
T_xM_x=\{Ax\,|\,A\in \mathfrak{so}(d)\}.\end{gathered}$$ The key point in the proof of Theorem \[Main1\] is the Saari decomposition of the velocities [@Ch; @S]. Define $$\begin{gathered}
\mathcal{H}_x:=\big\{v\in E^N\,|\,C(x,v)=0\big\}.\end{gathered}$$ Then $T_xM_x\perp\mathcal{H}_x$, with respect to the mass scalar product and $$\begin{gathered}
E^N=T_xM_x\oplus\mathcal{H}_x.\end{gathered}$$ In other words, if $v\in E^N$, then $v$ can be decomposed as $$\begin{gathered}
v=v_r+v_h,\end{gathered}$$ where $v_r\in T_xM_x$, $C(x,v_h)=0$ and $v_r\cdot v_h=0$, moreover the components $v_r$ and $v_h$ are uniquely determined by $v$. For dimensions 2 and 3 this is a direct consequence of the properties of the cross product, for dimensions $\geq4$ it is due to the properties of the “wedge” product.
On the other hand notice that if $u$ is a rotation invariant function and $x\in E^N$, then $u$ is constant on $M_x$. Thus, if $x$ is a point of differentiability of $u$, we have that $$\begin{gathered}
T_xM_x\subset \ker {\rm d}_xu.\end{gathered}$$
Let $u$ be a rotation invariant weak KAM solution and let $x\in E^N$, consider a curve ${\gamma}\colon [0,+\infty[{} \to E^N$ calibrating $u$ and starting at $x$. It is known that $u$ is differentiable at ${\gamma}(t)$ for any $t>0$, we also know that $$\begin{gathered}
\label{leg}
{\rm d}_{{\gamma}(t)}u(w)= w\cdot{\dot{\gamma}}(t),\end{gathered}$$ for all $w\in E^N$.
On the other hand, by the previous remark we have that $T_{{\gamma}(t)}M_{{\gamma}(t)}\subset \ker {\rm d}_{{\gamma}(t)}u$ and from we get ${\dot{\gamma}}(t)\perp T_{{\gamma}(t)}M_{{\gamma}(t)}$, therefore ${\dot{\gamma}}(t)\in\mathcal{H}_{{\gamma}(t)}$, then[$$\begin{gathered}
C({\gamma}(t),{\dot{\gamma}}(t))=0\end{gathered}$$ for all $t>0$.]{}
Let us consider now a weak KAM solution $u$ such that all of its calibrating curves have zero angular momentum. Let $x\in E^N$ and let ${\theta}\in {\rm SO}(d)$. We will prove that $u(R_{{\theta}}x)=u(x)$.
Clearly if $R_{{\theta}}x=x$, the result follows trivially. Suppose that $R_{{\theta}}x\neq x$, since $u$ is continuous and the set of collisionless configurations ${\Omega}$, given in , is open, dense and rotation invariant, we can assume $x\in{\Omega}$.
Since ${\rm SO}(d)$ is compact, $\exp\colon \mathfrak{so}(d)\to {\rm SO}(d)$ is surjective, thus we can take ${\omega}\in\mathfrak{so}(d)$ such that $\exp({\omega})={\theta}$. Define the curve ${\alpha}\colon [0,1]\to E^N$ by ${\alpha}(t)=R_{\exp(t{\omega})}(x)$. Let ${\varepsilon}>0$ be small enough so that $$\begin{gathered}
B:=\big\{z\in E^N\,|\,{\langle}z,{\dot{\alpha}}(0) {\rangle}=0,\, \|z-x\|<{\varepsilon}\big\}\subset{\Omega}.\end{gathered}$$ Notice that the set $W:=\{z\in E^N\,|\,R_{{\theta}}z\neq z\}$ is open, therefore we can also choose ${\varepsilon}>0$, smaller if necessary, so that $B\subset W$.
We can assume that ${\varepsilon}$ is sufficiently small so that the map $$\begin{gathered}
\label{difeo}
B\times [0,1]\to E^N, \qquad (z,t)\mapsto R_{\exp(tw)}z\end{gathered}$$ is a diffeomorphism onto its image. Indeed, If ${\alpha}(t)=R_{\exp(t{\omega})}(x)\neq x$ for every $t\in(0,1]$, then the curve ${\alpha}$ is an embedding and, by choosing ${\varepsilon}$ sufficiently small, the map is a diffeomorphism onto its image. Suppose, on the contrary, that ${\alpha}(\tau)=x$ for some $\tau\in(0,1]$, then ${\alpha}$ is $\tau$-periodic. Let $\tau$ be the minimal period of ${\alpha}$, then there exists $s\in(0,\tau)$ such that ${\alpha}(s)=R_{\exp(s{\omega})}(x)=R_{\exp({\omega})}(x)$ and ${\alpha}$ has no self intersections in the interval $[0,s]$. Replacing ${\omega}$ by $s{\omega}$, and choosing ${\varepsilon}$ sufficiently small we get as before that is a diffeomorphism onto its image.
Define $$\begin{gathered}
C:=\big\{R_{\exp(t{\omega})}(z)\,|\,z\in B,\,t\in[0,1]\big\}\end{gathered}$$ and denote by $C'$ to the set point in $C$ where $u$ is differentiable. Since $u$ is dominated, $u$ is Lipschitz in $C$ and therefore $C'$ has total measure in $C$. Notice also that $C\subset{\Omega}$.
Let $y\in C'$ and let ${\gamma}_y\colon [0,+\infty[{}\to E^N$ be a calibrating curve such that ${\gamma}(0)=y$, then ${\rm d}_yu(w)=w\cdot{\dot{\gamma}}_y(0)$ for any $w\in E^N$. From the hypothesis ${\dot{\gamma}}_y(0)\in\mathcal{H}_q$, thus ${\dot{\gamma}}_y(0)\perp T_yM_y$, thus $T_yM_y\subset\ker {\rm d}_yu$ for any $y\in C'$.
Let $f\colon B\times[0,1]\to{\mathbb R}$ the Lipschitz continuous function given by $$\begin{gathered}
f(z,t)=u\big(R_{\exp(t{\omega})}(z)\big)-u(z).\end{gathered}$$ Since $T_yM_y\subset\ker {\rm d}_yu$, we get $\frac{\partial f}{\partial t}=0$ almost everywhere, by Fubini theorem in $A\times[0,1]$, with $A$ any open subset of $B$ $$\begin{gathered}
0=\int_A\int_{[0,1]}\frac{\partial f}{\partial t}{\rm d}t{\rm d}y=\int_Af(y,1){\rm d}y,\end{gathered}$$ therefore $f(y,1)=0$ for every $y\in B$, in particular we have $$\begin{gathered}
u(R_{\theta}(x))=u(x).\tag*{\qed}\end{gathered}$$
\[inf;sol\] Let us denote by ${\mathcal S}$ to the set of weak KAM solutions of and notice that if ${\mathcal U}\subset {\mathcal S}$ is such that $\underset{u\in{\mathcal U}}\inf u(x)>-\infty$, then $$\begin{gathered}
\tilde u(x)=\underset{u\in{\mathcal U}}\inf \{u(x)\,|\, u\in {\mathcal U}\}\end{gathered}$$ is in ${\mathcal S}$. This is due to the fact that weak KAM solutions are the fixed points of the Lax–Oleinik semigroup [@M].
\[invKAM\] Let $a$ be a minimal central configuration with $I(a)=1$. For any ${\theta}\in {\rm SO}(d)$, let $u_{R_{\theta}a}$ be the Busemann solution associated to the minimal central configuration $R_{\theta}a$. Then the function $$\begin{gathered}
\hat u_a \colon \ E^N\to{\mathbb R}, \qquad \hat u_a(x):=\inf_{{\theta}\in {\rm SO}(d)}u_{{\theta},a}(x)\end{gathered}$$ is a rotation invariant weak KAM solution of the Hamilton–Jacobi equation. Therefore the callibrating curves of $\hat u_a$ are free time minimizers having zero angular momentum.
Let ${\mathcal M}$ be the set of minimal central configurations with moment of inertia one. Let $a\in{\mathcal M}$ and ${\theta}\in {\rm SO}(d)$ let $$\begin{gathered}
u_{{\theta},a}(x)=u_a\circ R_{{\theta}^{-1}}(x),\end{gathered}$$ it is not hard to see that $u_{{\theta},a}$ is also a weak KAM solution, furthermore, notice that $u_{R_{\theta}a}=u_{{\theta},a}$, thus $$\begin{gathered}
\label{uhat}
\hat u_a(x)=\inf_{{\theta}\in {\rm SO}(d)}u_{{\theta},a}(x),
\end{gathered}$$ and from the previous remark the function on the right is a weak KAM solution.
Due to , $\hat u_a$ is rotation invariant and from Theorem \[Main1\], these solutions define laminations by free time minimizer with zero angular momentum.
Given a minimal central configuration $a$, notice that the rotation invariant weak KAM solution $\hat u_a$ given in the previous Corollary in uniquely determined by $M_a$, the orbit of $a$ under ${\rm SO}(d)$, we call this solution *invariant Busemann solution* associated to $M_a$.
$\boldsymbol{G}$-invariance
===========================
Let $G$ be a connected Lie group acting on $E^N$ with the assumptions of Section \[teos\], let us notice that in this setting, due to the equivariant momentum map defines a Saari decomposition of the velocity (see [@AMR; @A; @MHO]), as follows.
For a fixed momentum value, $\mu(x,v)=\mu$, there are orthogonal vectors $v_{\mathcal H}$ and $v_{\mathcal V}$ such that $$\begin{gathered}
v=v_{\mathcal H}+v_{\mathcal V},\qquad
\mu(x,v_{\mathcal V})=\mu \qquad \text{and} \qquad \mu(x,v_{\mathcal H})=0.\end{gathered}$$ Let $x\in E^N$ and let $G_x$ be the orbit of $x$ under the $G$-action. Consider the subspaces of $T_xE^N=E^N$ $$\begin{gathered}
\mathcal{H}{\rm or}_x=\big\{v\in E^N\,|\,\mu(x,v)=0\big\} \qquad \text{and} \qquad T_xG_x,\end{gathered}$$ then these subspaces are orthogonal with respect to the mass inner product and $$\begin{gathered}
E^N=\mathcal{H}{\rm or}_x\oplus T_xG_x.\end{gathered}$$ Thus, any $v\in E^N$ can be uniquely decomposed as $$\begin{gathered}
\label{saarigen}
v=v_{\mathcal H}+v_{\mathcal V},\end{gathered}$$ where $v_{\mathcal H}\in\mathcal{H}{\rm or}_x$, $v_{\mathcal V}=X_\xi\in T_xG_x$, and $\xi\in \mathfrak g$ is the a element such that $\mu(x,v)=\mu(x,X_\xi)$.
Finally notice that if $u$ is a $G$-invariant function and $x$ a point of differentiability of $u$, then $T_xG_x\subset {\rm d}_xu$.
The main difficulty is the surjectivity of the exponential map, nevertheless it can be avoided as follows. Since $G$ is connected, it is well known that for any $g\in G$, there exists $\xi_1,\dots,\xi_n \in \mathfrak g$ such that $g=\exp(\xi_1)\cdots\exp(\xi_n)$. Therefore, if we can prove that $$\begin{gathered}
\label{restr}
u\big(S_{\exp(\xi)}x\big)=u(x)\end{gathered}$$ for any $x\in E^n$ and any $\xi\in\mathfrak g$, we get that $u(S_g x)=u(x)$ for any $x\in E^n$ and any $g\in G$. Given the Saari decomposition of the velocities , the proof of follows, as the one of Theorem \[Main1\]
We can apply Theorem \[Main2\] to any connected subgroup $G\subset {\rm SO}(d)$ getting that a solution is $G$-invariant if and only if the corresponding component of the angular momentum of the calibrating curves, in the direction of $\mathfrak g^*$ is null at any instant of the motion.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
----------------
The author acknowledges the referees for their valuable suggestions and remarks that substantially improved this article. The author is grateful to Ezequiel Maderna for his advice, to Héctor Sánchez Morgado for his suggestions and to Eddaly Guerra Velasco for her support in the process of this research.
[99]{}
Abraham R., Marsden J.E., Raţiu T.S., Manifolds, tensor analysis, and applications, *Global Analysis Pure and Applied: Series B*, Vol. 2, Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Reading, Mass., 1983.
Arnol’d V.I. (Editor), Dynamical systems. [VIII]{}, [*Encyclopaedia of Mathematical Sciences*](https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-06798-7), Vol. 39, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1993.
Chenciner A., Action minimizing solutions of the [N]{}ewtonian [$n$]{}-body problem: from homology to symmetry, in Proceedings of the [I]{}nternational [C]{}ongress of [M]{}athematicians, [V]{}ol. [III]{} ([B]{}eijing, 2002), Higher Ed. Press, Beijing, 2002, 279–294.
Contreras G., Action potential and weak [KAM]{} solutions, [*Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations*](https://doi.org/10.1007/s005260100081) **13** (2001), 427–458.
da Luz A., Maderna E., On the free time minimizers of the [N]{}ewtonian [$N$]{}-body problem, [*Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc.*](https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305004113000650) **156** (2014), 209–227, [arXiv:1301.7034](https://arxiv.org/abs/1301.7034).
Ferrario D.L., Terracini S., On the existence of collisionless equivariant minimizers for the classical [$n$]{}-body problem, [*Invent. Math.*](https://doi.org/10.1007/s00222-003-0322-7) **155** (2004), 305–362, [math-ph/0302022](https://arxiv.org/abs/math-ph/0302022).
Maderna E., On weak [KAM]{} theory for [$N$]{}-body problems, [*Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems*](https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143385711000046) **32** (2012), 1019–1041, [arXiv:1502.06273](https://arxiv.org/abs/1502.06273).
Maderna E., Translation invariance of weak [KAM]{} solutions of the [N]{}ewtonian [$N$]{}-body problem, [*Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.*](https://doi.org/10.1090/S0002-9939-2013-11542-X) **141** (2013), 2809–2816, [arXiv:1105.4484](https://arxiv.org/abs/1105.4484).
Marchal C., How the method of minimization of action avoids singularities, [*Celestial Mech. Dynam. Astronom.*](https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020128408706) **83** (2002), 325–353.
Meyer K.R., Offin D.C., Introduction to [H]{}amiltonian dynamical systems and the [$N$]{}-body problem, [*Applied Mathematical Sciences*](http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53691-0), Vol. 90, 3rd ed., Springer, Cham, 2017.
Percino B., Sánchez-Morgado H., Busemann functions for the [$N$]{}-body problem, [*Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal.*](https://doi.org/10.1007/s00205-014-0748-7) **213** (2014), 981–991.
Saari D.G., Symmetry in [$n$]{}-particle systems, in Hamiltonian Dynamical Systems ([B]{}oulder, [CO]{}, 1987), [*Contemp. Math.*](https://doi.org/10.1090/conm/081/986255), Vol. 81, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1988, 23–42.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
We construct a quiver with superpotential $(Q_\mathbf{T},W_\mathbf{T})$ from a marked surface $\mathbf{S}$ with full formal arc system $\mathbf{T}$. Categorically, we show that the associated cluster-$\mathbb{X}$ category is Haiden-Katzarkov-Kontsevich’s topological Fukaya category $\mathcal{D}_{\infty}(\mathbf{T})$ of $\mathbf{S}$, which is also an $\mathbb{X}$-baric heart of the Calabi-Yau-$\mathbb{X}$ category $\mathcal{D}_{\mathbb{X}}(\mathbf{T})$ of $(Q_\mathbf{T},W_\mathbf{T})$. Thus stability conditions on $\mathcal{D}_{\infty}(\mathbf{T})$ induces $q$-stability conditions on $\mathcal{D}_{\mathbb{X}}(\mathbf{T})$.
Geometrically, we identify the space of $q$-quadratic differentials on the logarithm surface $\log\mathbf{S}_\Delta$, with the space of induced $q$-stability conditions on $\mathcal{D}_{\mathbb{X}}(\mathbf{T})$, with parameter $s$ satisfying $\operatorname{Re}(s)\gg1$. When $s=N$ is an integer, the result gives an $N$-analogue of Bridgeland-Smith’s result for realizing stability conditions on the orbit Calabi-Yau-$N$ category $\mathcal{D}_{\mathbb{X}}(\mathbf{T})\mathbin{/\mkern-6mu/}[\mathbb{X}-N]$ via quadratic differentials with zeroes of order $N-2$. When the genus of $\mathbf{S}$ is zero, the space of $q$-quadratic differentials can be also identified with framed Hurwitz spaces.
.3cm [ *Key words:*]{} $q$-stability conditions, $q$-quadratic differentials Calabi-Yau-$\XX$ categories, Fukaya categories, cluster categories, Hurwitz spaces
author:
- Akishi Ikeda
- Yu Qiu
title: '$q$-Stability conditions via $q$-quadratic differentials for Calabi-Yau-$\XX$ categories'
---
Introduction
============
In the prequel [@IQ], we introduce $q$-stability conditions on a class of triangulated categories ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX$ with a distinguish auto-equivalence $\XX$. In the paper, we study the surface case when ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX$ are the Calabi-Yau-$\XX$ categories constructed from quivers with superpotential. We introduce $q$-quadratic differentials as counterpart of the prequel to realizes $q$-stability conditions.
Quadratic differentials as stability conditions
-----------------------------------------------
Motivated by Douglas’ $\Pi$-stability of D-branes in string theory, Bridgeland [@B1] introduces stability conditions on triangulated categories. Since then, the theory of stability conditions plays an important role in the study of mirror symmetry, Donaldson-Thomas invariants, cluster theory, etc. In particular, Kontsevich and Seidel observe that spaces of stability conditions and spaces of abelian/quadratic differentials have similar properties a couple of years ago (see [@BS]). Recently, there are two seminar works in this direction:
- In [@BS], Bridgeland-Smith (BS) show that $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:BS}
\Stap{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_3(\surf)/\Aut\cong{\operatorname{Quad}}_3(\surf),\end{gathered}$$ where ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_3(\surf)$ is a Calabi-Yau-3 category associated to a marked surface $\surf$, $\Stap{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_3(\surf)$ the space of stability conditions on ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_3(\surf)$ and ${\operatorname{Quad}}_3(\surf)$ the moduli space of quadratic differentials (with simple zeros) on $\surf$.
- In [@HKK], Haiden-Katzarkov-Kontsevich (HKK) show that $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:above}
\Stap{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty(\surf)/\Aut\cong{\operatorname{Quad}}_\infty(\surf),\end{gathered}$$ where ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty(\surf)$ is the topological Fukaya category, $\Stap{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty(\surf)$ the space of stability conditions on ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_3(\surf)$ and ${\operatorname{Quad}}_\infty(\surf)$ the moduli space of quadratic differentials (of exponential type) on $\surf$.
These works certainly share many similarities, which fit into the framework [@DHKK] that relates dynamical systems and categories. For one thing, these categories are topological Fukaya type. More precisely, the (spherical/indecomposable) objects in these categories correspond to (graded) arcs on the surfaces (i.e. [@QQ Thm. 6.6], [@HKK Prop. 4.2]). For another, the construction of a stability condition $\sigma=(Z,\hh{P})$ from a quadratic differential $\xi$ is roughly as follows:
- the geodesics/saddle trajectories $\eta$ correspond to stable objects $X_\eta$ of in the slicing $\hh{P}$;
- the integral of square root of $\xi$ along (the double cover of) an arc $\eta$ gives the central charge of the corresponding stable object $X_\eta$: $$Z(X_\eta)=\int_{\widetilde{\eta}} \sqrt{\xi}.$$
Note that ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_3(\surf)$ can be embedded into the derived Fukaya category of some symplectic manifold constructed from $\surf$ ([@S], cf. the survey [@Q5]).
The main aim of this paper is to give concrete links between these results. Categorically, we construct (deformed) Calabi-Yau-$\XX$ completion ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX(\surf)$ from ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty(\surf)$ such that ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_3(\surf)$ is the (triangulated hull of the) orbit quotient: $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:3}
{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_3(\surf)={\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty(\surf){\mathbin{/\mkern-6mu/}}[\XX-3].\end{gathered}$$ Geometrically, we will use HKK’s result to produce $q$-deformation of BS-type result, that realize the $q$-stability conditions as $q$-quadratic differentials.
A byproduct we obtain along the way is that HKK’s topological Fukaya category can be realized as cluster category in the following sense: $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:c0}
{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty(\surf)\cong{\operatorname{\hh{C}}}_\XX(\surf)\colon={\operatorname{per}}_\XX(\surf)/{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX(\surf),\end{gathered}$$ where ${\operatorname{\hh{C}}}_\XX(\surf)$ is the Calabi-Yau-$\XX$ version of cluster category, in the sense of Amiot-Guo-Keller [@A; @K8; @IY]. This explains the cluster-like structure of $\Stap{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty(\surf)$ in [@HKK § 6].
The $q$-deformations
--------------------
Given a triangulated category ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty$ with Grothendieck group $K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty) \cong \ZZ^{\oplus n}$, Bridgeland shows that the set of all stability conditions (with support property) on ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty$ forms a complex manifold with dimension $n$. There is a local homeomorphism/cooridnate $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:Z inf}
\mathcal{Z} \colon \Stab{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty \longrightarrow \Hom_{\ZZ}(K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty),\bC),
\quad (Z,\sli) \mapsto Z\end{gathered}$$ provided by the central charge $Z$ of a stability condition $\sigma=(Z,\hh{P})$. To $q$-deform the notion of stability conditions and this result, we consider the Calabi-Yau-$\XX$ version of ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty$, which is a triangulated category ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX$ with Grothendieck group $$K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}) \cong R^{\oplus n}, \quad R=\ZZ[q^{\pm 1}].$$ Recall that there are natural $\bC$-action and $\Aut$-action on the set of stability conditions. Consider stability conditions on ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX$ satisfying the following equation $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:Gepner}
\XX ( \sigma)=s \cdot \sigma,\end{gathered}$$ for a fixed complex number $s$ (and a technical condition, the $\XX$-support property). We show that they form a complex manifold with dimension $n$, with the corresponding local homeomorphism/cooridnate $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:Z s}
\mathcal{Z}_s \colon \QStab_s{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX}
\longrightarrow \Hom_{R}(K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX}),\bC_s),\quad
(Z,\sli,s) \mapsto Z.\end{gathered}$$ Here $\bC_s$ is the complex plane whose $R$-structure is given by $q \cdot z:=e^{ \ii \pi s}z$.
On the quadratic differential side (in the surface case), we also need to perform $q$-deformation. The moduli space ${\operatorname{Quad}}_\infty(\surf)$ that corresponds to $\Stab{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty(\surf)$ in consists of quadratic differentials of exponential type singularities $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:exp sing}
e^{z^{-k}}z^{-l} g(z) {\mathrm{d}}z^2,\end{gathered}$$ for some $(k,l)\in(\ZZ_{>0}\times\ZZ)$ and some locally holomorphic non-vanishing function $g(z)$. The local homeomorphism/cooridnate is given by the period map $$\Pi_\infty\colon{\operatorname{Quad}}_\infty(\surf)\to\Hom( {\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}(\surf,\M;\ZZ_{\tau}),\bC),$$ which corresponds to . We would like to $q$-deform the singularity as $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:sing}
e^{-k(s-2)-l} {\mathrm{d}}z^2.\end{gathered}$$ Analytically, we introduce the multi-valued quadratic differentials $\Theta$ on $\surf$, or equivalently, we construct $\log$-surface $\log\surfo$ and consider single-valued quadratic differentials on $\log\surf$. The deck transformation $q$ on $\log\surfo$ corresponds to $\XX\in\Aut{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX$ and the equation becomes the corresponding equation $$q^* (\Theta)=e^{\ii \pi s}\cdot \Theta.$$ Then the local homeomorphism/cooridnate is given by the period map $$\Pi_s\colon\XQuad_s(\surf)\to\Hom_R( {\widehat{\operatorname{\bf H}}_{}}(\log\surfo,\ZZ),\bC_s),$$ that corresponds to .
When ${\operatorname{Re}}(s)\gg1$, we use HKK’s to prove the main result (Theorem \[thm:q=x\]) of the paper, which is a $q$-deformation of BS’s .
Suppose ${\operatorname{Re}}(s)\gg1$. There is an isomorphism $$\QStap_s\DX\cong\XQuad_s(\log\surfo)$$ between complex manifold, where $\QStap_s\DX$ consists of connected components in the space $\QStab_s\DX$ of $q$-stability conditions.
Frobenius structures on genus zero Hurwits spaces
-------------------------------------------------
A Hurwitz space is the moduli space of meromorphic functions on a Riemann surface $\rs$. In [@Dub1 § 5], Dubrovin constructed Frobenius structures of Saito type (also called the flat structure in [@Sa]) on Hurwitz spaces. The primitive form [@Sa; @SaTa] (primary differential [@Dub1]) on the Hurwitz space plays an essential role in his construction.
In Section \[sec:Hurwitz\], we identify the space of $q$-quadratic differentials with regular locus of the Hurwitz space when the surface $\rs$ is $\kong{P}^1$. As in Section \[sec:q\_def\], for $q$-quadratic differentials, we consider $s$-poles of the form $z^{-k(s-2)-l}{\mathrm{d}}z^2$, which have the numerical data/polar type $(k,l)\in \ZZ_{\ge 1}\times\ZZ$. On one hand, the positive integer $k$ determines the complex structure of Hurwitz spaces. On the other hand, the choice of the integer $l$ specifies the choice of the primitive form. Thus our introduction of the new parameter $s$ and the division of the pole order into $k(s-2)$ and $l$ are essential for studying the moduli spaces of (multi-valued) quadratic differentials. The key numerical calculation is on the winding numbers (in Section \[sec:wind\]), which shows that such an $s$-pole is indeed the $q$-deformation of HKK’s exponential type singularity , with the same parameters $(k,l)$.
On the regular locus ${\operatorname{HS}}_{\reg}$ of the Hurwitz space, we can consider an almost Frobenius structure [@Dub2] as the almost dual of the original Frobenius structure. Under the identification between Hurwits spaces and moduli spaces, the twisted period of the almost Frobenius structure on ${\operatorname{HS}}_{\reg}$ can be identified with the period of $q$-quadratic differentials. Combining our main result that identifies the moduli space of $q$-quadratic differentials with the space of $q$-stability conditions, we finally obtain the correspondence between the Hurwitz space and the space of $q$-stability conditions in this case. In particular, twisted periods of the almost Frobenius structure can be identified with the central charges of $q$-stability conditions.
In the prequel [@IQ § 6], we present the conjectural description of the almost Frobenius structures on the space of $q$-stability conditions on Calabi-Yau-$\XX$ category in the case of type ADE through the conjectural isomorphism between the space of $q$-stability conditions and the universal covering of the regular locus of the corresponding type ADE Cartan subalgebra. One of the application of our $q$-deformation of quadratic differentials as stability conditions is to prove this conjectural relation in type A case. The observation here is the Cartan subalgebra of type A can be identifies with the unfolding of the type A singularity (the space of one variable polynomials), which is a special case of the Hurwitz spaces.
In all, our new constructions provide an approach to understand (almost) Frobenius structures on the spaces of $q$-stability conditions.
Content
-------
All the modules and categories will be over ${\mathrm{k}}$, an algebraic closed field. Denote $\ZZ/t\ZZ$ by $\ZZ_t$ for positive integer $t$. The paper is organized as follows.
In the first part, we study the categorical side of the story. In Section \[sec:QS\], we recall the $q$-deformation of stability conditions in the prequel [@IQ]. In Section \[sec:TFuk\] and Section \[sec:D-CY\], we review HKK’s topological Fukaya categories ${\operatorname{TFuk}}(\SS)$ (from [@HKK]) and Keller’s deformed Calabi-Yau completion (from [@K8])). In Section \[sec:CYS\], we construct a quiver with superpotential from a graded marked surface $\surf$ with an associated Calabi-Yau-$\XX$ category $\DX$. We show that the associated cluster-$\XX$ category is ${\operatorname{TFuk}}(\SS)$ of $\SS$, which is also an $\XX$-baric heart of the Calabi-Yau-$\XX$ category $\DX$.
In the second part, we study the geometrical side of the story. In Section \[sec:HKK\], we review quadratic differentials on Riemann surfaces (from [@BS; @HKK]). In Section \[sec:q\_def\], we introduce and study the general theory of $q$-quadratic differentials. In Section \[sec:main\], we prove the main result of the paper, that $q$-stability conditions can be constructed from $q$-quadratic differentials. In Section \[sec:Hurwitz\], we study the special case when the genus of the surface is zero and we identify $q$-quadratic differentials with (framed) Hurwitz covers. In particular, we confirm a conjecture for tyep A case in the prequel, which describes almost Frobenius structures on spaces of $q$-stability conditions. In Section \[sec:BS-N\], we discuss $N$-reduction, which shows how our result can be specialized to the (Calabi-Yau-$N$) Bridgeland-Smith cases. This outlines a key direction in the future works in our project.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
---------------
We would like to thank Tom Bridgeland, Yu-Wei Fan, Fabian Haiden, Bernhard Keller, Alastair King, Kyoji Saito, Atsushi Takahashi and Yu Zhou for inspirational discussion. AI is supported by World Premier International Research Center Initiative (WPI initiative), MEXT, Japan and JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP16K17588 and Qy is supported by Hong Kong RGC 14300817 (from Chinese University of Hong Kong).
$q$-stability conditions and $q$-stability conditions on Calabi-Yau-$\XX$ categories {#sec:QS}
====================================================================================
Bridgeland stability conditions {#sec:BSC}
-------------------------------
First we recall the definition of Bridgeland stability condition on triangulated categories from [@B1]. Throughout this section, we assume that for a triangulated category ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}$, its Grothendieck group $K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}})$ is free of finite rank, i.e. $K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}) \cong \ZZ^{\oplus n}$ for some $n$.
\[def:stab\] Let ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}$ be a triangulated category. A *stability condition* $\sigma = (Z, \sli)$ on ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}$ consists of a group homomorphism $Z \colon K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}) \to \bC$ called the *central charge* and a family of full additive subcategories $\sli (\phi) \subset {\operatorname{\hh{D}}}$ for $\phi \in \R$ called the *slicing* satisfying the following conditions:
- if $0 \neq E \in \sli(\phi)$, then $Z(E) = m(E) \exp(i \pi \phi)$ for some $m(E) \in \R_{>0}$,
- for all $\phi \in \R$, $\sli(\phi + 1) = \sli(\phi)[1]$,
- if $\phi_1 > \phi_2$ and $A_i \in \sli(\phi_i)\,(i =1,2)$, then $\Hom_{{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}}(A_1,A_2) = 0$,
- for $0 \neq E \in {\operatorname{\hh{D}}}$, there is a finite sequence of real numbers $$\label{eq:>}
\phi_1 > \phi_2 > \cdots > \phi_m$$ and a collection of exact triangles $$0 =
\xymatrix @C=5mm{
E_0 \ar[rr] && E_1 \ar[dl] \ar[rr] && E_2 \ar[dl]
\ar[r] & \dots \ar[r] & E_{m-1} \ar[rr] && E_m \ar[dl] \\
& A_1 \ar@{-->}[ul] && A_2 \ar@{-->}[ul] &&&& A_m \ar@{-->}[ul]
}
= E$$ with $A_i \in \sli(\phi_i)$ for all $i$.
Nonzero objects in $\sli(\phi)$ are called *semistable of phase $\phi$* and simple objects in $\sli(\phi)$ are called *stable of phase $\phi$*.
For a stability condition $\sigma = (Z,\sli)$, we introduce the set of semistable classes $\mathcal{C}^{\mathrm{ss}}(\sigma) \subset K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}})$ by $$\mathcal{C}^{\mathrm{ss}}(\sigma) :=\{\,\alpha \in
K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}})\,\vert\,\text{there is a semistable object }
E \in {\operatorname{\hh{D}}}\text{ such that } [E] = \alpha\,\}.$$ We always assume that our stability conditions satisfy the following condition, called the *support property* [@KoSo]. Let ${\lVert \,\cdot\, \rVert}$ be some norm on $K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}) \otimes \R$. A stability condition $\sigma=(Z,\sli)$ satisfies the support property if there is a some constant $C >0$ such that $$\label{eq:supp}
C \cdot |{Z(\alpha)}| > {\lVert \alpha \rVert}$$ for all $\alpha \in \mathcal{C}^{\mathrm{ss}}(\sigma)$.
There is a natural $\bC$ action on the set $\Stab({\operatorname{\hh{D}}})$ of all stability conditions on ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}$, namely: $$s \cdot (Z,\hh{P})=(Z \cdot e^{ -\mathbf{i}\pi s},\hh{P}_{{\operatorname{Re}}(s)}),$$ where $\hh{P}_x(\phi)=\hh{P}(\phi+x)$. There is also a natural action on $\Stab({\operatorname{\hh{D}}})$ induced by $\Aut({\operatorname{\hh{D}}})$, namely: $$\XX (Z,\hh{P})=(Z \circ \XX^{-1} ,\XX\circ \hh{P}).$$
$q$-stability conditions
------------------------
Let ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX}$ be a triangulated category with an distinguish auto-equivalence $$\XX \colon {\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX} \to {\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX}.$$ Here $[\XX]$ is not necessarily the Serre functor. We will write $E[l \XX]$ instead of $\XX^l(E)$ for $l \in \ZZ $ and $E \in {\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX}$. Set $R=\ZZ[q^{\pm 1}]$ and define the action of $R=\ZZ[q^{\pm 1}]$ on $K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX})$ by $$q^n \cdot [E] := [E[n \XX]].$$ Then $K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX})$ has an $R$-module structure.
A $q$-stability condition consists of a (Bridgeland) stability condition $\sigma=(Z,\hh{P})$ on ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX$ satisfying $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:X=s}
\XX(\sigma)=s \cdot \sigma,\end{gathered}$$ with respect to a complex number $s$. We may write $\sigma[\XX]$ for $\XX(\sigma)$.
In the rest of this paper, we assume following.
\[assumption:R\] The Grothendieck group $\Grot ({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX})$ is free of finite rank over $R$, i.e. $\Grot({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX} )\cong R^{\oplus n}$ for some $n $.
Similar to usual stability conditions, we consider the support property as follows.
\[def:support\] A $q$-stability condition $(\sigma,s)$ satisfies the *$\XX$-support property* if
1. there is some lattice $\Gamma:=\ZZ^n \subset K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX})$ satisfying $\Gamma \otimes_{\ZZ}R \cong K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX})$ and a subset $\widehat{\ss}(\sigma) \subset \Gamma$ such that the set of semistable classes $\ss(\sigma)$ is given by $$\ss(\sigma)=\bigcup_{k \in \ZZ}q^k \cdot \widehat{\ss}(\sigma),$$
2. for some norm ${\lVert \,\cdot\, \rVert}$ on a finite dimensional vector space $\Gamma \otimes_{\ZZ}\R$, there is some constant $C>0$ such that holds for all $\alpha \in \widehat{\ss}(\sigma)$.
3. $\XX\Hom$-bounded: Exists $N_0$ such that for any $E,F$ with $[E],[F]\in\widehat{\ss}(\sigma)$, $$\Hom(E,F[k\XX])=0$$ when $|k|>N_0$.
Denote by $\QStab_s{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX$ the set of all $q$-stability conditions satisfying support property and with fixed $s$. Let $\QStab{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX=\bigcup_{s\in\bC}\QStab_s{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX$.
We have the following results, consisting of Bridgeland’s original theorem [@B1 Thm. 1.2] and our $q$-deformation version [@IQ Thm 2.9]. Denote by $\bC_s$ the complex numbers with the $R$-module structure through the specialization $q_s$, i.e. $q \cdot z:=e^{ \ii \pi s}z$ for $z \in \bC_s$.
\[thm:localiso2\] Let ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}$ be a (normal) triangulated category with $\Grot({\operatorname{\hh{D}}})\cong \ZZ^{\oplus n}$ and ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX$ be a triangulated category with $\Grot({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX} )\cong R^{\oplus n}$. Fix $s\in\bC$.
- The projection map of taking central charges $$\mathcal{Z} \colon \Stab{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}\longrightarrow \Hom_{\ZZ}(K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}),\bC),\quad
(Z,\sli) \mapsto Z$$ is a local homeomorphism of topological spaces. In particular, $\mathcal{Z}$ induces a complex structure on $\Stab{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}$.
- The projection map of taking central charges $$\label{eq:Z_s}
\mathcal{Z}_s \colon \QStab_s{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX}
\longrightarrow \Hom_{R}(K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX}),\bC_s),\quad
(Z,\sli) \mapsto Z$$ is a local homeomorphism of topological spaces. In particular, $\mathcal{Z}_s$ induces a complex structure on $\QStab_s{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX}$.
$\XX$-baric heart and $q$-stability conditions {#sec:QSC}
----------------------------------------------
An *$\XX$-baric heart* ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\infty} \subset {\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX}$ is a full triangulated subcategory of ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX}$ satisfying the following conditions:
- if $k_1 > k_2$ and $A_i \in {\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\infty}[k_i\XX]\,(i =1,2)$, then $\Hom_{{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX}}(A_1,A_2) = 0$,
- for $0 \neq E \in {\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX}$, there is a finite sequence of integers $$k_1 > k_2 > \cdots > k_m$$ and a collection of exact triangles $$0 =
\xymatrix @C=5mm{
E_0 \ar[rr] && E_1 \ar[dl] \ar[rr] && E_2 \ar[dl]
\ar[r] & \dots \ar[r] & E_{m-1} \ar[rr] && E_m \ar[dl] \\
& A_1 \ar@{-->}[ul] && A_2 \ar@{-->}[ul] &&&& A_m \ar@{-->}[ul]
}
= E$$ with $A_i \in {\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\infty}[k_i\XX]$ for all $i$.
Note that by definition, classes of objects in ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\infty}$ span $K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX})$ over $R$ and we have a canonical isomorphism $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:KKK}
K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\infty}) \otimes_{\ZZ} R \cong K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX}).\end{gathered}$$ Recall that the triangulated category ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX$ is Calabi-Yau-$\XX$ if $\XX$ is the Serre functor. For an $\XX$-baric heart ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\infty}$ in a Calabi-Yau-$\XX$ category ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX$, Condition $(1)$ can be refined as $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:01}
\Hom_{{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX}}(A_1,A_2) = 0,\end{gathered}$$ for $A_i\in{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty[k_i\XX]$ and $k_1-k_2\notin\{0,1\}$.
For a fixed complex number $s \in \bC$, consider the specialization $$q_s\colon\bC[q,q^{-1}]\to\bC,\quad q\mapsto e^{\mathbf{i} \pi s}.$$
\[con:q\] Consider a triple $({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty,{\widehat{\sigma}},s)$ consists of an $\XX$-baric heart ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty$, a (Bridgeland) stability condition ${\widehat{\sigma}}=({\widehat{Z}},{\widehat{\hh{P}}})$ on ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty$ and a complex number $s$. We construct
1. the additive pre-stability condition $\sadd=(Z,\padd)$ and
2. the extension pre-stability condition $\sext=(Z,\pext)$,
where
- first extend ${\widehat{Z}}$ to $$Z_q\colon={\widehat{Z}}\otimes 1\colon K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX)\to\bC[q,q^{-1}]$$ via and $$Z=q_s\circ (\widehat{Z}\otimes R)\colon K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX)\to\bC$$ gives a central charge function on ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX$;
- the pre-slicing $\padd$ is defined as $$\label{eq:padd}
\padd(\phi)=\add^s{\widehat{\hh{P}}}[\ZZ\XX]\colon=\add \bigoplus_{k\in\ZZ} {\widehat{\hh{P}}}(\phi-k{\operatorname{Re}}(s))[k\XX].$$
- the pre-slicing $\pext$ is defined as $$\label{eq:pext}
\pext(\phi)=\<{\widehat{\hh{P}}}[\ZZ\XX]\>^s\colon=\< {\widehat{\hh{P}}}(\phi-k{\operatorname{Re}}(s))[k\XX] \>.$$
Note that $\sigma$ does not necessary satisfies condition (d) in Definition \[def:stab\] and hence may not be a stability condition.
[@IQ; @Q3] Given a slicing $\hh{P}$ on a triangulated category ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}$. Define the global dimension of $\hh{P}$ by $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:geq}
\gldim\hh{P}=\sup\{ \phi_2-\phi_1 \mid
\Hom(\hh{P}(\phi_1),\hh{P}(\phi_2))\neq0\}.\end{gathered}$$ For a stability conditions $\sigma=(Z,\hh{P})$ on ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}$, its global dimension $\gldim\sigma$ is defined to be $\gldim\hh{P}$.
\[eq:def:qstab\] An *open $q$-stability condition* on ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX}$ is a pair $(\sigma,s)$ consisting of a stability condition $\sigma$ on ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX$ and a complex parameter $s$, satisfying
- $\sigma=\sadd$ is an additive pre-stability condition induced from some triple $({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty,{\widehat{\sigma}},s)$ as in Construction \[con:q\] with $$\label{eq:open}
\gldim{\widehat{\sigma}}+1<{\operatorname{Re}}(s)$$
A *closed $q$-stability condition* on ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX}$ is a pair $(\sigma,s)$ consisting of a stability condition $\sigma$ on ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX$ and a complex parameter $s$, satisfying
- $\sigma=\sext$ is an extension pre-stability condition induced from some triple $({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty,{\widehat{\sigma}},s)$ as in Construction \[con:q\] with $$\label{eq:closed}
\gldim{\widehat{\sigma}}+1\le{\operatorname{Re}}(s)$$
Denote by $\OStab_s{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX$ the set of all $q$-stability conditions with parameter $s\in\bC$. Denote by $\CStab_s{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX$ the set of all closed $q$-stability conditions with parameter $s\in\bC$.
[@IQ]\[thm:IQ\] Suppose that ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX$ is Calabi-Yau-$\XX$ with an $\XX$-baric heart ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty$. Any triple $({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty,{\widehat{\sigma}},s)$ satisfies (resp. ) induces an open (resp. closed) $q$-stability condition $(\sigma,s)$ for $\sigma=\sadd$ (resp. $\sigma=\sext$).
We will write $$(\sigma,s)=({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty,{\widehat{\sigma}},s)\otimes_{\oplus} R,\qquad
(\sigma,s)=({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty,{\widehat{\sigma}},s)\otimes_{*} R$$ for the two inducing in the theorem.
Topological Fukaya categories from graded marked surfaces {#sec:TFuk}
=========================================================
Graded marked surface
---------------------
Following [@HKK; @LP], we recall the relative notions and notations on graded marked surfaces. Note that we will use a single marked point to denote a marked boundary arc in their setting, where if one do the real blow-up (with respect to some quadratic differential) at this type of point, one should get a line that is isomorphic to $\RR$.
A *graded marked surface* $(\SS,\Y,\grad)$ consists of the following data:
- $\SS$ is a smooth oriented surface;
- $\Y$ is a set of marked points in $\partial\SS$, such that $\Y\cap\partial_i\neq\emptyset$ for each boundary component $\partial_i$ of $\partial\SS$ (cf. the red hollow points in Figure \[fig:QR\]). Let $$\aleph\colon=|\Y|.$$
- $\grad$ is the grading (foliation) on $\SS$, that is, a section of the projectivized tangent bundle, $\mathbb{P}(T\SS)$.
For simplicity, we will use $\SS$ to denote the triple $(\SS,\Y,\grad)$ sometimes. We will exclude the case when $\surf$ is a disk with two marked points.
A morphism between graded marked surfaces $(\SS, \Y,\grad) \to (\SS', \Y',\grad')$ is a pair $(f,\widetilde{f})$ consists of an orientation preserving local diffeomorphism $f\colon \SS\to\SS'$, such that $f(\Y)=\Y'$, and a homotopy from $f^*(\grad')$ to $\grad$ (up to homotopy). Every graded marked surface $\SS$ admits an automorphism $[1]$, known as the shift, given by the pair $(\mathrm{id}_{\SS},\sigma)$ where $\sigma$ restricts, for every $x\in \SS$, to the generator of $\pi_1(\mathbb{P}(T_x\SS))$ given by rotating the foliation counterclockwise by an angle of $\pi$.
A *curve* in a graded marked surface $(\SS,\Y,\grad)$ is an immersion $c\colon I\to \SS$ for a 1-manifold $I$. A *grading* $\widetilde{c}$ of a curve $c$ is an element in $\Pi_1(\Gamma(I,c^*\mathbb{P}(T\SS)),c^*\grad,\dot{c})$, i.e. a homotopy class of paths in $\mathbb{P}(T_{c(t)}\SS)$ from the subspace given by the grading to the tangent space of the curve, varying continuously with $t\in I$. The pushforward of a graded curve as above by a graded morphism $(f,\widetilde{f})$ is given by $(I,f\circ c,(c^*\widetilde{f})\cdot\widetilde{c})$.
A point of transverse intersection of a pair $(I_1,c_1,\widetilde{c}_1)$, $(I_2,c_2,\widetilde{c}_2)$ of graded curves determines an integer as follows. Suppose $t_i\in I_i$ with $$c_1(t_1)=c_2(t_2)=p\in X,\qquad \dot{c}_1(t_1)\neq \dot{c}_2(t_2)\in\mathbb{P}(T_pX).$$ We have the following homotopy classes of paths in $\mathbb{P}(T_pX)$:
1. $\widetilde{c}_1(t_1)$ from $\grad(p)$ to $\dot{c}_1(t_1)$,
2. $\widetilde{c}_2(t_2)$ from $\grad(p)$ to $\dot{c}_2(t_2)$,
3. $\kappa$ from $\dot{c}_1(t_1)$ to $\dot{c}_2(t_2)$ given by counterclockwise rotation in $T_pX$ by an angle less than $\pi$.
Define the *intersection index* of $c_1,c_2$ at $p$ $$i_p(c_1,c_2)=\widetilde{c}_1(t_1)\cdot\kappa\cdot\widetilde{c}_2(t_2)^{-1}\quad\in\pi_1(\mathbb{P}(T_pX))\cong\mathbb{Z}.$$ This is well-defined if $c_1$,$c_2$ pass through $p$ exactly once; in particular if $c_i$ are in general position. In the following, we always consider graded curves but omit the grading in the notation for simplicity.
\[def:numerical\] The *numerical data* $$\num=\num(\surf)=(g,b;\uk,\ul;{\operatorname{LP}}_g)$$ of $\surf$ are the following.
- The genus $g=g_\surf$.
- The number $b=|\partial\surf|$ of boundary components.
- The numbers/*orders* $\uk=(k_1,\ldots,k_b)\in\ZZ_{>0}^b$ of marked points on the boundary component $\partial_i$, satisfy $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:order k_i}
\sum_{i=1}^b k_i=|\Y|.
\end{gathered}$$
- The *indices* $\ul=(l_1,\ldots,l_b)\in\ZZ^b$ for each boundary component $\partial_i$ can be calculated as follows. Let $\{Y^i_j \mid j\in\ZZ_{k_i}\}$ be the marked points on $\partial_i$ (in the order of the induced orientation of $\surf$) and $\gamma^i_j=Y^i_jY^i_{j+1}$ be the boundary arcs (with any grading). Then $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:winding l_i}
\begin{array}{rl}
{\operatorname{wind}_{\lambda}}(\partial_i)=&2-l_i\\
=&\sum_{j\in\ZZ_{k_i}} \left( i_{Y^i_j}(\gamma^i_{j-1},\gamma^i_j)-1\right).
\end{array}
\end{gathered}$$ Here ${\operatorname{wind}_{\lambda}}(\partial_i)$ is the winding number $\partial_i$ with respect to $\lambda$, cf. [@LP2 § 1.2] and [@HKK (3.21)]. Note that the index satisfies ([@LP2 (1.5)]) $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:4-4g}
\sum_{i=1}^b l_i=4-4g.
\end{gathered}$$ We will use quadratic differentials to calculate the winding number ${\operatorname{wind}_{}}$ and $l_i$ in Section \[sec:wind\]. Denote by $\uk=(k_1,\ldots,k_b)$ and $\ul=(l_1,\ldots,l_b)$ the data of $(k_i,l_i)$.
- The Lekili-Polishchuk data ${\operatorname{LP}}_g$ is defined as follows:
- If $g=0$, then ${\operatorname{LP}}_0=\emptyset$.
- If $g=1$, then ${\operatorname{LP}}_1=\widetilde{A}$, where $\widetilde{A}$ is the non-negative integer $\widetilde{A}(\lambda)\colon=\gcd\{{\operatorname{wind}_{\lambda}}(\gamma)\mid\text{non-separating $\gamma$}\}$.
- If $g>1$, then ${\operatorname{LP}}_g=(A,\kappa)$ consisting of the Arf invariant $A$ (see [@LP2 § 1.2]) and the indicator $\kappa$, where $\kappa=0$ if ${\operatorname{wind}_{\lambda}}^{(2)}\equiv0$ and $\kappa=1$ otherwise for the induced function ([@LP2 Definition 1.2.2]) $${\operatorname{wind}_{\lambda}}^{(2)}\colon{\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}(\surf;\ZZ_2)\to\ZZ_2.$$
\[ex:num\] For instance,
- when $\surf$ is a disk, which corresponds to a type $A_n$ quiver, then the numerical data are $$g=0,\;b=1,\;\uk=n+1,\;\ul=4.$$
- when $\surf$ is annulus, which corresponds to the affine type $\widetilde{A_{p,q}}$ quiver (with zero grading for all arrows), then the numerical data are $$g=0,\;b=2,\;\uk=(p,q),\;\ul=(2,2).$$
Notice that in the $g=0$ case, $A$ and $\kappa$ are irrelevant.
Moreover, we have the following notions.
- $\Y$ divides $\partial\SS$ into $\aleph$ boundary arcs.
- A closed arc $\gamma$ in $\SS$ is is (the isotopy class of) a (non-trivial) curve connecting points in $\Y$, such that except for the endpoints, $\gamma$ is in $\SS^\circ$. A trivial arc is an arc isotopy to a marked point. Note that we distinguish boundary arcs and closed arcs that are isotopy to them, i.e. the arcs $\eta_1,\eta_5,\eta_6$ in the left picture of Figure \[fig:QR\] is not the same as the corresponding (black) boundary arc.
- When closed arcs equipping with grading, the degree of intersection between then can be defined according to the grading, cf. [@HKK (2.5)].
- A closed arc system $\TT^*$ is a collection of pairwise disjoint simple graded closed arcs.
- A full formal closed arc system is a closed arc system $\TT^*$ such that it cuts $\SS$ into polygons each of which has exactly a single boundary arc.
Note that $\TT^*$ is formal implies that each polygon $D$ in $\TT$ contains exactly one boundary arc of $\SS$ (cf. red arcs Figure \[fig:QR\]).
\[rem:dual\] $\SS$ admits a natural dual $(\SS,\M,\grad^*)$, where $\M$ is the set of marked points that are midpoints of boundary arcs of $\SS$ (cf. the blue solid points in Figure \[fig:QR\]). We will call an arc on $(\SS,\M,\grad^*)$ connecting points in $\M$, an *open arc*. The dual graph of $\TT^*=\{\eta_i\}$, denoted by $\TT=\{\gamma_i\}$, is a full formal open arcs system of $(\SS,\M,\grad^*)$ satisfying $${\operatorname{Int}}(\gamma_i,\eta_j)=\delta_{ij},$$ where the index of the intersection between $\gamma_i$ and $\eta_i$ is $0$. As we only care about full formal closed/open arc systems, we will omit full formal for simplicity.
The topological Fukaya categories
---------------------------------
Now we will choose (and fix) an initial pair of closed/open arc system $(\TT^*,\TT)$ such that $\TT^*$ is induced from some quadratic differentials (cf. [@HKK] or § \[sec:Quad\_inf\]). The graded quiver $Q^{(0)}_\TT$ with relation $R^{(0)}_\TT$ associated to an open arc system $\TT$ is defined as follows:
- Its vertices are open arcs in $\TT$.
- Its arrows are the (anticlockwise) angle between arcs of $\TT$ in the polygons of $\SS$ cutting out by $\TT$. The grading of the arrows are the degree of the intersections between (graded closed) arcs.
- The quadratic relations are composable arrows (e.e. angles) whose corresponding angles do not share the marked point.
Let $\ha^0_\TT={\mathrm{k}}Q^{(0)}_\TT/R^{(0)}_\TT$. Next, we produce a dga from $\ha^0_\TT$, replacing the relation with differential.
[@O Cons. 2.2] Consider the basic finite dimensional ${\mathrm{k}}$-algebra $\ha^0_\TT$. Let $Q^{(1)}_\TT$ be the (graded) quiver obtained from $Q^{(0)}_\TT$ by adding the arrows corresponding to the (minimal set of) relations of $R_\TT$, whose degrees are the degrees of the corresponding relations minus one, and a differential (of degree $1$), such that There ${\operatorname{H}^{0}}(\ha^0_\TT)$ is a quotient of ${\operatorname{H}^{0}}({\mathrm{k}}Q^{(1)}_\TT)$. Now pick a generating set $R^{(1)}_\TT$ for $$\ker \left( {\operatorname{H}^{1}}({\mathrm{k}}Q^{(1)}_\TT)\to {\operatorname{H}^{0}}(\ha^0_\TT) \right)$$ so that ${\mathrm{k}}Q^{(1)}_\TT/R^{(1)}_\TT$ is quasi-isomorphic to $\ha^{(0)}_\TT$. Iterating this process till we obtain a graded quiver $Q_\TT$ (without relation) and a differential ${\mathrm{d}}$ such that $\ha_\TT\colon={\mathrm{k}}Q_\TT$ is quasi-isomorphic to $\ha^0_\TT$.
By simple-projective duality, $Q_\TT$ can be identified with the Ext-quiver ([@KQ Def 6.2]) of ${\operatorname{mod}}\ha^0_\TT$, after changing degree by $1-?$, i.e. each (graded) arrow $a$ in $Q_\TT$ corresponds to a morphism (with grading $1-\deg a$) between the corresponding simple ${\mathrm{k}}Q_\TT$ modules. In our case, the simple ${\mathrm{k}}Q_\TT$ modules one-one correspond to the closed arcs in $\TT^*$ and the (graded) arrows in the Ext-quiver correspond to all intersections (with degrees) between (graded) closed arcs in $\TT^*$. For instance, in the right picture of Figure \[fig:QR\], the red arrows are all the arrows of the quiver $Q_\TT$ while only the ones between $\eta_i$ and $\eta_{i+1}$ are in $Q^{(0)}_\TT$ (for $1\le i\le 5$). Further discussion of this duality will appear in [@IQZ].
Denote by ${\operatorname{TFuk}}(\SS)$ the topological Fukaya category, which can be defined as $${\operatorname{TFuk}}(\SS)\colon={\operatorname{per}}\ha_\TT\cong{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\ha_\TT).$$ The derived equivalence above follows from the fact that $\TT$ is full formal (and hence $\ha_\TT$ is homological smooth and proper). Denote by $\Ind{\operatorname{\hh{C}}}$ the set of indecomposable objects in a category ${\operatorname{\hh{C}}}$. Denote by $\CA(\SS)$ (resp. $\OA(\SS)$) the set of admissible graded closed (resp. open) arcs with indecomposable local system on $\SS$, cf. Remark \[rem:dual\].
[@HKK]\[thm:HKK cat\] There are injections $$\begin{gathered}
\widehat{M}\colon \OA(\SS) \to \Ind{\operatorname{per}}\ha_\TT,\\
\widehat{M}\colon \CA(\SS) \to \Ind{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\ha_\TT).\end{gathered}$$
Note that in [@HKK], they state a stronger result that $\widehat{M}$ can be extended to bijections. Also, the theorem implies that there is a canonical embedding (except for the case when $\surf$ is a disk with two marked points). $${\operatorname{MCG}}(\surf) \to \Aut^\circ{{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty(\TT)},$$ where $\Aut^\circ$ is the quotient group of $\Aut$ by those auto-equivalences that preserve objects and rescale (some of the) morphisms.
(0,0) circle (7); (180-360/7\*5:7) edge \[bend right=-35\] (180-360/7\*4:7) edge \[bend right=-15\] (180-360/7\*3:7) edge \[bend right=-5\] (180-360/7\*2:7); (180-360/7\*2:7) to\[bend right=-35\] (180-360/7\*1:7) to\[bend right=-35\] (180-360/7\*0:7) to\[bend right=-35\] (180-360/7\*7:7) to\[bend right=-35\] (180-360/7\*6:7); in [1,...,7]{} (180-360/7:7)node\[cyan\][$\bullet$]{};
(360/7\*5:7)node\[below\][$Y$]{} edge \[bend right=5\]node\[right\][$\eta_4$]{} (360/7\*1:7) edge \[bend right=10\]node\[right\][$\eta_3$]{} (360/7\*2:7) edge \[bend right=15\]node\[left\][$\eta_2$]{} (360/7\*3:7) edge \[bend right=25\]node\[left\][$\eta_1$]{} (360/7\*4:7); (360/7\*1:7) to\[bend left=-25\] node\[right\][$\eta_5$]{}(360/7\*0:7) to\[bend left=-25\] node\[right\][$\eta_6$]{}(-360/7:7);
in [1,...,7]{} (360/7:7)node\[white\][$\bullet$]{} node\[red\][$\circ$]{};
in [1,2,3,4]{} [(-54-72\*:1.7)node(v)[$\bullet$]{}(-54-72\*:2)node[$\eta_\j$]{};;]{} in [1,2,3]{}[in [,...,3]{}[ (-54-72-72\*:1.7)node(w)[$\bullet$]{}; (v.-90-36\*-36\*-60)to(w.-90-36\*-36\*+60); (w.-90-36\*-36\*+120)to(v.-90-36\*-36\*-120); ]{}]{} (-54+72:1.7)node(v4)[$\bullet$]{} (0:3)node\[red\](v5)[$\bullet$]{}node\[right,red\][$\eta_5$]{} (-25:3)node\[red\](v6)[$\bullet$]{}node\[left,red\][$\eta_6$]{};
(v5.190)to(v4.-40); (v6.100)to(v5.-120); (v4.15)to(v5.135); (v5.-65)to(v6.45);
Let $\widehat{M}_j^i=\widehat{M}(\gamma_j^i)$, where $\gamma_j^i$ are the boundary arcs in Definition \[def:numerical\]. Then the index $i_{Y^i_j}(\gamma^i_{j-1},\gamma_j^i)$ equals the degree of a non-vanishing element in $\Hom^\bullet(\widehat{M}_{j-1}^i,\widehat{M}_j^i)$, by the definition/construction of the topological Fukaya category.
[@LP2 Theorem 1.2.5] Let $\surf_i$ be two graded marked surfaces with numerical data $\num(\surf_i)$. Then the derived equivalence ${\operatorname{TFuk}}(\surf_1)\cong{\operatorname{TFuk}}(\surf_2)$ holds if and only if $\num(\surf_1)=\num(\surf_2)$.
Deformed Calabi-Yau-$\XX$ completion {#sec:D-CY}
====================================
In this section, we generalize Keller’s deformed Calabi-Yau completion [@K8].
$\ZZ^2$-graded differential modules and categories
--------------------------------------------------
We will work will *$\ZZ^2$-graded ${\mathrm{k}}$-modules* ($\ZZ^2$-greded mods), So such a $\ZZ^2$-graded mod $M$ admits a decomposition $M=\bigoplus_{(q,s)\in\ZZ^2} M_s^q$. Denote by $\deg m=(q,s)\in\ZZ^2$ the degree of an element of $m\in M^q_s$. A $\ZZ^2$-graded morphsim $f\colon M\to N$ between Gmods with degree $(p,t)$ is a ${\mathrm{k}}$-linear morphism s.t. $f(M^q_s)\subset N^{q+p}_{s+t}$. The first component of $\ZZ^2$-grading is the *cohomological grading* and denote the cohomological degree of $m\in M^q_s$ by $|m|=q$. Similarly $|f|$ denotes the cohomological degree of a $\ZZ^2$-graded morphsim. The tensor product $M\otimes L$ is $(M\otimes N)^q_s\colon=\bigoplus_{}M^{q_1}_{s_1}\otimes N^{q_2}_{s_2}$ for $(q_1,s_1)+(q_2,s_2)=(q,s)$ and $f\otimes g\colon M\otimes L\to M'\otimes L'$ is $$\begin{gathered}
(f\otimes g)(m\otimes l)\colon=(-1)^{|m|\cdot|g|}f(m)\otimes g(l),\end{gathered}$$ for $f\colon M\otimes L, g\colon M'\otimes L'$, where only the cohomological degree effects the sign.
A *differential $\ZZ^2$-graded ${\mathrm{k}}$-module* ($\ZZ^2$-dg-mod) is a pair consisting of a $\ZZ^2$-graded mod $M$ and a (${\mathrm{k}}$-linear) *differential* map ${\mathrm{d}}_M\colon M\to M$ with degree $(1,0)$ s.t. ${\mathrm{d}}_M^2=0$. The cochain ${\operatorname{Z}^{q}}(M)$ and cohomology ${\operatorname{H}^{q}}(M)$ are defined with respect to to the differential ${\mathrm{d}}$ (or the cohomological degree), which admits a $\ZZ^2$-grading (that corresponds the second grading on $M$) $${\operatorname{Z}^{q}}(M)=\bigoplus_s {\operatorname{Z}^{q}}_s(M),\quad {\operatorname{H}^{q}}(M)=\bigoplus_s {\operatorname{H}^{q}}_s(M).$$
There are two natural shifts $M\{1\}$ and $M[1]$ on $\ZZ^2$-dg-mod $M$: $$\begin{array}{cl}
(M\{1\})^q_s=M^q_{s+1}, &{\mathrm{d}}_{M\{1\}}={\mathrm{d}}_M\\
(M[1])^q_s=M^{q+1}_s, &{\mathrm{d}}_{M[1]}=-{\mathrm{d}}_M.
\end{array}$$
A $\ZZ^2$-dg-morphism $f\colon M\to L$ between $\ZZ^2$-dg-mods is a ${\mathrm{k}}$-linear map s.t. $\deg f=(0,0)$ and $f\circ{\mathrm{d}}_M={\mathrm{d}}_L\circ f$, which induces a morphism (of graded modules) on cohomologies ${\operatorname{H}^{\bullet}}$. The tensor product $M\otimes L$ of two $\ZZ^2$-dg-mod is the tensor $\ZZ^2$-graded mod with ${\mathrm{d}}_{M\otimes L}={\mathrm{d}}_M\otimes {\operatorname{id}}_L+{\operatorname{id}}_M\otimes{\mathrm{d}}_L$. The morphism space $\hom(M,L)$ is also a $\ZZ^2$-dg-mod, where the component $\hom^q_s(M,L)$ consists of all ${\mathrm{k}}$-linear maps of degree $(q,s)$ and $${\mathrm{d}}_f\colon={\mathrm{d}}_M\circ f-(-1)^{|q|}f\circ{\mathrm{d}}_L.$$
A $\ZZ^2$-graded differential category ($\ZZ^2$-dg-cat) $\ha$ is a ${\mathrm{k}}$-category whose morphism spaces are $\ZZ^2$-dg-mods and whose compositions $\ha(Y,Z)\otimes \ha(X,Y) \to \ha(X,Z)$ are $\ZZ^2$-dg-morphisms. A $\ZZ^2$-dg-functor $F\colon \ha\to\hh{B}$ between $\ZZ^2$-dg-cats is given by a map between their objects and by morphisms of $\ZZ^2$-dg-mods $F(X,Y)\colon \ha(X,Y)\to\hh{B}(FX,FY)$ for $X,Y\in\Obj\ha$.
The opposite $\ZZ^2$-dg-cat $\ha^{op}$ of $\ha$ has the same objects with morphisms $\ha^{op}(X,Y)=\ha(Y,X)$ and the composition of $f\in\ha(Y,X)$ and $g\in\ha(Z,Y)$ is given by $(-1)^{|f||g|}gf$. The cochain and homology category ${\operatorname{Z}^{0}}(\ha), {\operatorname{H}^{0}}(\ha)$ of $\ha$ have the same objects of $\ha$ with morphisms $({\operatorname{Z}^{0}}\ha)(X,Y)={\operatorname{Z}^{0}}(\ha(X,Y))$ and $({\operatorname{H}^{0}}\ha)(X,Y)={\operatorname{H}^{0}}(\ha(X,Y))$ respectively.
For two $\ZZ^2$-dg-functors $F,G\colon\ha\to\hh{B}$, the complex of graded morphisms $\hom(F,G)$ consists of a family of morphisms $\phi_X\colon\hh{B}(FX,FY)^n$ such that $(Gf)(\phi_X)=(\phi_Y)(Ff)$ with the induced differential from $\hh{B}(FX,FY)$. The set of morphisms between $F$ and $G$ is given by the set ${\operatorname{Z}^{0}}_0\hom(\ha,\hh{B})(F,G)$.
Derived categories of $\ZZ^2$-dg-cats
-------------------------------------
Denote by $\hh{C}_{dg}(A)$ the $\ZZ^2$-dg-cat of a $\ZZ$-graded ${\mathrm{k}}$-algebra $A=\bigoplus_s A_s$. Let $\ha$ be a small $\ZZ^2$-dg-cat. A (right) $\ZZ^2$-dg-$\ha$-mod $M$ is a $\ZZ^2$-dg-functor $$M\colon\ha^{op}\to\hh{C}_{dg}({\mathrm{k}}).$$ There are also two natural shifts $[1],\{1\}$ for a $\ZZ^2$-dg-$\ha$-mod $M$, that $M[1]\{1\}(X)\colon=M(X)[1]\{1\}\in\hh{C}_{dg}({\mathrm{k}})$. the cohomological shift $[1]$ and the extra grading shift ${1}$. For each object $X$ of $\ha$, there is a right module $X^\wedge=\ha(?,X)$ represented by $X$.
The $\ZZ^2$-dg-cat is defined to be $$\hh{C}_{dg}(\ha)\colon=\hom(\ha^{op},\hh{C}_{dg}^\ZZ({\mathrm{k}}))$$ and we denote its morphism by $\hom_{\ha}$. The category of $\ZZ^2$-dg-$\ha$-mods $\hh{C}(\ha)$ has the $\ZZ^2$-dg-$\ha$-mods as objects and the morphisms of $\ZZ^2$-dg-functors as morphisms and we have $$\hh{C}(\ha)={\operatorname{Z}^{0}}\hh{C}_{dg}(\ha).$$ The homotopy category of $\ZZ^2$-dg-$\ha$-mods is $\hh{H}(\ha)={\operatorname{H}^{0}}\hh{C}_{dg}(\ha)$ whose morphisms is given by ${\operatorname{H}^{0}}_0\hom_{\ha}$. Note that there are canonical isomorphisms $\hom(X^\wedge,M)\xrightarrow{\sim}M(X)$ and $${\operatorname{H}^{}}(\ha)(X^\wedge, M[n])\xrightarrow{\sim}{\operatorname{H}^{n}}M(X).$$
Denote by $\hh{D}(\ha)$ the derived category of $\hh{C}(\ha)$ (or ${\hh{H}}(\ha)$) with respect to the class of quasi-isomorphisms and its homomorphism by $\Hom_{\hh{D}(\ha)}$. An important fact is that $\hh{D}(\ha)$ also admits two equivalences, the triangulated shift $[1]$ and the extra grading shift $\{1\}$.
Recall that a $\ZZ^2$-dg-mod $P$ is cofibrant if, for every surjective (resp. injective) quasi-isomorphism $L\to M$, every morphism $P\to M$ factors through $L$; a $\ZZ^2$-dg-mod $I$ is cofibrant (resp. fibrant) if, for every injective quasi-isomorphism $L\to M$, every morphism $L\to I$ extends to $M$.
[@Ke2 Prop 3.1] For each $\ZZ^2$-dg-mod $M$, there is a quasi-isomorphism (known as cofibrant resolution) $\mathbf{p}M\to M$ with cofibrant $\mathbf{p}M$ and a quasi-isomorphism (known as fibrant resolution) $M\to\mathbf{i}M$ with fibrant $\mathbf{i}M$. Moreover, the projection functor ${\hh{H}}(\ha)\to\hh{D}(\ha)$ admits a fully faithful left/right adjoint given by $M\mapsto\mathbf{p}M$ and $M\mapsto\mathbf{i}M$ respectively. Thus, $${\hh{H}}(\ha)(\mathbf{p}L,M)=\Hom_{\hh{D}(\ha)}(L,M)={\hh{H}}(\ha)(L,\mathbf{i}M) .$$
The inverse dualizing complex and Calabi-Yau categories
-------------------------------------------------------
Suppose that $\ha$ is homologically smooth (i.e. $\ha$ is a perfect as an ${\mathcal{A}^e}$-mod).
A preduality $\ZZ^2$-dg-functor $V$ on a $\ZZ^2$-dg-cat $\ha$ is a $\ZZ^2$-dg-functor $V\colon\ha\to\ha^{op}$, such that the opposite functor $V^{op}$ is a right adjoint of $V$. For a (right) $\ZZ^2$-dg-mod $M$, its dual left $\ZZ^2$-dg-mod $M^*\colon\ha\to\hh{C}_{dg}({\mathrm{k}})$ sends $X$ to $\hom_{\ha}(M,X^\wedge)$. The $V$-dual of $M$ is a $\ZZ^2$-dg-mod $$\begin{array}{rcl}
M^\vee=M^*\circ V^{op}\colon \ha&\to&\hh{C}_{dg}({\mathrm{k}}),\\
X&\mapsto&\hom_{\ha}(M,(V^{op}X)^\wedge).
\end{array}$$ This induces a preduality functor, still denoted by $V$: $$V\colon\hh{C}_{dg}(\ha)\to \hh{C}_{dg}(\ha^{op}).$$ Now let $\ha$ be a small $\ZZ^2$-dg-cat. As ${\mathrm{k}}$ is a field, $\ha$ is cofibrant over ${\mathrm{k}}$. Let ${\mathcal{A}^e}$ be the $\ZZ^2$-dg-cat $\ha\otimes\ha^{op}$, which admits an involution $V^e$ such that $$V^e(X,Y)=(Y,X)\quad\text{and}\quad V^e(f\otimes g)=(-1)^{|f|\cdot|g|}g\otimes f,$$ which is a preduality on ${\mathcal{A}^e}$.
The inverse dualizing complex $\Theta_\ha$ is any cofibrant replacement of the image of $\ha$ (consider as a right $\ZZ^2$-dg-${\mathcal{A}^e}$-mod) under the total derived functor of the $V^e$.
Denote by ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\ha)$ the finite dimensional derived category of $\ha$, which is the full subcategory of ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}(\ha)$ formed by the $\ZZ^2$-dg-mod $M$ such that $\sum_i \dim{\operatorname{H}^{i}}(M)$ is finite.
[@K8 Lem. 3.4]\[lem:CY\] Then for any $L\in{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}(\ha)$ and $M\in{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\ha)$, there is a canonical isomorphism $$\Hom_{{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}(\ha)}(L\otimes_{\ha} \Theta_{\ha}, M)\xrightarrow{\sim}
D\Hom_{{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}(\ha)}(M,L),$$ where $D=\Hom_{\mathrm{k}}(?,{\mathrm{k}})$.
Recall that our $\ZZ^2$-dg-cats are $\ZZ^2$-graded and ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}(\ha)$ has two shifts: $[1]$ and $\{1\}$. We will write $[\XX]$ for $\{1\}$ and $[m+l\XX]$ for $[m]\circ[\XX]^l$, where $m,l\in\ZZ$.
Let $\hh{N}=m+l\XX$. A triangulated category ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}$ is called *Calabi-Yau-$\hh{N}$* (CY-$\hh{N}$) if, for any objects $X,Y$ in $\hh{D}$ we have a natural isomorphism $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:serre}
\mathfrak{S}:\Hom (X,Y)
\xrightarrow{\sim}{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}\Hom (Y,X)[\hh{N}].\end{gathered}$$ Further, an object $S$ is *$\hh{N}$-spherical* if $\Hom^{\ZZ^2}(S, S)={\mathrm{k}}\oplus {\mathrm{k}}[-\hh{N}]$ and holds functorially for $X=S$ and $Y$ in ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}$, where $$\Hom^{\ZZ^2}(X,Y)\colon=\bigoplus_{m,l\in\ZZ} \Hom(X,Y[m+l\XX]).$$ By Lemma \[lem:CY\], if $\Theta_{\ha}\cong\ha[-\hh{N}]$, then ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\ha)$ is Calabi-Yau-$\hh{N}$. We are in particular interesting in the case when $\hh{N}=\XX$ or $\hh{N}=N\in\ZZ$. In these two cases, there is a *twist functor* $\Phi_S\in\Aut{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}$ for each $\hh{N}$-spherical object $S$, defined by $$\label{eq:sphtwist+}
\Phi_S(X)={\operatorname{Cone}}\left(S\otimes\Hom^{\ZZ^2}(S,X)\to X\right)$$ with inverse $$\label{eq:sphtwist-}
\Phi_S^{-1}(X)={\operatorname{Cone}}\left(X\to S\otimes\Hom^{\ZZ^2}(X,S)^\vee \right)[-1].$$ Note that the graded dual of a graded ${\mathrm{k}}$-vector space $V=\oplus_{m,l\in\ZZ} V_{m,l}[m+l\XX]$ is $$V^\vee=\bigoplus_{m,l\in\ZZ} V_{m,l}^*[-m-l\XX].$$ where $V_{m,l}$ is an ungraded ${\mathrm{k}}$-vector space and $V_{m,l}^*$ is its usual dual.
Deformed Calabi-Yau completion
------------------------------
Let $\Theta_\ha$ be the inverse dualizing complex of $\ha$ and $\theta=\Theta_{\ha}[\XX-1]$. The Calabi-Yau-$\XX$ completion of $\ha$ is the tensor DG category $$\Pi_\XX(\ha)=T_{\ha}(\theta)\colon=\ha\oplus\theta\oplus(\theta\otimes_{\ha}\theta)\oplus\cdots.$$ Moreover, let $c$ be an element of the Hochschild homology $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:HH}
{\operatorname{HH}}_{\XX-2}(\ha)=\operatorname{Tor}_{\XX-2}^{{\mathcal{A}^e}}(\ha,\ha)\end{gathered}$$ or a closed morphism of degree $1$ form $\Theta$ to $\ha$ (i.e. in $\Hom_{{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}({\mathcal{A}^e})}(\theta,\ha[1])$ (cf. [@K8 § 5.1]).
The deformation $\Pi_\XX(\ha,c)$ obtained from $\Pi_\XX(\ha)$ by adding $c$ to the differential is called a deformed Calabi-Yau completion of $\ha$ with respect to $c$.
[@Y Thm 3.17] Suppose $\ha$ is finitely cellular. Assume that the element $c \in {\operatorname{HH}}_{\XX-2}(\ha)$ can be lifted to an element $\tilde{c}$ of the negative cyclic homology $\operatorname{HN}_{\XX-2}(\ha)$. Then the deformed Calabi-Yau completion $\Pi_\XX(\ha,c)$ is homologically smooth and Calabi-Yau-$\XX$.
Recently, Keller [@K18] corrected some error in [@K8]. As in remarked in [@K18], the assumption in the above theorem can be satisfied in the case of Ginzburg dga which we will deal with in Section \[sec:CYS\].
Moreover, we prove a lemma, which is a slightly weaker Calabi-Yau $\XX$ version of [@K8 Lem. 4.4, Remark 5.3].
[@KQ Def 7.2] A functor $\hh{L}\colon{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}(\ha)\to{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}(\Pi_\XX(\ha,c))$ is a *Lagrangian(-$\XX$) immersion* if
- for $L,M\in{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\ha)$, we have $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:HOM}
\RHom_\Pi(\hh{L}(L),\hh{L}(M))=\RHom_{\ha}(L,M)
\oplus D\RHom_{\ha}(M,L)[-\XX],\end{gathered}$$
In particular, it is full faithful restricted to the finite dimensional derived categories, i.e. $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:hom}
\Hom^{}_{{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\Pi_\XX(\ha,c))} (\hh{L}(L),\hh{L}(M))=\Hom^{}_{{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\ha)} (L,M)\end{gathered}$$ for any $L,M\in{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\ha)$.
\[lem:L-inf\] The canonical projection (on the first component) $\Pi_\XX(\ha,c)\to\ha$ induces a Lagrangian immersion $$\hh{L}\colon{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\ha) \to {\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\Pi_\XX(\ha,c)).$$ Moreover, the image of $\hh{L}$ is an $\XX$-baric heart of $\Pi_\XX(\ha,c)$.
By definition, holds for any (double) shifts of simple $\ha$-modules. Denote by $\Sim{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\ha)$ the set of all shifts of simple $\ha$-modules. Note that any object $M$ in ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\ha)$ admits a simple filtration with factors in $\Sim{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\ha)$ (which is a refinement of the canonical filtration with respect to the heart ${\operatorname{mod}}\ha$–the category of $\ha$-modules). Thus, follows by induction (on the numbers of factors of simple filtration of $M$ and $L$).
For the second statement: first any object in $ $ has a filtration with factors in $$\{\Sim{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\ha)[m+l\XX]\}_{m,l\in\ZZ};$$ second, $\ha$ has non-negative $\XX$-grading; thus, $\< \Sim{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\ha)[m] \>_{m\in\ZZ}={\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\ha)$ is an $\XX$-baric heart.
Calabi-Yau-$\XX$ and cluster-$\XX$ categories from graded marked surfaces {#sec:CYS}
=========================================================================
We introduce and study the $\ZZ^2$-graded quivers with superpotential and the associated categories in this section for a fixed/initial pair of open/closed arc systems $(\TT,\TT^*)$ of $\SS$.
Quivers with superpotential from marked flat surfaces
-----------------------------------------------------
The $\ZZ^2$-graded quiver $\widetilde{Q}_{\TT}$ with superpotential $W_{\TT}$ is defined as follows:
- the vertices in $\widetilde{Q}_{\TT}$ are arcs in $\TT$.
- For each arrow $a_{}\colon \gamma\to \gamma'$ in $Q_\TT$, add a dual arrow $a^*_{}\colon \gamma'\to \gamma$ with degree $$\DEG a_{}=(\deg a_{},0)\quad\text{and}\quad
\DEG a^*_{}=(2,-1)-(\deg a_{},0).$$ We will write $\deg a^*$ for the first coordinate of $\DEG a^*$, i.e. $\deg a^*=2-\deg a$.
- For each polygon $D$ in $\TT$, let its edges are $\gamma_1,\ldots,\gamma_m$ in clockwise order. Then there are graded arrows $$\xymatrix{\gamma_i \ar@<.5ex>[r]^{ a_{ij} }
\ar@{<-}@<-.5ex>[r]_{ a^*_{ji} } & \gamma_j}
\quad\text{for}\quad 1\leq i<j\le m-1.$$ in $\widetilde{Q}_{\TT}$. Let (composing from left to right) $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:W}
W_D=\sum_{1\leq i<j<k\leq m} a_{ij} a_{jk} a^*_{ki},
\end{gathered}$$
- There is also a loop $\gamma^*$ at each vertex $\gamma$ of degree $(1,-1)$ in $\widetilde{Q}_{\TT}$.
- the superpotential $W_{\TT}$ is the sum of all $W_D$ for polygon $D$ in $\TT$.
The potential $W_\TT$ defined above is homogenous of degree $(3,-1)$.
Choose a polygon $D$ in $\TT$ and we only need to show $W_D$ is of homogenous of degree $(3,-1)$. Since $\TT$ is full formal, there is an unique marked point $Y_D$ in $\Y$ contained in $D$. Then the closed arcs in $\TT^*$ starting at $Y$, denoted by $\eta_1,\ldots,\eta_m$ (in clockwise order, cf. Figure \[fig:QR\] for $m=4$), are the dual arcs of edges $\gamma_1,\ldots,\gamma_m$ of $D$. Note that when an arc is a loop based at $Z$ then it appears twice in $\{\eta_i\}$. Suppose that the index of intersection at $Y$ between graded arrows are $$d_{ij}=i_Y(\eta_i, \eta_j),
\quad\text{for}\quad 1\leq i<j\le m-1.$$ Then by composition rule, we have $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:d_ij}
\deg d_{ij} = \sum_{k=i}^{j-1} d_{k k+1}\end{gathered}$$ for any $1\leq i<j\le m$. Thus the corresponding arrow $a_{ij}$ in $Q_{\TT}$ has degree $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:a_ij}
\deg a_{ij}=1- d_{ij}.\end{gathered}$$ and $$\begin{array}{rl}
&\DEG a_{ij}+\DEG a_{jk}+\DEG a^*_{ki}\\
=& (1-d_{ij},0)+(1-d_{jk},0)+\big( (2,-1)-(1+d_{ik},0) \big)\\
=&(3,-1)
\end{array}$$ for $1\leq i<j<k\leq m$, as required.
The *Ginzburg Calabi-Yau-$\XX$ dga* $\GAX$ is defined as follows.
- The underlying graded algebra of $\GAX$ is the completion of the graded path algebra ${\mathrm{k}}\widetilde{Q}_\TT$.
- The differential ${\mathrm{d}}={\mathrm{d}}_\TT$ of degree $(1,0)$ is the unique continuous linear endomorphism satisfies ${\mathrm{d}}^2=0$ and the Leibniz rule (with respect to the first degree) and takes the following values:
- ${\mathrm{d}}a = \partial_{a^*} W_{\TT}$ for $a\in (\widetilde{Q}_\TT)_1$;
- ${\mathrm{d}}\sum_{\gamma \in (\widetilde{Q}_\TT)_0} \gamma^* =
\sum_{a\in (\widetilde{Q}_\TT)_1 } \, [a,a^*]$.
Let $\XX$ be the grading shift of $(0,1)$. Note that we have the following convention:
- $\partial abc=(-1)^{\deg a}ab+(-1)^{\deg b}bc+(-1)^{\deg c}ca$ for any term $abc$ in $W_\TT$.
- $[a,a^*]=(-1)^{\deg a}aa^*+(-1)^{\deg a^*}a^*a$.
to ensure ${\mathrm{d}}^2=0$. See [@IQZ] for the detailed calculation.
Let ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}(\GAX)$ be the derived category of $\ZZ^2$-graded dg $\GAX$-modules. Denote two of its subcategories by $D_{fd}(\GAX)$ and ${\operatorname{per}}\GAX$, for the finite-dimensional and perfect derived categories respectively. So the standard triangle shift functor $[1]$ in this triangulated category corresponds to the degree $(1,0)$-shift while the distinguished auto-equivalence $\XX$ corresponds to the degree $(0,1)$-shift and we will write $E[l\XX]\colon=\XX^l(E)$.
Equivalently, we have the following. Let $\hh{R}_\TT$ be the discrete ${\mathrm{k}}$-category associated to the vertex set of $Q_\TT$ and $\ha_\TT$ be the path category of $Q_\TT$. Then $\GAX$ is the tensor category over R of the bimodule $$\widetilde{Q}_\TT=Q_\TT\oplus \left(Q_\TT\right)^\vee[\XX-2]\oplus
\hh{R}_\TT[\XX-1].$$ Let $c_\TT$ be the image of $W_\TT$ in . We have the following.
[@K8 Prop 6.3][@Y Thm 3.17] \[thm:CY\] The Ginzburg dga $\GAX$ is quasi-isomorphic to the deformed Calabi-Yau completion $\Pi_\XX(\ha_\TT,c_\TT)$. Hence homologically smooth and Calabi-Yau-$\XX$.
Moreover, we have the following by applying Lemma \[lem:L-inf\].
\[cor:X-heart\] The projection $$\Pi_\XX(\ha_\TT,c)\to\ha_\TT$$ induces a Lagrangian immersion $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:Lagrangian}
\hh{L}_\TT\colon \Dinf \to {\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\GAX).\end{gathered}$$ and its image $$\label{eq:DT}
{{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty(\TT)}\colon=\hh{L}_\TT(\Dinf)$$ is an $\XX$-baric heart of $$\label{eq:DX=}
\DX\colon={\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\GAX).$$
\[rem:inducing\] A consequence of Corollary \[cor:X-heart\] is that we can apply Theorem \[thm:IQ\]. Namely, we can use stability conditions on ${{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty(\TT)}$ to construct $q$-stability conditions on $\DX$.
Topological Fukaya categories as cluster categories
---------------------------------------------------
Recall that the cluster category $\hh{C}(\GAX)$, in the sense of Amiot-Guo-Keller (cf. [@A; @K8]), is the Verdier quotient $$\hh{C}(\GAX)\colon={\operatorname{per}}\GAX/\DX.$$
\[thm:TFuk=C\] $\hh{C}(\GAX)\cong{\operatorname{per}}\ha_\TT$.
First, the projection $\GAX\to\ha_\TT$ induces the functor $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:induce}
i_*\colon {\operatorname{per}}\ha_\TT\to {\operatorname{per}}\GAX,\end{gathered}$$ sending the projectives to the projectives. Denote the image by $\hh{C}$, which is generated by $\{\GAX[i]\}_{i\in\ZZ}$.
Recall that $\DX$ admits the Serre functor $\XX$. Recall that $\Sim\GAX$ is the set of simple $\GAX$ modules and denote by $\hh{S}$ the subcategory of $\DX$ generated by the objects in $$\bigcup_{i\in\ZZ} \Sim\GAX[i].$$ Consider the canonical unbounded t-structure $\DX=\<\hh{X}, \hh{Y}\>$, where $\hh{X}$ is generated by $\bigcup_{j\geq0}\hh{S}[j\XX]$ and $\hh{Y}$ is generated by $\bigcup_{j<0}\hh{S}[j\XX]$.
By the Calabi-Yau-$\XX$ duality (cf. [@Keller Lem. 4.1]), we have $$\Hom(M,\GAX)=D\Hom(\GAX,M[\XX])$$ for any $M\in\DX$. We also have the following calculation about $\Hom$ between projectives and simples: $$\Hom^i_{{\operatorname{per}}\GAX}(\GAX,\hh{S}[j\XX])=0$$ for any $i\in\ZZ, j\neq0$. Therefore $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:1}
\Hom_{{\operatorname{per}}\GAX}(\hh{S}[j\XX],\hh{C})=0,\quad j\neq-1.\end{gathered}$$ Moreover, $$\Hom_{{\operatorname{per}}\GAX}(\hh{S},\GAX[\XX])
=\Hom_{{\operatorname{per}}\GAX}(\GAX,\hh{S})\neq0,$$ which implies $\Hom_{{\operatorname{per}}\GAX}(\hh{S},\hh{C}[\XX])\neq0$. Therefore we deduce that the right perpendicular $$\hh{X}^\perp \colon=\{ Z\in{\operatorname{per}}\GAX \mid \Hom_{{\operatorname{per}}\GAX} (\hh{X},Z)=0 \}$$ of $\hh{X}$ in ${\operatorname{per}}\GAX$ is generated by $\bigcup_{j\leq0}\hh{C}[j\XX]$. Similarly, the left perpendicular $$^\perp\hh{Y}\colon=\{ Z\in{\operatorname{per}}\GAX \mid \Hom_{{\operatorname{per}}\GAX} (Z,\hh{Y})=0 \}$$ of $\hh{Y}$ in ${\operatorname{per}}\GAX$ is generated by $\bigcup_{j\geq0}\hh{C}[j\XX]$.
By [@IY Thm 1.1] we have the following equivalence between additive categories $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:IY}
\xymatrix{
F\colon
\hh{C}\quad\ar[rr]^{\cong}\ar@{^{(}->}[dr]&&\hh{C}(\GAX)\\
&{\operatorname{per}}\GAX\ar@{->>}[ur]^{\pi},
}\end{gathered}$$ noticing that $\hh{C}=\hh{X}^\perp\cap\;^\perp\hh{Y}[1]$. What is left to show is that $F\circ i_*$ is an equivalence as triangulated categories. As $\hh{C}$ is closed under shift functor $[1]$, the shift functor on $\hh{C}$ coincides with the one on $\hh{C}$ under $F$. This implies any triangle in $\hh{C}$ will be preserved in $\hh{C}$. Moreover, as $i_*$ is a functor between triangulated categories, it preserves shift functor and triangles. Hence $F\circ i_*$ preserves shift functors and triangles and it is an equivalence between triangulated categories.
Decorated surfaces and mapping class groups
-------------------------------------------
(0,0) circle (7); (360/7\*5:7) edge \[bend right=5\]node\[right\][$\eta_4$]{} (360/7\*1:7) edge \[bend right=10\]node\[right\][$\eta_3$]{} (360/7\*2:7) edge \[bend right=15\]node\[left\][$\eta_2$]{} (360/7\*3:7) edge \[bend right=25\]node\[left\][$\eta_1$]{} (360/7\*4:7); (360/7\*1:7) to\[bend left=-25\] node\[right\][$\eta_5$]{}(360/7\*0:7) to\[bend left=-25\] node\[right\][$\eta_6$]{}(-360/7:7);
in [1,...,7]{} (360/7:7)node\[white\][$\bullet$]{} node\[red\][$\circ$]{};
(0,0) circle (10); (360/7\*5:7) edge \[bend right=5\]node\[right\][$\eta_4$]{} (360/7\*1:7) edge \[bend right=10\]node\[right\][$\eta_3$]{} (360/7\*2:7) edge \[bend right=15\]node\[left\][$\eta_2$]{} (360/7\*3:7) edge \[bend right=25\]node\[left\][$\eta_1$]{} (360/7\*4:7); (360/7\*1:7) to\[bend left=-25\] node\[right\][$\eta_5$]{}(360/7\*0:7) to\[bend left=-25\] node\[right\][$\eta_6$]{}(-360/7:7);
in [1,...,7]{} (360/7:10)to(360/7:7)node\[white\][$\bullet$]{} node\[red\][$\circ$]{};
We fix a full formal arc system $\TT$ of $\SS$.
\[def:DMS\] The associated decorated surfaces $\surfo$ of $\SS$, with respect to $\TT$ is obtained from $\SS$ by pushing each marked point $Y_i$ in $\Y$ into the interior of $\SS$ via path $c_i$ (becoming a decorating point $Z_i$), such that
- they do not intersect pairwise.
- they do not intersect arcs in $\TT$.
Denote by ${\bigtriangleup}=\{Z_i\}_{i=1}^\aleph$ the set of decorating points and $\tcut_\TT$ the set of arcs $c_i$.
We have the following topological notions.
- The *mapping class group* ${\operatorname{MCG}}(\surf)$ is the group of isotopy classes of diffeomorphism of $\surfo$, where all diffeomorphism and isotopies are required to fix $\Y$ setwise.
- The *mapping class group* ${\operatorname{MCG}}(\surfo)$ is the group of isotopy classes of diffeomorphism of $\surfo$, where all diffeomorphism and isotopies are required to fix $\Y$ and ${\bigtriangleup}$ setwise.
- The kernel of the forgetful map ${\operatorname{MCG}}(\surfo)\to{\operatorname{MCG}}(\surf)$ is the *surface braid group* ${\operatorname{SBr}}(\surfo)$, that is, the fundamental group of the configuration space of $|{\bigtriangleup}|$ points in (the interior of) $\surf$, based at the set ${\bigtriangleup}$.
- A *closed arc* in $\surfo$ is (the isotopy class of) a simple curve in the interior of $\surfo$ that connects two decorating points in ${\bigtriangleup}$. Denote by $\CA(\surfo)$ the set of closed arcs on $\surfo$.
- Each closed arc $\eta\in\CA(\surfo)$ induces a (positive) braid twist $B_\eta\in{\operatorname{MCG}}(\surfo)$. The braid twist group ${\operatorname{BT}}(\surfo)$ is the subgroup of ${\operatorname{MCG}}(\surfo)$ generated by $\{B_\eta\mid\eta\in\CA(\surfo)\}$. Note that in fact we have ${\operatorname{BT}}(\surfo)\subset{\operatorname{SBr}}(\surfo)$.
The closed arcs in the decorated surface $\surfo$ provide a topological model for $\DX$, similar to the cases in [@KS; @QQ; @QZ2]. More precisely, we have the following Calabi-Yau-$\XX$ analogue of [@QQ Thm.1].
[@IQZ]\[thm:IQZ\] There is a bijection $$\underline{X}\colon \CA(\surfo)\to{\operatorname{Sph}}\DX/[\ZZ\XX]$$ that induces an isomorphism $$\iota_\TT\colon{\operatorname{BT}}(\surfo)\cong{\operatorname{ST}}\DX,$$ sending the braid twist $B_\eta$ of a closed arc $\eta$ to the spherical twist $\Phi_{\underline{X}(\eta)}$.
Similar to [@BS Thm. 9.9] (cf. [@KQ2 § 4.4]), we can consider a quotient group $\Aut^\circ\DX$ of some subgroup of $\Aut\DX$, which sits in the short exact sequence $$1\to{\operatorname{ST}}\DX\to\Aut^\circ\DX\to{\operatorname{MCG}}(\surf)\to1.$$
Log surface via cuts {#sec:log}
--------------------
For the later use (in Section \[sec:MC\], we discuss the topological construction of the log surface $\log\surfo$ from $\surfo$, where the grading can also be inherited.
\[def:cut\] A (topological) cut $\tcut$ of $\surfo$ is collection of isotopy classes of $\aleph$ simple (i.e. no self intersection) arcs on $\surfo$, such that
- each decorating point $Z_i\in{\bigtriangleup}$ is connected to a marked point $Y\in\Y$ by an arc $c_i\subset\surfo-{\bigtriangleup}$ in $\tcut$ and different decorating points connect to different marked points.
- $c_i$’s do not intersect pairwise.
For instant, the set $\tcut_\TT$ of arcs associated to a full formal arc system in Definition \[def:DMS\] is a cut.
\[con:top log\](Topological $\log$ surface) We can construct a log surface $\log\SSo$ from $\surfo$ as follows, with respect to a chosen cut $\cut$:
- Take $\ZZ$ copy of $\SSo$ and denote them by $\SSo^m$. On each sheet, there is a cut $\cut^m=\{c_i^m\}$.
- Cut each sheet $\SSo^m$ along all arcs $c_i^m\in\cut^m$ from the decorating point $Z_i^m$ to the marked point $Y_i^m$. Denote by $c_{i\pm}^m$ the cut marks (where $\pm$ are determined by the orientation.
- By identifying $c_{i+}^m$ with $c_{i-}^{m+1}$ for $m\in\ZZ, c_i\in\cut$, we glue $\{\SSo^m\mid m\in\ZZ\}$ together to get $\log\SSo$.
- $\log\SSo$ also inherits the grading of $\SSo^m$ via the gluing above.
- The mapping class group ${\operatorname{MCG}}(\SSo)$ canonically acts on $\log\SSo$ by acting on $\SSo^m$, for $m\in\ZZ$, where the acting is compatible with cutting and gluing. In particular, denote by ${\operatorname{BT}}(\log\SSo)$ the subgroup of ${\operatorname{MCG}}(\log\SSo)$ induced by ${\operatorname{BT}}(\SSo)\subset{\operatorname{MCG}}(\SSo)$.
- There is a deck transformation, also denoted by $q$, such that $q(\surfo^m)=\surfo^{m+1}$.
We will fix the $\log$-surface $\log\surfo$ with respect to the $\cut_\TT$ in this paper. Finally, denote by ${\operatorname{MCG}}(\log\surfo)$ the mapping class group of $\log\surfo$, which are generated by the deck transformation $q$ and those homeomorphisms induced from ${\operatorname{MCG}}(\surfo)$. Clearly $q$ is in the center of ${\operatorname{MCG}}(\log\surfo)$.
So the map $\underline{X}$ in Theorem \[thm:IQZ\] can be lifted as: $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:string}
X\colon \CA^\circ(\log\surfo)\to{\operatorname{Sph}}\DX\end{gathered}$$ where $\CA^\circ(\log\surfo)$ is the set of closed arcs on $\log\surfo$, which are lifts of closed arcs in $\CA(\surfo)$.
The following is a characterization of cuts.
\[lem:cuts\] The set $\Cut(\surfo)$ of cuts is a ${\operatorname{SBr}}(\surfo)$-torsor.
First, suppose there is an element $b\in{\operatorname{SBr}}(\surfo)$ and a cut $\cut$ such that $b(\cut)=\cut$. As ${\operatorname{SBr}}(\surfo)={\operatorname{MCG}}(\surfo)/{\operatorname{MCG}}(\surf)$, we can assume that $b$ acts as identity on $\surfo-\cut$ and hence $b$ is identify in $\surfo$. Second, for any two cuts $\cut_1$ and $\cut_2$, one can construct an element $b\in{\operatorname{SBr}}(\surfo)$ satisfying $b(\cut_1)=b(\cut_2)$ as follows:
- First take a homeomorphism/diffeomorphism $b_1\colon\surfo\to\surfo^1$ that acts as identity outside the neighbourhood of $\cut_1=\{c\}$ and pulling decorations ${\bigtriangleup}=\{Z_i\}$ along $\{c_i^1\}$ to neighbourhood of $\Y=\{Y_i\}$.
- Take another homeomorphism $b_{21}\colon\surfo^1\to\surfo^2$ that move the decorations (around $\Y$) on the arcs $\cut_2=\{c_i^2\}$.
- Finally take a homeomorphism $b_2\colon\surfo^2\to\surfo$ that move the decoration along $\{c_i^2\}$ back to ${\bigtriangleup}$.
Then the composition $b_2\circ b_{21}\circ b_1$ gives $b$ as required.
Quadratic differentials on Riemann surfaces {#sec:HKK}
===========================================
Preliminaries
-------------
Let $\xx$ be a Riemann surface and $\omega_\xx$ be its holomorphic cotangent bundle. A *meromorphic quadratic differential* $\phi$ on $\xx$ is a meromorphic section of the line bundle $\omega_{\xx}^{2}$. In terms of a local coordinate $z$ on $\xx$, such a $\phi$ can be written as $\phi(z)=g(z)\, {\mathrm{d}}z^{\otimes 2}$, where $g(z)$ is a meromorphic function. Denote by $\Zer(\phi)$ the set of zeros of $\phi$, $\Pol_j(\phi)$ the set of poles of $\phi$ with order $j$ and $\Crit(\phi)=\Zer(\phi)\cup\Pol(\phi)$.
At a point of $\xx^\circ=\xx \setminus \Crit(\phi)$, there is a distinguished local coordinate $\omega$, uniquely defined up to transformations of the form $\omega \mapsto \pm\, \omega+\operatorname{const}$, with respect to which $\phi(\omega)={\mathrm{d}}\omega^{\otimes 2}$. In terms of a local coordinate $z$, we have $w=\int \sqrt{g(z)}{\mathrm{d}}z$. A quadratic differential $\phi$ on $\xx$ determines the $\phi$-metric on $\surp$, which is defined locally by pulling back the Euclidean metric on $\kong{C}$ using a distinguished coordinate $\omega$. Thus, there are geodesics on $\surp$ and each geodesics have a constant phase with respect to $\omega$.
Trajectories and horizonal strip decompositions
-----------------------------------------------
In this section, we summarize the global structure of the horizontal trajectories and horizontal strip decompositions (following, e.g. [@BS § 3] and [@HKK § ]).
A (horizontal) *trajectory* of $\phi$ on $\surp$ is a maximal horizontal geodesic $\gamma\colon(0,1)\to\surp$, with respect to the $\phi$-metric. The trajectories of a meromeorphic quadratic differential $\phi$ provide the *horizontal foliation* on $\xx$.
There are the following types of trajectories of a quadratic differential $\phi$ we are interested in:
- *saddle trajectories* whose both ends are in $\Zer(\phi)$;
- *separating trajectories* with one end in $\Zer(\phi)$ and the other in $\Pol(\phi)$;
- *generic trajectories* whose both ends are in $\Pol(\phi)$;
- *closed trajectories* are simple closed curves;
- *recurrent trajectories* are recurrent in at least one direction.
By removing all separating trajectories (which are finitely many) from $\surp$, the remaining open surface splits as a disjoint union of connected components. Each component is one of the following types:
- a *half-plane*, i.e. is isomorphic to $\{z\in \kong{C}\colon\operatorname{Im}(z)>0\}$ equipped with the differential ${\mathrm{d}}z^{\otimes 2}$ for some $a\leq b \in \kong{R}$. It is swept out by generic trajectories which connect a fixed pole to itself.
- a *horizontal strip*, i.e. is isomorphic to $\{z\in \kong{C}\colon a<\operatorname{Im}(z)<b\}$ equipped with the differential ${\mathrm{d}}z^{\otimes 2}$ for some $a\leq b \in \kong{R}$. It is swept out by generic trajectories connecting two (not necessarily distinct) poles.
- a *ring domain*, i.e. is isomorphic to $\{z\in\kong{C}\colon a<|z|<b\}\subset\kong{C}^*$ equipped with the differential $r{\mathrm{d}}z^{\otimes 2}/z^2$ for some $r\in\kong{R}_{<0}$ It is swept out by closed trajectories.
- a *spiral domain*, which is defined to be the interior of the closure of a recurrent trajectory.
We call this union the *horizontal strip decomposition* of $\xx$ with respect to $\phi$. A quadratic differential $\phi$ on $\xx$ is *saddle-free*, if it has no saddle trajectory. Note the following:
- In each horizontal strip, the trajectories are isotopy to each other.
- the boundary of any components consists of separating trajectories.
- In each horizontal strip, there is an unique geodesic, the *saddle connection*, connecting the two zeros on its boundary.
- If $\phi$ is saddle-free, then $\Pol(\phi)$ must be nonempty and, by [@BS Lem. 3.1], $\phi$ has no closed or recurrent trajectories. Thus, in the horizontal strip decomposition of $\xx$ with respect to $\phi$, there are only half-planes and horizontal strips.
\[rem:GMN\] In the unpunctured Bridgeland-Smith setting [@BS; @KQ2], a GMN differential on $\rs$ satisfies the following condition:
- all the zeroes are simple zeroes (i.e. of order $1$).
- every pole of has order bigger than 2.
This fits perfectly with triangulated surfaces in the theory of cluster algebras, cf. [@FST]. For instance, the foliation of a quadratic differential on $\PP^1$ with type $(1,1,1,-7)$, i.e. has $3$ simple zeroes and one order $7$ pole, is shown in Figure \[fig:Quad A2\]. The left picture is the real blow-up part and the right picture is the neighbourhood of the pole. Note that, in the pictures
- the blue vertices are poles or marked points,
- the red vertices are simple zeroes,
- the green arcs are geodesics,
- the black arcs are separating trajectories,
- the red arcs are the saddle connections in the horizontal strips.
Notice that the isotopy classes of separating trajectories in the left picture of Figure \[fig:Quad A2\] form a (WKB-)triangulation of the marked surface (pentagon).
(18+72:5) coordinate (v2) (18+72\*3:5) coordinate (v1) (18+72\*2:2.7) coordinate (v3) (0,-1) coordinate (v4); in [.1, .18, .26, .34, .42, .5,.58, .66, .74, .82, .9]{} [ (v3)–(v4) coordinate\[pos=\] (m0); plot \[smooth,tension=.3\] coordinates [(v1)(m0)(v2)]{}; ]{} (v4)to(v1)to(v3)to(v2)to(v4);
(18+72:5) coordinate (v2) (18+72\*4:5) coordinate (v1) (18+72\*0:2.7) coordinate (v3); in [.1, .18, .26, .34, .42, .5,.58, .66, .74, .82, .9]{} [ (v3)–(v4) coordinate\[pos=\] (m0); plot \[smooth,tension=.3\] coordinates [(v1)(m0)(v2)]{}; ]{} (v4)to(v1)to(v3)to(v2)to(v4); (18+72:5) coordinate (v2) (18+72\*2:5) coordinate (v1) (18+72\*2:2.7) coordinate (v3); (v1)–(v2) coordinate\[pos=.4\] (v4); in [.2,.32,.45,.55,.68,.8, .9]{} [ (v3)–(v4) coordinate\[pos=\] (m0); plot \[smooth,tension=.4\] coordinates [(v1)(m0)(v2)]{}; ]{} (18+72\*3:5) coordinate (v2); (v1)–(v2) coordinate\[pos=.4\] (v4); in [.2,.32,.45,.55,.68,.8, .9]{} [ (v3)–(v4) coordinate\[pos=\] (m0); plot \[smooth,tension=.4\] coordinates [(v1)(m0)(v2)]{}; ]{} (18+72:5) coordinate (v2) (18+72\*0:5) coordinate (v1) (18+72\*0:2.7) coordinate (v3); (v1)–(v2) coordinate\[pos=.4\] (v4); in [.2,.32,.45,.55,.68,.8, .9]{} [ (v3)–(v4) coordinate\[pos=\] (m0); plot \[smooth,tension=.4\] coordinates [(v1)(m0)(v2)]{}; ]{} (18+72\*4:5) coordinate (v2); (v1)–(v2) coordinate\[pos=.4\] (v4); in [.2,.32,.45,.55,.68,.8, .9]{} [ (v3)–(v4) coordinate\[pos=\] (m0); plot \[smooth,tension=.4\] coordinates [(v1)(m0)(v2)]{}; ]{} (18+72\*3:5) coordinate (v2) (18+72\*4:5) coordinate (v1) (0,-1) coordinate (v3); (v1)–(v2) coordinate\[pos=.5\] (v4); in [.2,.3,.4,.5,.6,.7,.8,.9]{} [ (v3)–(v4) coordinate\[pos=\] (m0); plot \[smooth,tension=.4\] coordinates [(v1)(m0)(v2)]{}; ]{} (18+72\*2:5)to(18+72\*2:2.7)(18:5)to(18:2.7); in [1,2,3,4,5]{} [ (18+72\*:5)to(90+72\*:5);]{} in [1,2,3,4,5]{} [ (18+72\*:5)node[$\bullet$]{};]{} (18+72\*2:2.7)node[$\bullet$]{}node\[white\]nodeto (0,-1)node[$\bullet$]{}node\[white\]nodeto (18+72\*0:2.7)node[$\bullet$]{}node\[white\]node;
(0,0)circle(3.6)(-90:4.5); in [0,1,2,3,4]{} [ (72\*+0:3.6)to(0,0); plot \[smooth,tension=1\] coordinates [(0,0)(15+72\*:3)(72-15+72\*:3)(0,0)]{}; plot \[smooth,tension=1\] coordinates [(0,0)(20+72\*:2.5)(72-20+72\*:2.5)(0,0)]{}; plot \[smooth,tension=1\] coordinates [(0,0)(25+72\*:2)(72-25+72\*:2)(0,0)]{}; plot \[smooth,tension=1\] coordinates [(0,0)(30+72\*:1.5)(72-30+72\*:1.5)(0,0)]{}; ]{} (0,0)node[$\bullet$]{};
Exponential type singularities {#sec:Exp}
------------------------------
In the flat surface setting of [@HKK], which corresponds to Section \[sec:TFuk\], they consider the exponential type singularities of index $(k,l)$ of a quadratic differential $\phi$ on a Riemann surface $\rs$ with local coordinate as $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:exp}
e^{z^{-k}}z^{-l} g(z){\mathrm{d}}z^{\otimes2}\end{gathered}$$ for $(k,l)\in\ZZ_{>0}\times\ZZ$ and some non-zero holomorphic function $g(z)$ (near the singularity). In fact, we restrict ourselves to the case when the flat surface $\xxp=(\xx,\phi)$ has only the singularities above. By [@HKK Prop. 2.5], for a singularity $p$ in $\xxp$ with local coordinate , there are exactly $k$ additional points in the $\phi$-metric completion in the neighborhood of $p$, each of which is an $\infty$-angle singularities, also known as the conical singularity with infinity angle described as below.
\[def:conical\] Consider the spaces $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:C_m}
C_m \colon=\ZZ_m\times\RR\times\RR_{\geq0}/\sim, \qquad (k,x,0)\sim (k+1,-x,0)
\text{ for } x\le 0\end{gathered}$$ for $m\in\ZZ_{>0}$ and $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:C_infty}
C_\infty\colon=\ZZ\times\RR\times\RR_{\geq0}/\sim, \qquad (k,x,0)\sim (k+1,-x,0)
\text{ for } x\le 0.\end{gathered}$$ The origin $0=(0,0,0)\sim(k,0,0)$ is a distinguished point in these spaces. The standard flat structure of $\RR^2$ makes $C_?\setminus\{0\}$ a smooth flat surface with metric completion $C_?$. The singularity (for $m\ne2$) is a conical singularity with $m\pi$ angle for $C_m$ and is a conical singularity with infinity angle for $C_\infty$.
Note that the conical singularities with $3\pi$ angle correspond to simple zeros that appear in [@BS]; in general, the conical singularities with $m\pi$ angle correspond to zeros of order $m-2$, that will appear in the Calabi-Yau-$m$ analogue of [@BS], cf. [@I] for type A case. The graded marked surfaces in Section \[sec:TFuk\] are the flat surfaces with conical singularities of infinity angle. Note that the local behavior in the origin of $C_\infty$ is similar to zeros instead of pole (in the Bridgeland-Smith setting) as a trajectory attending to such points has finite length.
Saddle connections and Cores {#sec:Quad_inf}
----------------------------
Let $\xx_\sg$ be the set of singularities of the flat surface $\xxp$ (where the smooth part of $\xxp$ is just $\xx$). We have the following notions.
- A *saddle connection* is a maximal geodesics converging towards points in $\xx_\sg$ in both directions. Note that saddle trajectories are saddle connections which are horizonal. Also, the endpoints are not required to be distinct.
- The *core* $\Core(\phi)$ is the convex hull of $\xx_\sg$ by [@HKK Prop 2.2], which contains all saddle trajectories. Moreover, $\Core(\phi)$ is a deformation retract of $\xxp$ provided that each point on $\xxp$ has finite distance to $\Core(\phi)$ (with respect to the $\phi$-metric), cf. [@HKK Prop 2.3].
We will also use $\xx^\phi$ to denote the oriented real blow-up of $\xx$ at those singularities, where we only apply the blow-up at points that behave like poles, in the sense that the trajectories approaching those points have infinity length. The rest of the singularities will be marked on $\xx^\phi$. Comparing to the convention in [@HKK], their marked boundaries components are marked points in our setting. Recall the main result of [@HKK].
\[def:nn\] Let $\surf$ be a graded marked surface with the numerical data $$\num(\surf)=(g,b;\uk,\ul;{\operatorname{LP}}_g).$$ An $\surf$-framed quadratic differential $(\rs,\phi,h)$ on $\surf$ consists of a quadratic differential $\phi$ on some Riemann surface $\xx$ together with a diffeomorphism $h$ from the real blow-up $\xxp$ to $\surf$, such that
- the numerical data of the grading $h^*(\phi)$ on $\surf$ (the pull-back of the $\phi$-induced grading on $\rs$) equals $\num(\surf)$.
Two $\surf$-framed quadratic differentials $(\rs_i,\phi_i,h_i)$ are equivalent if there exists a biholomorphism $f\colon\rs_1\to\rs_2$ such that
1. $f^*(\phi_2)=\phi_1$;
2. $h_2^{-1}\circ f_*\circ h_1\in\Diff_0(\surf)$, where $f_*\colon\xx_1^{\phi_1}\to\xx_2^{\phi_2}$ is the induced diffeomorphism.
Denote by ${\operatorname{Quad}}_\infty(\surf)$ the space of $\surf$-framed quadratic differentials on $\surf$. For simplicity, we will only mention a quadratic differential $\phi$ on $\surf$ (omitting $\xx$ and $h$).
[@HKK Thm. 5.2, Thm 5.3]\[thm:HKK geo\] There is the following identification $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:chi_infty}
\chi_\infty\colon {\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}(\surf,\partial\surf;\ZZ_\Sp)\to\Grot(\DI),\end{gathered}$$ where $\ZZ_\Sp=\ZZ\otimes_{\ZZ_2}\Sp$ for $\Sp$ being the canonical double cover of $\rs$.Moreover, there is an embedding $\Xi_\infty$ fits into the following commutative diagram $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:i infinity}
\xymatrix@C=6pc{
{\operatorname{Quad}}_\infty(\surf)\ar[r]^{\Xi_\infty} \ar[d]_{\Pi_\infty} &
\Stab\DI \ar[d]^{\hh{Z}_\infty}\\ \Hom( {\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}(\surf,\partial\surf;\ZZ_\Sp),\bC) \ar[r]^{ \chi_*} &
\Hom( \Grot(\DI),\bC),
}\end{gathered}$$ whose image consists of connected components of $\Stab\DI$ and the period map $\Pi_\infty$ becomes the central charge $\hh{Z}_\infty$. Denote the image by $\Stap\DI$, as the the principal part of this space of stability conditions.
As mentioned in Remark \[rem:inducing\], we are interested in $q$-stability conditions on $\CStab\DX$ induced from $\Stap{{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty(\TT)}$.
\[def:QStap\] Denote by $\CStab\DX$ the subspace of $\CStab\DX$ consisting of closed $q$-stability conditions $\Psi(\sigma)$ for $\Psi\in{\operatorname{ST}}\DX$ and $\sigma$ is induced from some triple $({{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty(\TT)},{\widehat{\sigma}},s)$ as in Theorem \[thm:IQ\] for some ${\widehat{\sigma}}\in\Stap{{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty(\TT)}$ and $s\in\bC$.
We end this section by pointing out that, for ${\widehat{\sigma}}=\xi_\infty(\phi)$, the ${\widehat{\sigma}}$-semistable objects corresponds to saddle trajectories of $\phi$ (on $\surf$).
$q_s$-Quadratic differentials {#sec:q_def}
=============================
In this section, we fix a complex number $s \in \bC$ with ${\operatorname{Re}}(s)>2$ and set $q_s=e^{\ii \pi s}$.
$q_s$-Quadratic differentials {#sec:q_quad}
-----------------------------
First we consider $q_s$-quadratic differentials on a disk. We fix the following notations:
- a disk $D:=\{z \in \bC\,\vert\,|z|<1\,\}$,
- a punctured disk $D^*:=D\setminus\{0\}$,
- the universal cover $\widetilde{D^*}$ of $D^*$.
We note that $\widetilde{D^*}$ is isomorphic to the half-plane $$\widetilde{D^*}\cong \{w \in \bC\,\vert\, {\operatorname{Re}}(w)<0\,\}$$ and the covering map is given by $$\widetilde{D^*} \to D^*,\quad w \mapsto e^w.$$ Consider a holomorphic quadratic differential $$\xi=e^{(k s+l)w+2}{\mathrm{d}}w^{\otimes2}$$ on $\widetilde{D^*}$ where $k,l \in \ZZ$. Let $z=e^w$ and then ${\mathrm{d}}z= e^w {\mathrm{d}}w$. The quadratic differential $\xi$ can be considered as a multi-valued quadratic differential $z^{ks+l}{\mathrm{d}}z^{\otimes2}$ on $D$ ramified at $0 \in D$. Let $\gamma$ be a counter-clockwise loop around $0$. Then, since the action of the deck transformation group $\pi_1(D^*)\cong \langle \gamma \rangle$ on $\widetilde{D^*}$ is given by $\gamma(w)=w+2 \pi \ii$, the monodromy of $\xi$ is given by $$\gamma^* \xi=q_s^{2k}\xi.$$
Now we consider general cases. Let $\rs$ be a compact Riemann surface and $\Ram \subset \rs$ be a set of finite points. Denote by $$\Pi \colon \widetilde{\rs^{\circ}}\to \rs^{\circ}$$ the universal cover of $\rs^{\circ}:=\rs \setminus \Ram$. In this paper, a *multi-valued quadratic differential on $\rs$ ramified at $\Ram$* refers to a holomorphic quadratic differential on $\widetilde{\rs^{\circ}}$. Note that the fundamental group $\pi_1(\rs^{\circ},*)$ acts on $\widetilde{\rs^{\circ}}$ as the group of deck transformations. For a multi-valued quadratic differential $\xi$, denote by $\gamma^* \xi$ the pull-back of $\xi$ via the action of a deck transformation $\gamma \in \pi_1(\rs^{\circ},*)$.
\[def:q\_quad\] A *$q_s$-quadratic differential $\xi$ on $\rs$ ramified at $\Ram$* is defined to be a multi-valued quadratic differential on $\rs$ ramified at $\Ram$ which satisfies the condition $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:m gamma}
\gamma^* \xi=q_s^{2m(\gamma)}\xi\end{gathered}$$ for any $\gamma \in \pi_1(\rs^{\circ},*)$ where $k(\gamma) \in \ZZ$ is some integer.
We consider zeros and poles of $q_s$-quadratic differentials. For a point $p \in \rs$, we denote by $D_p$ a small disk with the center $p$ and a coordinate $z \in D_p$. (Similarly, we use notations $D_p^*$ and $\widetilde{D^*_p}$.) Then we have $D_p^* \subset \rs^{\circ}$ for $p \in \Ram$ and the pull-back $\Pi^{-1}(D_p^*)$ consists of (countable) disjoint union of $\widetilde{D^*_p}$. We say a $q_s$-quadratic differential $\xi$ has the local form $$\xi=c\, z^{k_p s+l_p}{\mathrm{d}}z^{\otimes2}$$ on $D_p$ if $\xi$ can be written $\xi=c\,e^{(k_p s+l_p)w+2}{\mathrm{d}}w^{\otimes2} $ on some connected component $\widetilde{D^*_p} \subset \Pi^{-1}(D_p^*)$ where $c\in \bC$ is some constant and $k_p, l_p \in \ZZ$. Note that if $\xi$ takes the form $\xi=c\,e^{(k_p s+l_p)w+2}{\mathrm{d}}w^{\otimes2} $ on some connected component of $\Pi^{-1}(D_p^*)$, then $\xi$ also takes the form $\xi =c\, q_s^{2l}\,e^{(k_p s+l_p)w+2}{\mathrm{d}}w^{\otimes2} $ on the other connected component by Definition \[def:q\_quad\] where $l \in \ZZ$.
We introduce the notion of zeros and poles for $q_s$-quadratic differentials. For a $q_s$-quadratic differential $\xi$, assume that $\xi$ has the local form $\xi=c\, z^{k_p s+l_p}{\mathrm{d}}z^{\otimes2}$ on $D_p$ for $p \in \Ram$ where $c \in \bC$ and $k_p,l_p \in \ZZ$. The point $p$ is called
- a *zero of order $(k_p s+l_p)$*,$\;\,\;$ if ${\operatorname{Re}}(k_p s+l_p)>0$,
- a *pole of order $-(k_p s+l_p)$*, if ${\operatorname{Re}}(k_p s+l_p)<0$.
If a pole $p$ satisfies ${\operatorname{Re}}(k_p s+l_p)<-2$, then we call $p$ a *higher order pole*.
We introduce the following terminologies.
- A zero $Z$ of a $q_s$-quadratic differential $\xi$ is *$s$-simple* if $\xi $ has the local form $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:s-simple}
\xi=c z^{s-2}dz^{\otimes 2}\end{gathered}$$ around $p$.
- If a pole $p$ of $q_s$-quadratic differential $\xi$ has the local form $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:s-pole}
\xi=c z^{-k(s-2)-l}dz^{\otimes 2}\end{gathered}$$ around $p$, we say $p$ is an *$s$-pole of type $(k,l)$*.
For a $q_s$-quadratic differential $\xi$, we can always associate a multi-set of pairs of integers $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:ukul}
(\uk,\ul)\colon=\{(k_1,l_1),\dots,(k_b,l_b)\}\end{gathered}$$ by gathering all the types of $s$-poles of $\xi$ where $b$ is the number of poles of $\xi$. We call this set an *$s$-polar type of $\xi$*.
Note that if $s\ \in \QQ$, the pair of integers $(k_i,l_i)$ is not determined uniquely from the local form $\xi$ around the corresponding $s$-pole. Therefore in this case, we consider the $s$-polar type $(\uk,\ul)$ is an additional information for $\xi$.
We recall that a $q_s$-quadratic differential $\xi$ defines the monodromy representation $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:rho}
\rho_s \colon \pi_1(\rs^{\circ},*) \to \bC^*,
\quad \gamma \mapsto q_s^{2m(\gamma)}\end{gathered}$$ where $m(\gamma)$ is given by . In this paper, we put the following assumption for $q_s$-quadratic differentials.
\[ass:trivial\] For a $q_s$-quadratic differential $\xi$, there is a simply connected open domain $ U \subset \rs$ satisfying the following two conditions:
- $U$ contains all ramification points $\Ram$, i.e. $\Ram \subset U$,
- the induced monodromy representation $\rho_s \circ \iota_* \colon \pi_1(\rs \setminus U,*) \to \bC^*$ through the inclusion $\iota \colon \rs \setminus U \to \rs^{\circ}$ is trivial.
Now we introduce the following class of $q_s$-quadratic differentials. Later we will consider the moduli space of these $q_s$-quadratic differentials.
\[def:BS\_quad\] Let $g \ge 0$ be a non-negative integer and $(\uk,\ul)$ as in be a multi-set of pairs of integers satisfying $k_i>0$ and . A *CY-$s$ type $q_s$-quadratic differential* $\xi$ on genus $g$ Riemann surfaces $\rs$ is a $q_s$-quadratic differential satisfying:
- All zeros are $s$-simple. Denote by ${\bigtriangleup}=\Zer(\xi)$ the set of $s$-simple zeros.
- The number of $s$-poles is $b$ and the $s$-polar type is $(\uk,\ul)$.
- All $s$-poles are higher order $s$-poles, namely $${\operatorname{Re}}(k_i (s-2)+l_i)>2,\qquad\forall i=1,\dots,b.$$
- Assumption \[ass:trivial\].
Therefore the set of ramification points is $\Ram={\bigtriangleup}\bigcup\Pol(\xi)$ in this case. Next, we clarify the relationship between the number of $s$-simple zeros and the $s$-polar type.
\[lem:zeros\] Let $\xi$ be a CY-$s$ type $q_s$-quadratic differential with an $s$-polar type $(\uk,\ul)$ in . Then the number of $s$-simple zeros $\aleph$ is given by $$\aleph=\sum_{i=1}^b k_i.$$
First we consider the case $s \notin \QQ$. Let $Z_1,\dots,Z_{\aleph}$ be $s$-simple zeros and $p_1,\dots,p_b$ be $s$-poles of $\xi$. We assume that the type of the $s$-pole $p_i$ is $(k_i,l_i)$. Denote by $\gamma_{j}$ the loop around $Z_j$ and by $\delta_i$ the loop around $p_i$. Then Assumption \[ass:trivial\] implies that $$\prod_{j=1}^{\aleph} \rho_s(\gamma_j) \prod_{i=1}^b \rho_s(\delta_i)=1.$$ Since $\rho_s(\gamma_j)=q_s^2$ and $\rho(\delta_i)=q_s^{-2k_i}$, the above condition implies $$\left(2\aleph-2\sum_{i=1}^b k_i \right) s=2 m$$ for some $m \in \ZZ$. Then the lemma follows since $s \notin \QQ$.
Next we consider the case $s \in \QQ$. Assume $s=j/m$ where $j,m \in \ZZ$. Then $\xi^m$ is a single-valued meromorphic section of $\omega_S^{\otimes 2m}$ with $\aleph$ zeros of order $m(s-2)$ and poles of order $m(k_1(s-2)+l_1),\dots,m(k_b(s-2)+l_b)$. Then Riemann-Roch theorem implies $$m(4g-4)= m \aleph (s-2)-m\sum_{i=1}^b (k_i(s-2)+l_i)$$ and thus the lemma noticing .
When $s=3$, we recover the GMN differential on Riemann surfaces in [@BS] for (unpunctured) marked surfaces. For example, when $\rs$ is $\PP^1$ with numerical data (cf. Example \[ex:num\]) $$g=0,\;b=1,\;(k,l)=(3,4),$$ we will get the $A_2$ example in Remark \[rem:GMN\] and Figure \[fig:Quad A2\]. $$$$
Log surfaces {#sec:log_surf}
------------
Recall that $g \ge 0$ is a non-negative integer and $(\uk,\ul)$ is a multi-set of pairs of integers satisfying $k_i >0$ and . As in the previous section, we consider a CY-$s$ type $q_s$-quadratic differential $\xi$ on a genus $g$ Riemann surface $\rs$ with an $s$-polar type $(\uk,\ul)$.
We define the representation of $\pi_1(\rs^{\circ},*)$ on the infinite cyclic group $\langle q \rangle$ as follows. For $\xi$, let $Z_1,\dots,Z_{\aleph}$ be $s$-simple zeros and $p_1,\dots,p_b$ be $s$-poles of type $(k_1,l_1),\dots,(k_b,l_b)$. By Assumption \[ass:trivial\], the simply connected domain $U \subset \rs$ contains $Z_j$ and $p_i$. Denote by $\gamma_{j}$ the loop around $Z_j$ and by $\delta_i$ the loop around $p_i$ in $U$. We define the representation $$\underline{\rho} \colon \pi_1(U \setminus \Ram, *) \to \langle q \rangle$$ by $\underline{\rho}(\gamma_j):=q$ and $\underline{\rho}(\delta_i):=q^{-k_i}$. Note that for a loop $\Gamma$ encircling all points in $\Ram$, it satisfies $\underline{\rho}(\Gamma)=1$. Then we can extend $\underline{\rho}$ to the representation $$\rho \colon \pi_1(\rs^{\circ},*)\to \langle q \rangle$$ to satisfy
- the restriction of $\rho$ on $U \setminus \Ram$ is $\underline{\rho}$,
- any loop $\gamma \in \pi_1(\rs \setminus U)$ satisfies $\rho(\gamma)=1$.
By using the representation $\rho$, we shall introduce log surfaces.
The *log surface $\log \rs^{\circ}$ associated to $\xi$* is defined to be the covering space $\pi \colon \log \rs^{\circ}
\to \rs^{\circ}$ corresponding to the representation $\rho$. Since $\xi$ is a single valued quadratic differential on $\log \rs^{\circ}$, the log surface has the natural grading (see [@HKK Section 2.2]). The infinite cyclic group $\langle q\rangle$ acts on $\log \rs^{\circ}$ as the group of deck transformations.
We consider the relationship between the above representation $\rho$ and the monodromy representation $\rho_s$ (\[eq:rho\])defined in the previous section.
\[lem:rel\] Define a group homomorphism $$\operatorname{ev}_s^{\otimes 2} \colon \langle q \rangle \to
\bC^* \quad q \mapsto q_s^2,$$ then we have $\rho_s=\operatorname{ev}_s^2 \circ \rho$.
\[rem:s.v.\] Note that Lemma \[lem:rel\] implies that the CY-$s$ type $q_s$-quadratic differential $\xi$ is a single-valued non-zero holomorphic quadratic differential on $\log \rs^{\circ}$ satisfying $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:GG0}
q^* \xi=q_s^2 \xi.\end{gathered}$$
In the last of this section, we remark the following. Let $p$ be an $s$-simple zero or an $s$-pole of $\xi$ and $\gamma_p$ be a counter-clockwise loop around $p$. Assume $\rho(\gamma_p)=q^m$. Take a small disk $D_p \subset \rs$ with the center $p$ and set $D_p^*:=D \setminus\{p\}$. Then the inverse image $\pi^{-1}(D^*)$ consists of $|m|$ connected components $\widetilde{D^*_1},\dots,\widetilde{D^*_k}$ such that each component $\widetilde{D^*_i}$ is isomorphic to the universal covering $\widetilde{D_p^*}$ of the punctured disk $D_p^*$. The deck transformation $q$ maps $\widetilde{D^*_i}$ to $\widetilde{D^*_{i+1}}$, up to modulo $|m|$.
Hat homology groups
-------------------
Let $\log \rs^{\circ}$ be the logarithmic surface associated to a $q_s$-quadratic differential $\xi$ on $\rs$. Consider the square root $\psi_s:=\sqrt{\xi}$, which is a double-valued holomorphic $1$-form on $\log \rs^{\circ}$. Then $\psi_s$ defines the monodromy representation $$\rho^{\frac{1}{2}} \colon \pi_1(\rs^{\circ},*)
\to \langle q,-q \rangle,\quad \gamma \mapsto
\pm q^{m(\gamma)}$$ where $\gamma^* \psi_s=\pm q_s^{m(\gamma)}\psi_s$. The image of $\rho^{\frac{1}{2}}$ is given as one of the following two cases $$\Im \rho^{\frac{1}{2}}=\langle q \rangle \quad \text{or}\quad
\Im \rho^{\frac{1}{2}}=\langle q,-q \rangle.$$ We consider the Riemann surface associated $\psi_s$ as follows.
The *spectral cover* $$\widetilde{\Sp} \colon \log \hat{\rs}^{\circ} \to \log \rs^{\circ}$$ is defined to be the covering space corresponding to the representation $\rho^{\frac{1}{2}}$.
The holomorphic $1$-form is single-valued on $\log \hat{\rs}^{\circ}$. Note that
- $\log \hat{\rs}^{\circ}$ is a double cover of $\log \rs^{\circ}$ if $\Im \rho^{\frac{1}{2}}=\langle q,-q \rangle$;
- $\log \hat{\rs}^{\circ}=\log \rs^{\circ}$ if $\Im \rho^{\frac{1}{2}}=\langle q \rangle$.
Let $\hat{\rs}^{\circ}$ be the covering space $\Sp \colon \hat{\rs}^{\circ} \to \rs^{\circ}$ corresponding to the representation $$\pi_1(\rs^{\circ},*) \to \{\pm 1\}$$ given by sending $q \mapsto 1$ in the representation $\rho^{\frac{1}{2}}$. Then the constructions give the following commutative diagram: $$\xymatrix {
\log \hat{\rs}^{ \circ} \ar[d]_{\widetilde{\Sp}} \ar[rr]^{\hat{\pi}}
&& \hat{\rs}^{\circ} \ar[d]^{\Sp} \\
\log \rs^{ \circ} \ar[rr]^{\pi} && \rs^{\circ} .
}$$ We also note that the double cover $\Sp \colon \hat{\rs}^{\circ} \to \rs^{\circ}$ can be extended to the ramified double cover $\Sp \colon \hat{\rs} \to \rs$ whose ramification points are poles of $\xi$ with odd $l_i$.
To consider an appropriate integration of $\psi_s$ on $\log \hat{\rs}^{\circ}$, we introduce the following homology group.
The *hat homology group* of $\xi$ is defined by $${\widehat{\operatorname{\bf H}}_{}}(\xi):=\{\,\gamma \in {\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}(\log \hat{\rs}^{\circ};\ZZ) \,\vert\,
\tau_* \gamma=- \gamma\,\}$$ if $\log \hat{\rs}^{\circ}$ is a double cover of $\log S^{\circ}$ with the covering involution $\tau$, and by $${\widehat{\operatorname{\bf H}}_{}}(\xi):={\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}(\log \rs^{\circ};\ZZ)$$ if $\log \hat{\rs}^{\circ} =\log \rs^{\circ}$. The group ${\widehat{\operatorname{\bf H}}_{}}(\xi)$ has an $R=\ZZ[q^{\pm 1}]$-module structure induced from the action of the deck transformation group $\langle q,-q \rangle$ (or $\langle q \rangle$) on $\log \hat{\rs}^{\circ}$.
We note that implies $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:GG}
q^* \psi_s=q_s \psi_s.\end{gathered}$$ The integration of $\psi_s$ on cycles in ${\widehat{\operatorname{\bf H}}_{}}(\xi)$ defines an $R$-linear map $$Z_{\xi} \colon {\widehat{\operatorname{\bf H}}_{}}(\xi) \to \bC_s,\quad
\gamma \mapsto \int_{\gamma}\psi_s$$ since $$\int_{q_* \gamma}\psi_s=\int_{\gamma}q^* \psi_s=
q_s \int_{\gamma} \psi_s.$$ Recall that $\bC$ is the complex plane whose $R$-structure is given by We call $Z_{\xi}$ the *period* of $\xi$.
The rest of this section is devoted to show the following.
\[prop:rank1\] Let $\xi$ be a CY-$s$ type $q_s$-quadratic differential of genus $g$ and an $s$-polar type $(\uk,\ul)$ as in . Then the associated hat homology group ${\widehat{\operatorname{\bf H}}_{}}(\xi)$ is a free $R$-module of rank $$n=2g-2+b+\sum_{i=1}^b k_i.$$
To show the above, we prepare some results. Let $B^{(m)}$ be a bouquet of $m$ circles joined at the point $*$: $$B^{(m)}=S^1 \vee \cdots \vee S^1.$$ Then the fundamental group of $B^{(m)}$ is the free group with $m$ generators $$\pi_1(B^{(m)},*) \cong \langle \gamma_1,\dots,\gamma_m \rangle$$ where $\gamma_i$ is a loop around the $i$-th circle of $B^{(m)}$. Let $\rho \colon \pi_1(B^{(m)},*) \to \langle q \rangle$ be a surjective group homomorphism and take the covering space $\pi \colon \widetilde{B}^{(m)} \to B^{(m)}$ corresponding to $\rho$. Set $\widetilde{*}=\pi^{-1}(*)$.
\[lem:bouquet1\] The relative homology group ${\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}( \widetilde{B}^{(m)} ,\widetilde{*};\ZZ)$ is a free $R$-module of rank $m$ generated by the classes $[\widetilde{\gamma}_1],\dots,[\widetilde{\gamma}_m]$ over $R$ where $\widetilde{\gamma}_i$ is a lift of a loop $\gamma_i$ around the $i$-th circle in $B^{(m)}$.
Take some lifts of $\gamma_i$ for $i=1,\dots,m$ on $\widetilde{B}^{(m)}$ and denote them by $\widetilde{\gamma}_i$. Then all other lifts are given by the form $(q_*)^n\, \widetilde{\gamma}_i$ for some $n \in \ZZ$. We note that any path connecting two points in $\widetilde{*}$ is homotopy equivalent to the composition of lifts of $\gamma_i^{\pm 1}$. Thus any relative homology class of ${\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}( \widetilde{B}^{(m)} ,\widetilde{*};\ZZ)$ is a linear combination of classes $[\widetilde{\gamma}_i]$ over $R$. Clearly, $[(q_*)^{n_i} \widetilde{\gamma}_i]$ for all $i=1,\dots,m$ and $n_i \in \ZZ$ are linearly independent.
\[lem:bouquet2\] The homology group ${\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}(\widetilde{B}^{(m)};\ZZ)$ is a free $R$-module of rank $m-1$.
Consider the exact sequence of relative homology groups $$0 \to {\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}(\widetilde{B}^{(m)}\ZZ)\to
{\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}( \widetilde{B}^{(m)} ,\widetilde{*};\ZZ)
\to \widetilde{{\operatorname{\bf H}_{}}}_0(\widetilde{*};\ZZ)\to 0$$ where $\widetilde{{\operatorname{\bf H}_{}}}_0(\widetilde{*};\ZZ)$ is the $0$-th reduced homology group of $\widetilde{*}$. Since ${\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}( \widetilde{B}^{(m)} ,\widetilde{*};\ZZ) \cong R^{\oplus m}$ by Lemma \[lem:bouquet1\] and $\widetilde{{\operatorname{\bf H}_{}}}_0(\widetilde{*};\ZZ) \cong R$ by definition, we obtain the result.
\[prop:rank2\] Let $\log \rs^{\circ}$ be the logarithmic surface associated to a CY-$s$-type $q_s$-quadratic differential of genus $g$ and an $s$-polar type $(\uk,\ul)$ as in . Then the homology group ${\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}(\log \rs^{\circ};\ZZ)$ is a free $R$-module of rank $$n=2g-2+b +\sum_{i=1}^b k_i.$$
By Lemma \[lem:zeros\], the number $\aleph$ of $s$-simple zeros of $\xi$ is $\sum_{i=1}^b k_i$. Thus we have $$|\Ram|=b+\sum_{i=1}^b k_i.$$ Recall that an oriented surface of genus $g$ excluded $m$ points is homotopy equivalent to a bouquet of $2g-1+m$ circles. Therefore $\rs^{\circ}=\rs \setminus \Ram$ is homotopy equivalent to the bouquet $B^{(n+1)}$. Then the result follows from Lemma \[lem:bouquet2\].
*Proof of Proposition \[prop:rank1\].* In the case of $\log \hat{\rs}^{\circ}=\log \rs^{\circ}$, the result follows from Proposition \[prop:rank2\]. Consider the case that $\log \hat{\rs}^{\circ}$ is a double cover of $\log \rs^{\circ}$ and compute the rank of ${\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}(\log \hat{\rs}^{\circ};\ZZ)$ over $R$. Let $p \colon \hat{\rs} \to S$ be the underlying spectral cover and recall that $\hat{\rs}^{\circ}=\hat{\rs} \setminus \hat{\Ram}$ where $\hat{\Ram}=p^{-1}(\Ram)$. The Riemann-Hurwitz formula implies that $$2\hat{g}-2=2(2g-2)+b^{\prime}$$ where $\hat{g}$ is the genus of $\hat{\rs}$ and $b^{\prime}$ is the number of odds in $\{l_1,\dots,l_b\}$. On the other hand, we have $$|\hat{\Ram}|=2|\Ram|-b^{\prime}
=2b+2\sum_{i=1}^b k_i-b^{\prime}.$$ As a result, the surface $\hat{\rs}^{\circ}$ is homotopy equivalent to the bouquet of $m$ circles where $$m=2\hat{g}-1+|\hat{\Ram}|=2(2g-2)+d^{\prime}+1+2d+2\sum_{i=1}^d k_i
-d^{\prime}=2n+1.$$ Therefore the homology group ${\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}(\log \hat{\rs}^{\circ};\ZZ)$ is a free $R$-module of rank $2n$ by Proposition \[prop:rank2\]. Since the $\tau_*$-invariant part of ${\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}(\log \hat{\rs}^{\circ};\ZZ)$ can be identified with ${\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}(\log \rs^{\circ};\ZZ)$, the rank of $\tau_*$-anti-invariant part is given by $$\rank_R {\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}(\log \hat{\rs}^{\circ};\ZZ)-
\rank_R {\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}(\log \rs^{\circ};\ZZ)=2n-n=n.$$
Metric completions and oriented real blow-ups {#sec:MC}
---------------------------------------------
Let $\xi$ be a CY-$s$ type $q_s$-quadratic differential of genus $g$ and an $s$-polar type $(\uk,\ul)$ on $\rs$ ramified at $\Crit={\bigtriangleup}\bigcup\Po$.
1. As in Section \[sec:log\_surf\], near each $s$-simple zero $Z \in \Delta$, we can take a disk $D_Z \subset \rs$ with center $Z$ and the restriction of covering map $\Sp\colon\log \rs^{\circ} \to \rs^{\circ}$ on $D_Z^*=D_Z\setminus\{Z\}$ is the universal covering $\widetilde{D_Z^*} \subset \log \rs^{\circ}$. By adding a point $\widetilde{Z}$ on $\widetilde{D_Z^*}$ as the fiber of $Z$, we can extend the covering $\widetilde{D_Z^*} \to D_Z^*$ to the ramified infinite covering $\widetilde{D_Z} \to D_Z$ ramified at $\widetilde{Z}$. We explain this construction as the metric completion with respect to the $\xi$-metric on $\log \rs^{\circ}$. Take coordinates $w \in \widetilde{D_Z^*}$ and $z \in D_Z^*$ to satisfy $z=e^w$. Then $\xi$ on $\widetilde{D_Z^*}$ can be written as $$\xi|_{\widetilde{D_Z^*}}=(e^w)^{s-2}(d e^w)^2=e^{sw}dw^{2}.$$ We assume $$\widetilde{D_Z^*}=\{w \in \bC\,\vert\, {\operatorname{Re}}w<0\,\}\subset
\bC \cup \{\infty\}=\bC \mathbb{P}^1.$$ Then due to [@HKK Prop. 2.1 and Lem. 2.5], the point $\infty$ is an exponential-type singularity and we can obtain a single additional point $\widetilde{Z}$ by the (partial) completion of $\widetilde{D_Z^*}$ with respect to the $\xi$-metric. Denote by $\log \rs_{\Delta}^{\circ}$ the topological surface obtained by adding $\widetilde{Z}$ for each $Z \in \Delta$. When there is no confusion, we will identify $\widetilde{Z}$ with $Z$.
2. Next we consider the oriented real blow-up at a pole of $\xi$. Let $p \in \Po$ be an $s$-pole of $\xi$ with type $(k,l)$. Consider the disk $D_p$ with center $p$. Then the oriented real blow-up of $D_p$ at $p$ is an annulus $A$ obtained by replacing $p$ with a circle $S^1$. Now we consider the fiber of $D_p^{*}$ in $\log \rs^{\circ}$. Then as in explained in Section \[sec:log\_surf\], the fiber of $D_p^*$ consists of $k$ connected components $\widetilde{D^*_1},\dots,\widetilde{D^*_k}$ and each $\widetilde{D^*_i}$ is isomorphic to the universal covering $\widetilde{D_p^*}$. Corresponding to the real blow-up of $D_p$ at $p$, we add a real line $\RR$ on each $\widetilde{D^*_i}$ as the fiber of $S^1 \subset A$ and can extend $\widetilde{D^*_i} \to D_p^*$ to the universal covering $\widetilde{A_i} \to A$ where $\widetilde{A_i}:=\widetilde{D^*_i}\cup \RR$. In the coordinate $$\widetilde{D_p^*}=\{x+\mathbf{i}y\,\vert\,x<0, y \in \RR \},$$ the real line $\RR$ corresponds to $\{-\infty+ \mathbf{i}y \,\vert\, y \in \RR \}$. We call this construction an *oriented real blow-up of $\log \rs^{\circ}$* at a pole $p$. Denote by $(\log \rs^{\circ})^{\xi}$ the surface obtained by the oriented real blow-ups of $\log \rs^{\circ}$ at all poles of $\xi$.
3. Finally, we have the (topological) surface $(\log \rs^{\circ}_{\Delta})^{\xi}$ which is given by adding back all zeros $\Delta$ together with the oriented real blow-ups at all poles.
The numerical data $\num(\log\surfo)$ of $\log\surfo$ is given by $\num(\surf)$ in Definition \[def:numerical\]. Now, we define the numerical data $\num(\log \rs_{\Delta}^{\circ})^{\xi}=(g,b;\uk,\ul;{\operatorname{LP}}_g)$ of $(\log \rs_{\Delta}^{\circ})^{\xi}$ as follows:
- The genus $g$ and the number $b$ of boundary components are inherited from $\rs$.
- $(\uk,\ul)$ is given by the polar type of $\xi$.
- The Lekili-Polishchuk data ${\operatorname{LP}}_g$ is defined the same way as in Definition \[def:numerical\], via the winding numbers on $\rs$ w.r.t. $\xi$. Note that, when choosing (e.g. non-separating) curves, one need to avoid the simply connected domain $U$ in Assumption \[ass:trivial\].
Then we have the following.
\[pp:winding\] Let $\surf$ be a graded marked surface that shares the numerical data $\num(\surf)$ with $\rs$. Then there is a homeomorphism $$h \colon \log \surfo \to (\log \rs_{\Delta}^{\circ})^{\xi}$$ which commutes with the action of the deck transformation group $\langle q \rangle$ and the numerical data $\num(\log \rs_{\Delta}^{\circ})^{\xi}$ equals $\num(\log\surfo)$ under $h$.
The data $(g,b,\uk)$ is trivial to check while the tricky part is to show that winding numbers (i.e. index $l_i$) matches. This becomes the calculation of winding numbers in the following two situations:
- around a loop $\gamma$ in an exponential-type singularity $0$ (HKK’s setting) where the quadratic differential is in the form of $e^{z^{-k}}z^{-l} g(z){\mathrm{d}}z^{\otimes2}$ as in . This gives the grading change in $\log\surfo$.
- around a loop $\gamma$ that contains an $s$-pole of type $(k,l)$ together with $k$ zeroes that are $s$-simple. This gives the corresponding grading change in $(\log \rs_{\Delta}^{\circ})^{\xi}$, cf. Figure \[fig:cut\].
The two calculations are shown in Proposition \[pp:1\] and Proposition \[pp:2\] in the next section. As the Lekili-Polishchuk data ${\operatorname{LP}}_g$ is determined by the winding function, the proposition follows.
Winding numbers {#sec:wind}
---------------
In this section, we compute angle changes/winding numbers of closed paths on a Riemann surface with a quadratic differential. First we recall the definition of the curvature for smooth paths in $\RR^2$ with the classical standard flat metric ${\mathrm{d}}x^2+{\mathrm{d}}y^2$. Take a coordinate $(x,y) \in \RR^2$ and consider a smooth path $$\gamma \colon [0,1] \to \RR^2,\quad t \mapsto \gamma(t)=(x(t),y(t)).$$ The curvature $\kappa(t) $ of a path $\gamma(t)$ is defined by $$\kappa(t):=\frac{\dot{x} \ddot{y} -\ddot{x}\dot{y} }{(\dot{x}^2+\dot{y}^2)^{\frac{3}{2}} }$$ where $\dot{x}(t)=({\mathrm{d}}\slash {\mathrm{d}}t)x(t)$ and $\ddot{x}(t)=({\mathrm{d}}\slash {\mathrm{d}}t)^2 x(t)$ (similarly for $y(t)$). Then we define the *angle change of a path $\gamma$* by $${\operatorname{AC}}(\gamma):=\int_0^1 \kappa(t)|\dot{\gamma}(t)|{\mathrm{d}}t
=\int_0^1 \frac{\dot{x} \ddot{y} -\ddot{x}\dot{y} }{\dot{x}^2+\dot{y}^2 }dt.$$ If we identify $\RR^2$ with $\bC$ by $ w=x +\mathbf{i}y$, then the angle change can be written as $${\operatorname{AC}}(\gamma)=\Im \int_0^1 \frac{\overline{\dot{w}}\ddot{w} }{|\dot{w}|^2}{\mathrm{d}}t =
\Im \int_0^1 \frac{\ddot{w} }{\dot{w}}{\mathrm{d}}t.$$ We note that if two paths $\gamma$ and $\gamma^{\prime}$ are regularly homotopic and have the same tangent vectors at boundaries $t=0, 1$, then ${\operatorname{AC}}(\gamma)={\operatorname{AC}}(\gamma^{\prime})$. We also note that by definition, the angle change is invariant under the transformation $w \mapsto \alpha w +\beta$ where $\alpha \in \bC^*$ and $\beta \in \bC$ are some constants.
Now we extend the definition of the angle change on a Riemann surface $\rs$ with a ($q_s$-)quadratic differential $\xi$. Take a small open subset $U \subset \rs \setminus \Crit(\xi)$ with a coordinate $z \in U$ and consider the distinguished coordinate $w(z)=\int^z \sqrt{\xi}$. For a smooth path $$\gamma \colon [0,1] \to U,\quad t \mapsto \gamma(t)=z(t),$$ we can similarly define the angle change of $\gamma$ by $${\operatorname{AC}}(\gamma):=\Im \int_0^1 \frac{\ddot{w}(z(t))}{\dot{w}(z(t))}dt$$ where $\dot{w}(z(t))=({\mathrm{d}}\slash {\mathrm{d}}t) w(z(t))$ and $\ddot{w}(z(t))=({\mathrm{d}}\slash {\mathrm{d}}t)^2 w(z(t))$. Since the coordinate $w$ is determined up to $w \mapsto \pm q_s^m w+c$, the angle change ${\operatorname{AC}}(\gamma)$ is well-defined. For a general path $\gamma \colon [0,1] \to \rs \setminus \Crit(\xi)$, we can define the angle change by taking an open covering $\gamma \subset \cup_{\alpha}U_{\alpha}$ and using the distinguished coordinate $w$ on each $U_{\alpha}$.
\[lem:AC\_formula\] Assume that on an open subset $U \subset \rs \setminus \Crit(\xi)$ with a coordinate $z \in U$, the quadratic differential $\xi$ takes the form $\xi=f(z){\mathrm{d}}z^{\otimes2}$. Then for a path $\gamma \colon [0,1] \to U$ with the $z$-coordinate expression $z(t)$, we have $${\operatorname{AC}}(\gamma):=\frac{1}{2} \Im \int_0^1 \frac{f^{\prime}(z(t))}{f(z(t))}\dot{z}(t)dt+
\Im \int_0^1 \frac{\ddot{z}(t)}{\dot{z}(t)}dt$$ where $f^{\prime}(z)=({\mathrm{d}}\slash {\mathrm{d}}z)f(z)$.
First we note that by definition $({\mathrm{d}}\slash {\mathrm{d}}z)w(z)=\sqrt{f(z)}$. So we have $$\begin{gathered}
\frac{{\mathrm{d}}}{{\mathrm{d}}t}w(z(t))=\sqrt{f(z(t))}\dot{z}(t),\\
\frac{{\mathrm{d}}^2}{{\mathrm{d}}t^2}w(z(t))=\frac{f^{\prime}(z(t)) }{2\sqrt{f(z(t))}}\dot{z}(t)^2+\sqrt{f(z(t))}\ddot{z}(t).\end{gathered}$$ Then by the definition of ${\operatorname{AC}}(\gamma)$, we have the result.
When $\gamma$ is a loop, the *winding number* is given by (cf. Definition \[def:numerical\]) $$\begin{gathered}
{\operatorname{wind}_{\xi}}(\gamma)\colon=\frac{1}{\pi}{\operatorname{AC}}(\gamma).\end{gathered}$$
We now compute the winding numbers around $s$-simple zeros, $s$poles and exponential-type singularities.
\[lem:winding1\] Consider a $q_s$-quadratic differential $\xi=z^{s-2} {\mathrm{d}}z^{\otimes2}$ on $\bC$. Then for a small loop $\gamma$ around $s$-simple zero at $0 \in \bC$, we have $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:wind s}
{\operatorname{wind}_{\xi}}(\gamma)={\operatorname{Re}}(s).\end{gathered}$$
Set $z(t)=e^{ \mathbf{i}t}$. Then by Lemma \[lem:AC\_formula\], we have $$\begin{aligned}
{\operatorname{AC}}(\gamma)&=\frac{1}{2} \Im \int_0^{2 \pi} \frac{(s-2)z(t)^{s-3}} {z(t)^{s-2}}\dot{z}(t){\mathrm{d}}t
+\Im \int_0^{2 \pi}\frac{\ddot{z}(t)}{\dot{z}(t)}dt \\
&=\frac{1}{2} \Im \int_0^{2 \pi} \frac{(s-2)e^{ \mathbf{i}t(s-3)}} {e^{ \mathbf{i}t(s-2)}}\mathbf{i}
e^{ \mathbf{i}t}{\mathrm{d}}t
+\Im \int_0^{2 \pi}\frac{\mathbf{i}^2 e^{ \mathbf{i}t}}{\mathbf{i}e^{ \mathbf{i}t}}dt \\
&=\frac{1}{2}\Im 2 \pi \mathbf{i}(s-2)+\Im 2\pi \mathbf{i}\\
&=\pi {\operatorname{Re}}(s).\qedhere\end{aligned}$$
Similarly, we have the following.
\[lem:winding2\] Consider a $q_s$-quadratic differential $\xi=z^{-k(s-2)-l} {\mathrm{d}}z^{\otimes2}$ on $\bC$. Then for a small loop $\gamma$ around $s$-pole of type $(k.l)$ at $0 \in \bC$, we have $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:wind k,l}
{\operatorname{wind}_{\xi}}(\gamma)=-k({\operatorname{Re}}(s) -2)-l +2.\end{gathered}$$
\[pp:1\] Let $\xi$ be a $q_s$-quadratic differential on $\rs$ and $U \subset \rs$ be a simply connected domain which contains just $k$ $s$-simple zeros and a $s$-pole of type $(k,l)$. Then for a loop $\gamma \subset U$ encircling these zeros and a pole, we have $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:wind 2-l}
{\operatorname{wind}_{\xi}}(\gamma)=2-l.\end{gathered}$$
This follows from combing , and the following fact:
- if the loop $\gamma$ is obtained from a loop $\gamma'$ by including a single $s$-simple zero, then $${\operatorname{wind}_{\xi}}(\gamma)={\operatorname{wind}_{\xi}}(\gamma')+(s-2).$$
The proof of this claim is illustrated in Figure \[fig:wind-2\].
(.8,-1.5).. controls +(0:1) and +(0:2) ..(0,1) (0,1).. controls +(180:2) and +(180:1) ..(-.8,-1.5);
(-3,-1.5)to(-.8,-1.5); (.8,-1.5)to(3,-1.5)node\[right\]; (-3,-2.3)to(3,-2.3)node\[right\];
(1.1,-1.5)arc(0:-342:.3); (1.1-.3,-1.1)node; (-1.1+.3,-1.1)node; (-1.1,-1.5)arc(-180:180-18:.3); (1.1-.6,-1.5)to(1.1-.6,-1.5-.05); (-1.1+.6,-1.5)to(-1.1+.6,-1.5+.05);
(0,.2-.5)node\[above\] (0,0-.5)node\[white\] [$\bullet$]{} node\[red\][$\circ$]{} circle(.3); (0,.3-.5)to(-.05,.3-.5);
Set $D=\{\,z \in \bC \mid\, |z|<2\,\}$.
\[pp:2\] Consider a quadratic differential $
\phi=e^{z^{-k}}z^{-l} g(z) {\mathrm{d}}z^{\otimes2} $ on $D$ with an exponential type-singularity of index $(k,l)$ at $0 \in D$ where $g(z)$ is non-zero holomorphic function on $D$. Then for a small loop $\gamma$ around $0$, we have $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:wind exp}
{\operatorname{wind}_{\xi}}(\gamma)=2-l.\end{gathered}$$
Set $z(t)= e^{ \mathbf{i}t}$. We note that the formula in Lemma \[lem:AC\_formula\] can be written as $${\operatorname{AC}}(\gamma)=\frac{1}{2}\Im \int_{\gamma}\frac{{\mathrm{d}}}{{\mathrm{d}}z} \log f(z) {\mathrm{d}}z
+\Im \int_0^1 \frac{\ddot{z}(t)}{\dot{z}(t)}dt.$$ Then the first term is $$\begin{aligned}
&\frac{1}{2}\Im \int_{\gamma}\frac{{\mathrm{d}}}{{\mathrm{d}}z} \log e^{z^{-k}}z^{-l} g(z) {\mathrm{d}}z\\
=&\frac{1}{2}\Im \int_{\gamma}\frac{{\mathrm{d}}}{{\mathrm{d}}z} \left(z^{-k}-l \log z+\log g(z) \right) {\mathrm{d}}z \\
=&\frac{1}{2}\Im \int_{\gamma} \left(-k z^{-k-1}-l z^{-1}+ \frac{g^{\prime}(z)}{g(z)} \right) {\mathrm{d}}z \\
=&\frac{1}{2}\Im (-2 \pi \mathbf{i}l)\\=&-\pi l.\end{aligned}$$ Here we use the two facts:
- the residue of $z^{-k-1}$ at $z=0$ is zero since $k \ge 1$ and
- the residue of $g^{\prime}(z) \slash g(z)$ at $z=0$ is zero since this function is holomorphic near zero by the condition that $g(z)$ is non-vanishing on $D$.
Next, we can easily compute that the contribution of the second term is $2 \pi$. Thus we have the proposition follows.
Surface framings and period maps
--------------------------------
Let $\surf$ be a graded marked surface with numerical data $\num(\surf)$ and $\log \surfo$ its topological log surface.
\[def:x.f.quad\] Fix a complex number $s$. A *$q$-quadratic differential* $\Theta=(\rs,\xi,h;s)$ on $\log\surfo$ consists of a CY-$s$ type $q_s$-quadratic differential $\xi$ on a genus $g$ Riemann surface $\rs$ of $s$-polar type $(\uk,\ul)$ together with an isotopy class of a homeomorphism ($\log \surfo$-framing) $$h \colon \log \surfo \to (\log \rs_{\Delta}^{\circ})^{\xi},$$ such that
- $h$ sends the decoration ${\bigtriangleup}$ of $\surfo$ to the set ${\bigtriangleup}=\Zer(\xi)$ of zeros of $\xi$;
- $h$ sends $\partial\log\surfo$ to the set of real blow-ups of poles $\Pol(\xi)$ of $\xi$ and
- ${\hh{H}}$ commutes with the action of the deck transformation group $\langle q \rangle$.
- The numerical data $\num(\log \rs_{\Delta}^{\circ})^{\xi}$ is equivalent to $\num(\log \surfo)$ under $h$.
Two $q$-quadratic differential $\Theta_i=(\rs_k,\xi_i,h_i;s)$ are $\log\surfo$-equivalent if there is a biholomorphism $F \colon \rs_1 \to \rs_2$ with $F(\Pol(\xi_1))=\Pol(\xi_2)$ together with the choice of a lift $\widetilde{F} \colon \log \rs_1^{\circ} \to \log \rs_2^{\circ}$ satisfies:
- $\widetilde{F}^* \xi_{2}=\xi_{1}$,
- $h_2^{-1} \circ \log\widetilde{F} \circ h_1\in\Homeo_0(\log\surfo)$, where $$\log\widetilde{F} \colon (\log \rs_{1,\Delta}^{\circ})^{\xi_1}\to
(\log \rs_{2,\Delta}^{\circ})^{\xi_2}$$ is the induced homeomorphism.
Here, $\Homeo_0(\log \surfo)$ is the isotopy class of homeomorphisms of $\log\surfo$ that commute with the deck transformation and are isotopy to identity.
Denote by $\XQuad_s(\log\surfo)$ the moduli space of $q$-quadratic differentials with the numerical data $\num(\log\surfo)$ (cf. Definition \[def:numerical\]).
Consider the spectral cover $\log \hat{\rs}^{\circ}\to \log \rs^{\circ}$. This can be naturally extended to the double cover $
(\log \hat{\rs}^{\circ}_{\Delta})^{\xi}\to (\log \rs^{\circ}_{\Delta})^{\xi}$ with metric completions at zeros and oriented blow-ups at poles. Correspondingly, we can also define the spectral cover of the topological log surface $\log \hat{\surf}_{\Delta}\to \log\surfo$ with the covering involution $\tau$ such that $h \colon \log \surfo \to (\log \rs_{\Delta}^{\circ})^{\xi}$ lifts to the homeomorphism between spectral covers $\hat{h} \colon \log \hat{\surf}_{\Delta} \to (\log \hat{\rs}^{\circ}_{\Delta})^{\xi}$. Finally, the homeomorphism $h$ induces an isomorphism of the hat homology groups $$\hat{h}_* \colon {\widehat{\operatorname{\bf H}}_{}}(\log \surfo)\to
{\widehat{\operatorname{\bf H}}_{}}(\xi)$$ where $${\widehat{\operatorname{\bf H}}_{}}(\log \surfo):=
\{\gamma \in {\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}(\log \hat{\surf}_{\Delta};\ZZ)\,\vert\,
\tau_* \gamma=-\gamma \}.$$
Recall that $\xi$ defines an $R$-linear map $$Z_{\xi} \colon {\widehat{\operatorname{\bf H}}_{}}(\xi) \to \bC_s,\quad
\gamma \mapsto \int_{\gamma} \sqrt{\xi}.$$ Thus a $\log \surfo$-framed $q_s$-quadratic differential $(\xi,h)$ gives an $R$-linear map $$Z_{\xi}\circ \hat{h}_* \in \Hom_{R}({\widehat{\operatorname{\bf H}}_{}}(\log \surfo),\bC_s).$$ The *period map* $$\Pi_s \colon\XQuad_s(\log \surfo) \to \Hom_{R}({\widehat{\operatorname{\bf H}}_{}}(\log \surfo),\bC_s)$$ is defined by sending $
(\xi,h) \mapsto Z_{\xi}\circ \hat{h}_*$.
\[conj:period\] The period map $\Pi_s$ is a local homeomorphism.
$q$-Stability conditions via $q$-quadratic differentials {#sec:main}
========================================================
Quadratic differentials on log surfaces
---------------------------------------
Let $\Theta=(\rs,\xi,h;s)$ be a $q$-quadratic differential on $\log\surfo$. Recall from Remark \[rem:s.v.\] that $\xi$ can be regarded as a single-valued meromorphic quadratic differential on $\log\rs_{\Delta}^{\circ}$ satisfying equation , which corresponds to the equation for $q$-stability conditions. Using $h$, we will pull back the structures of $\log\rs_{\Delta}^{\circ}$ to $\log\surfo$ and omit $\rs$ and $h$ in the following discuss when there is no confusion.
\[rem:log\] The zeros of $\xi$ on $\log\surfo$ are then exactly points in ${\bigtriangleup}$. Moreover, each of which is a conical singularity of infinity angle, as in Definition \[def:conical\]. Therefore, an alternative definition of a $q$-quadratic differential $\Theta=(\log\surfo,\xi,h;s)$ in $\XQuad_s(\log\surfo)$ is as follows:
- $\xi$ is a meromorphic quadratic differential on some Riemann surface $\logrs$ with deck transformation $q$.
- The set of zeros of $\xi$ is $\Delta$ and the $s$-polar type of $\xi$ is $(\uk,\ul)$. At a zero, the local coordinate of $\xi$ is $$\xi=c z^{s} dz^{\otimes 2}$$ Moreover, for each $(k_i,l_i)$, there are poles $\{p^i_j\mid j\in\ZZ_{k_i}\}$ of $\xi$ such that the local coordinate of $\xi$ near them is $$\xi=c z^{-k_i (s-2)-l_i}dz^{\otimes 2}.$$
- $\xi$ satisfies .
- Denote by $(\logrs)^\xi$ the real blow-up of $\xi$ at the poles and then $h$ is a homeomorphism $\log\surfo\to(\logrs)^\xi$, which is compatible with the deck transformation $q$ (on both sides).
- Furthermore, the numerical data of $(\logrs)^\xi$ equals $\num(\log\surfo)$ under $h$.
Denote by $\Core(\xi)$ the core of $\xi$ on $\log\surfo$. Let $\pi_0\colon\log\So\to\So$ be the projection. Denote by $$\core(\xi)\colon=\pi_0(\Core(\xi))$$ the projection of $\Core(\xi)$ on $\So$. Note that $\core$ is well-defined topologically since implies that $\Core(\xi)$ preserves angles/direction of geodesic (but the deck transformation scales the length of geodesics). In order to give the metric information on $\core(\xi)$, we need to choose a cut. We will discuss the existence of cuts in the later section.
Let $\Theta=(\log\surfo,\xi,h;s)$ be a $q$-quadratic differential. A cut $\cut$ of $\surfo$ is compatible with $\Theta$ if any of its arc $c_i$ does not intersect the interior of $\core(\xi)$. Denote by $\QQuad_s(\log\surfo)$ the $q$-quadratic differentials on $\log\surfo$ that admit compatible cuts. We will call them $q$-quadratic differentials on $\log\surfo$.
(175:5.5)coordinate (Z1) (5:5.5)coordinate (Z3) (-90:3)coordinate (Z2)
(60:7)coordinate (U2) (120:7)coordinate (U1) (-135:7)coordinate (U3) (-45:7)coordinate (U4);
in [.1,.2,...,.9]{} [ (Z1)–(Z2) coordinate\[pos=\] (m0); (U1)–(m0) coordinate\[pos=.9\] (m1); plot \[smooth,tension=.5\] coordinates [(U1)(m1)(U3)]{}; ]{} in [.1,.2,...,.9]{} [ (Z3)–(Z2) coordinate\[pos=\] (m0); (U2)–(m0) coordinate\[pos=.9\] (m1); plot \[smooth,tension=.5\] coordinates [(U2)(m1)(U4)]{}; ]{}
in [-36,-25,-16,-9,0,9,16,25,36,49,64,81,100,121,144,169,196,225,256,289,324]{} [ (U1)–(U2) coordinate\[pos=.5\] (m0); ($(m0)!\j*.0025!(Z2)$) coordinate (m1); plot \[smooth,tension=.5\] coordinates [(U2)(m1)(U1)]{}; ]{}
(Z1)to(U1)to(Z2)to(U3)–cycle; (Z3)to(U2)to(Z2)to(U4)–cycle; in [10,20,30,40,50,-15,-25,-35]{} [(Z1)to(180-:7);]{} in [10,20,30,40,50,-15,-25,-35]{} [(Z3)to(:7);]{} in [15,-15,25,-25,35,-35]{} [(Z2)to(-90+:7);]{} (0,0) circle (7);
(180:7)coordinate (z1)(0:7)coordinate (z3)(-90:7)coordinate (z2); in [1,2,3]{}[ in [.2,.5,.8]{}[ (Z)to(z);]{}]{}
(Z1)to\[bend left=2\](Z2)to\[bend left=2\](Z3); in [1,2,3]{}[ (Z)node\[white\][$\bullet$]{} node\[red\][$\circ$]{};]{}
(180:7)coordinate (Z1) (0:7)coordinate (Z3) (-90:7)coordinate (Z2)
(60:7)coordinate (U2) (120:7)coordinate (U1) (-135:7)coordinate (U3) (-45:7)coordinate (U4);
in [.1,.2,...,.9]{} [ (Z1)–(Z2) coordinate\[pos=\] (m0); (U1)–(m0) coordinate\[pos=.9\] (m1); plot \[smooth,tension=.5\] coordinates [(U1)(m1)(U3)]{}; ]{} in [.1,.2,...,.9]{} [ (Z3)–(Z2) coordinate\[pos=\] (m0); (U2)–(m0) coordinate\[pos=.9\] (m1); plot \[smooth,tension=.5\] coordinates [(U2)(m1)(U4)]{}; ]{}
in [-25,-16,-9,0,9,16,25,36,49,64,81,100,121,144,169,196,225,256,289,324]{} [ (U1)–(U2) coordinate\[pos=.5\] (m0); ($(m0)!\j*.0025!(Z2)$) coordinate (m1); plot \[smooth,tension=.5\] coordinates [(U2)(m1)(U1)]{}; ]{}
(Z1)to(U1)to(Z2)to(U3)–cycle; (Z3)to(U2)to(Z2)to(U4)–cycle; in [10,20,30,40,50,-25,-35]{} [(Z1)to(180-:7);]{} in [10,20,30,40,50,-25,-35]{} [(Z3)to(:7);]{} in [-25,25,35,-35]{} [(Z2)to(-90+:7);]{} (0,0) circle (7);
(Z1)to\[bend left=10\](Z2)to\[bend left=10\](Z3); in [1,2,3]{}[ (Z)node\[white\][$\bullet$]{} node\[red\][$\circ$]{};]{}
Construction of $q$-Stability conditions
----------------------------------------
Now we show that a $q$-quadratic differential on $\log\surfo$ induces a closed $q$-stability condition on $\DX$. Recall that we have the following setting.
- $\TT$ is an (initial) full formal arc system of $\surf$.
- $\surfo$ is constructed from $\surf$ via the cut $\cut_\TT$.
- $\log\surfo$ is obtained by cutting, with respect to $\cut_\TT$, and gluing $\ZZ$ sheets/copies $\surfo^m$ of $\surfo$.
- There is a canonical Lagrangian immersion .
- ${{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty(\TT)}$ denotes the topological Fukaya category associated to $\surf$ as well as the canonical $\XX$-baric heart of $\DX$.
Note that the cut $\cut_\TT$ induces an isomorphism $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:otimes}
{\widehat{\operatorname{\bf H}}_{}}(\log \surfo)={\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}(\surf,\M;\ZZ_\Sp)\otimes R.\end{gathered}$$
\[con:QQ\] Note that there is a unique element $b_*\in{\operatorname{SBr}}(\surfo)$ such that $b(\cut)=\cut_0$. Consider the induced action of $b$ on $\log\surfo$, which also denote by $b$. Denote by $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:beta}
\cz(\xi)\colon=\Core(b_*(\xi))\cap \surfo^0\end{gathered}$$ the induced core on $\surfo$, which is the intersection of the core $\Core(b_*(\xi))$ with the zero sheet of $\log\surfo^0$. Note that $\xi$ also provide foliation/metric on $\cz(\xi)$. By pulling the set of vertices ${\bigtriangleup}$ of $\cz(\xi)$ on $\surfo$ along the arcs in $\cut_0$ (one for each) to the set $\M$ of marked points of $\surfo$, we obtain some convex hull $\cx(\xi)$ of $\M$ on $\surf$. The foliation of $\cx(\xi)$ gives partial foliation of $\surfo$, which can be extended to the rest of the surface by gluing upper half planes as the core determines a flat surface. Thus we obtain a flat surface, or equivalently, a quadratic differential $\underline{\xi}$ in ${\operatorname{Quad}}_\infty(\surf)$ determined by $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:cx xi}
\Core(\underline{\xi})=\cx(\xi).\end{gathered}$$ Using , $\underline{\xi}$ corresponds to a stability condition $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:ns xi}
{\widehat{\sigma}}(\xi)\colon=\Xi_\infty(\underline{\xi})\in\Stap{{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty(\TT)}.\end{gathered}$$ Therefore, we obtain a triple $(\DI, {\widehat{\sigma}}(\xi), s)$.
We proceed to show that we indeed get a $q$-stability conditions.
\[pp:QS=QQ2\] Suppose that ${\operatorname{Re}}(s)\geq2$. Then the triple $(\DI, {\widehat{\sigma}}(\xi),s)$ induces a closed $q$-stability condition $$(\sigma,s)=(\DI, {\widehat{\sigma}}(\xi),s)\otimes_*R$$ on $\DX$ as in Construction \[con:q\]. Then we obtain an isomorphism $$\Xi_s\colon\QQuad(\log\surfo)/{\operatorname{SBr}}(\surfo)\to\CStab\DX/{\operatorname{ST}}.$$
Without loss of generality, assume $b$ in is trivial, i.e. $\xi$ and $\cut_\TT$ are compatible. We first prove . Then Theorem \[thm:IQ\] implies that the construction above gives a $q$-stability condition and we obtain a map $\Xi_s$.
Suppose not, then there is a pair of semistable objects $\widehat{M}_1$ and $\widehat{M}_2$ in $\DI$ such that $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:>1}
\Hom_{{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty}(\widehat{M}_1,\widehat{M}_2)\neq0\quad
\text{and}\quad \varphi(\widehat{M}_2)-\varphi(\widehat{M}_1)>{\operatorname{Re}}(s)-1(\geq1),\end{gathered}$$ where $\varphi$ denotes the phase function with respect to ${\widehat{\sigma}}$. Let $\gamma_i$ be the open arcs on $\surf$, with grading $g_i$, that correspond to $\widehat{M}_i$ in $\DI$. We claim that $(\gamma_i,g_i)$ can only intersect at endpoint as the red arcs in Figure \[fig:cut\] shown. $$\begin{tikzpicture}[xscale=.5, yscale=.3]
\draw[red, thick](3,3)node[below]{$\gamma_2$}to(-3,-3)
(3,-3)to(-3,3)node[below]{$\gamma_1$}
(0,0)node{\small{$\bullet$}}node[below]{$p$};
\end{tikzpicture}$$ Otherwise, suppose that $$p\in(\gamma_1,g_1)\cap(\gamma_2,g_2)\quad \text{with index $0$}$$ is an intersection between $(\gamma_i,g_i)$ in $\surf^\circ$ that induces some nonzero element in $\Hom_{{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty}(\widehat{M}_1,\widehat{M}_2)$, then we have ([@HKK (2.6)]) $$p\in(\gamma_2,g_2[1])\cap(\gamma_1,g_1)\quad \text{with index $0$}.$$ By [@HKK § 5.5] (cf. [@OPS; @IQZ]), this intersection induces some nonzero element in $\Hom_{{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty}(\widehat{M}_2,\widehat{M}_1[1])$. As both $\widehat{M}_i$ (and their shifts) are (semi-)stable, we have $$\varphi(\widehat{M}_1[1])\geq\varphi(\widehat{M}_2)$$ which contradicts . Note that this is equivalent to the equality $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:Wid=gldim}
{\operatorname{Wid}}( {\widehat{\sigma}}(\xi) )=\pi\cdot\gldim{\widehat{\sigma}}.\end{gathered}$$
(12, 5) to (6,-5) to (-12, -5) to (-6,5) – cycle; (1,3)coordinate (A1) (4,1)coordinate (A2) (3,-2)coordinate (A3) (-1,-3)coordinate (A4) node\[below,red\] (-4,-1)coordinate (A5) (-3,2)coordinate (A6) (1,3+12)coordinate (B1) (4,1+12)coordinate (B2) (-3,2+12)coordinate (B6) ; plot \[smooth,tension=1\] coordinates [(-2.2,-3)(A4)(0,-4)]{} plot \[smooth,tension=1\] coordinates [(-4.5,.5)(A5)(-3.8,-3)]{} plot \[smooth,tension=1\] coordinates [(2,-3)(A3)(4.2,-2)]{};
(A1) edge (1,3+15); (A2) edge (4,1+15); (A6) edge (-3,2+15);
(A1) edge (A6) edge (A2); (A4) edge\[bend left\] (A3) edge\[bend right\] (A5); (B1) edge (B6) edge (B2);
/in [1/4,6/5,2/3]{}[ in [.2,.5,.8]{}[ (A)to(A);]{}]{}
(A6) to(A2); (B6) to node\[below\] (B2);
in [3,4,5]{}[ (A)node\[white\][$\bullet$]{} node\[red\][$\circ$]{};]{} in [1,2,6]{}[ (A)node\[white\][$\bullet$]{} node\[red\][$\circ$]{} (B)node\[white\][$\bullet$]{} node\[red\][$\circ$]{};]{}
(-3,2+7)coordinate (C6)node\[white\][$\bullet$]{} node\[red!23\][$\circ$]{} to(1,3+7)coordinate (C1)node\[white\][$\bullet$]{} node\[red!23\][$\circ$]{} to(4,1+7)coordinate (C2)node\[white\][$\bullet$]{} node\[red!23\][$\circ$]{};
(8,12)node[$\log\surfo$]{}(8,3)node[$\surfo$]{}; ($(A4)!.5!(A5)$)node\[\] ($(A4)!.5!(A3)$)node\[\]; ($(A1)!.5!(A6)$)node\[above\] ($(A1)!.5!(A2)$)node\[above\]; ($(B1)!.5!(B6)$)node\[above\] ($(B1)!.5!(B2)$)node\[above\]; (-1,9.5)node\[above\](2.5,9)node\[above\]; (-1.7,-2)to\[bend left\]node\[above\](0,-2.25);
plot \[smooth,tension=1.5\] coordinates[ ($(A6)!.8!(A1)$) (1+.2,3+.8) ($(A1)!.2!(A2)$) ]{} (1+.2+.2,3+.8+.5)node\[\]; (1+.2,3+.8)to(1.0001+.2,3+.8) ; plot \[smooth,tension=1.5\] coordinates[ ($(C6)!.8!(C1)$) (1+.2,3+.8+7) ($(C1)!.2!(C2)$) ]{} (1+.2+.2,3+.8+7+.5)node\[\]; (1+.2,3+.8+7)to(1.0001+.2,3+.8+7) ;
($(B6)!.8!(B1)$) to\[bend right=50\]($(B1)!.2!(B2)$) (1-.3,15-1)node\[\] (A1)node\[below\];
Consider the following:
- $\gamma_i$, which are in $\cx(\xi)$, intersect at $Y\subset\M$. So the angle $\alpha$ from $\gamma_1$ to $\gamma_2$ at $Y$ (with respect to the quadratic differential $\underline{\xi}$) equals $$\left(\varphi(\widehat{M}_2)-\varphi(\widehat{M}_1)\right)\cdot\pi.$$
- $\underline{\eta}_i$ are the closed arcs on $\surfo$ (the lower red arcs in Figure \[fig:cut and lift\]), whose endpoints are connected to endpoints of $\gamma_i$ via arcs in the cut $\cut_\TT$ (green arcs in Figure \[fig:cut and lift\]). They are in $\cz(\xi)$ and let $Z$ be the decorating point connecting $Y$. By construction, the angle $\underline{\beta}$ from $\underline{\eta}_1$ to $\underline{\eta}_2$ at $Z$ (with respect to the quadratic differential $\xi$) (clockwise) equals the angle $\alpha$ above.
- Let $\eta_i$ are lifted closed ares of $\eta_i$ on $\log\surfo$. Then the angle $\underline{\beta}$ lifts to an angle $\beta$ (cf. Figure \[fig:cut and lift\]). As the deck transformation $q$ acting as rotation by $e^{\ii \pi s}$, the angle $\theta$ from $\eta_2$ to $q(\eta_1)$ at $Z$ is $$\theta={\operatorname{Re}}(s)\cdot\pi - \beta ={\operatorname{Re}}(s)\cdot\pi - \underline{\beta}
={\operatorname{Re}}(s)\cdot\pi - (\varphi(\widehat{M}_2)-\varphi(\widehat{M}_1))\cdot\pi.$$ By , $\theta<\pi$. Since both $\eta_2$ and $q(\eta_1)$ are in the core $\Core(\xi)$, which is convex, there is a geodesic $\eta_0$ in $\Core(\xi)$ obtained from $q(\eta_1)\cup\eta_2$ by smoothing the intersection at $Z$ (on the side of the angle $\theta$, cf. the violet dashed arc in Figure \[fig:cut and lift\]).
Then the projection $\pi_0$ of $\eta_0$ on $\surfo$, which is in $\cz(\xi)$, will intersect the arc $ZY$ in the cut $\cut$. This contradicts to the compatibility between $\xi$ and $\cut_\TT$. Thus holds and $\sigma$ is a closed $q$-stability condition.
Reversing the process above, we have the following.
- Given a point in $\CStab\DX/{\operatorname{ST}}$, it can be represent by a $q$-stability condition $(\sigma,s)$ induced from some triple $({{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty(\TT)},{\widehat{\sigma}},s)$ for ${\widehat{\sigma}}\in\Stap{{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty(\TT)}$.
- Let $\underline{\xi}=\Xi_\infty^{-1}({\widehat{\sigma}})$ with core $\Core(\underline{\xi})$. Pushing the vertices of $\M$ along the cut $\cut_\TT$ to points in $\Delta$, to get a convex hull $\Core^0$ of $\surfo$. The convexity follows from as follows:
- Take two saddle trajectories, say $\eta_i$ in Figure \[fig:cut and lift\], that intersect at a decoration $Z$. Then the angle between that does not intersect the cut is at most $\gldim({\widehat{\sigma}})\cdot\pi$, which implies the other angle, e.g. $\theta$ in Figure \[fig:cut and lift\], is at least $${\operatorname{Re}}(s)\cdot\pi-\gldim({\widehat{\sigma}})\cdot\pi\ge\pi.$$
Now we shall use this convex hull to build a $q$-quadratic differential on $\log\surfo$.
- Consider the horizontal strip decomposition of $\surf$ w.r.t. $\underline{\xi}$. Delete all the upper half planes that do not intersect the core $\Core(\underline{\xi})$. When pushing each marked point along the cut $\cut$, the foliation of the remaining of the horizontal strip decomposition provides a partial foliation/grading of $\log\surfo$ (that contains $\Core^0$) at the zero sheets $\surfo^0$.
- The partial foliation for the $m$-th sheet $\surfo^m$ (which contains the corresponding convex hull $\Core^m$ is given in the same way by the rotated quadratic differential $e^{m \ii \pi s}\cdot\underline{\xi}$ on $\surf$.
- The rest of the foliation on $\log\surf$ will be given/fill-in by part of the $\log$-surface $C_\infty^s=s\log z$ at each decoration $Z$, which is topologically homeomorphic to $C_\infty$ in . This can be done because of :
- As each angle of $\Core^m$ between corns at a decoration $Z$ is at most $\gldim\cdot\pi$, which implies that (the neighbourhood of) the cores $\Core^m$ around $Z$ can be regard as part of $C_\infty^s$. Moreover, implies that the angle of each gap between consecutive sheets $\Core^m$ is at least $\pi$. Thus, there will be a horizonal foliation between the gap and the partial foliations (i.e. horizontal strips in each sheet) above do not have overlaps in $C_\infty^s$.
Thus we see that the map $\Xi_s$ is surjective.
Now take a subspace $\XQuad^\circ_s(\log\surfo)$ in $\QQuad_s(\log\surfo)$ which consists of those $q$-quadratic differentials, whose compatible cuts are in $\{b(\cut_\TT)\mid b\in{\operatorname{BT}}(\surfo)\}$. This is the analogue of taking the connected component $\FQuad_3^{\kong{T}}(\surfo)$ in $\FQuad(\surfo)$ in [@KQ2 (4.13)], where they fits in the commutative diagram $$\label{eq:quad0}
\begin{tikzpicture}[xscale=1.6,yscale=0.8,baseline=(bb.base)]
\path (0,1) node (bb) {}; \draw (0,2) node (s0) {$\FQuad_3^{\kong{T}}(\surfo)$}
(0,0) node (s1) {$\FQuad_3(\surf)$}
(2.5,1) node (s2) {$\FQuad_3(\surf)$};
\draw [->, font=\scriptsize]
(s0) edge[right hook-stealth](s1)
(s0) edge node [above] {${\operatorname{BT}}(\surfo)$} (s2)
(s1) edge node [below] {${\operatorname{SBr}}(\surf)$} (s2);
\end{tikzpicture}$$ in that case (Calabi-Yau-3).
As we have ${\operatorname{ST}}\DX\cong{\operatorname{BT}}(\surfo)$ by Theorem \[thm:IQZ\], which is a subgroup of ${\operatorname{SBr}}(\surfo)$, we can lift $\Xi_s$ as follows.
\[thm:main\] There are an isomorphism $\Xi_s$ and (vertical) local homeomorphisms that fit in the following commutative diagram $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:QQ=QS2}
\xymatrix@C=6pc{
\XQuad^\circ_s(\log\surfo) \ar[r]^{\Xi_s} \ar[d]_{\Pi_s} & \CStab\DX
\ar[d]^{\hh{Z}_s} \\
\Hom_R( {\operatorname{\bf H}_{1}}(\log\surfo;\ZZ),\bC_s) \ar[r]^{ \chi_* } &
\Hom_R( \Grot\DX,\bC_s),
}\end{gathered}$$ such that the period map $\Pi_s$ is given by $$\Pi_s=q_s\circ (\Pi_\infty\otimes 1)$$ via and becomes the central charge $\hh{Z}_s= q_s\circ (Z_\infty\otimes 1).$
Note that Conjecture \[conj:period\] follows from the local homeomorphism $\Pi_\infty$ in and implies
Take $\Theta=(\log\surfo,\xi,h;s)\in\XQuad^\circ_s(\log\surfo)$, with saddle trajectories $\{\eta\}$ on $\log\surfo$ with respect to $\Theta$. Then by , $\{\eta\}$ correspond to spherical objects $\{X(\eta)\}$ in $\DX$. Then these objects are (semi-)stable with respect to the $q$-stability condition $\sigma=\Xi_s(\Theta)$. The corresponding central charge is given by the formula $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:ff}
Z(X(\eta))=\int_{\widetilde{\eta}}\sqrt{\xi},\end{gathered}$$ where the integral is taking on the spectral cover of $\log\surfo$.
Existence of cuts
-----------------
One technical issue is if the compatible cuts always exist for a $q$-quadratic differential. In other words, such a existence is equivalent to the equality below.
\[ass:cuts\] $\QQuad_s(\log\surfo)=\XQuad^\circ_s(\log\surfo)$.
First we have the following fact.
\[lem:core\] The projection of any zero of $\xi$ on $\surfo$ is in the boundary of $\core(\xi)$.
Up to rotation, we only need to consider the saddle-free case. Suppose that a zero $Z$ is in the interior of $\core(\xi)$.
Consider the horizontal foliations and saddle connections staring from $Z$ among the sheets $\surfo^m$ for $0\le m\le M$. Each sheet contains the same number of saddle connections, say $l$, each of which is between two adjacent horizontal foliations (with angle $\pi$). Thus we have $$M {\operatorname{Re}}(s)\cdot\pi+\pi\ge M\cdot l\cdot \pi.$$ Since this holds for any $M$, we deduce that $l\le\lfloor{\operatorname{Re}}(s)\rfloor$. On the other hand, the angle of any two adjacent saddle connections is less than $\pi$. Thus, $Z$ is an interior point of $\core(\xi)$ implies $l\cdot\pi>{\operatorname{Re}}(s)\cdot\pi$, i.e. $l>{\operatorname{Re}}(s)$, which contradicts to the previous inequality.
Then we deduce the assumption above holds in the disk case.
If $\surfo$ is a disk, then Assumption \[ass:cuts\] holds.
Also, when ${\operatorname{Re}}(s)\gg1$, then Assumption \[ass:cuts\] holds. More precisely, we have the following.
Recall that $(\uk,\ul)\colon=\{(k_1,l_1),\dots,(k_b,l_b)\}$. If $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:sgg1}
{\operatorname{Re}}(s)\geq\max_{1\le i\le b} \{k_i+3-l_i\},\end{gathered}$$ then Assumption \[ass:cuts\] holds.
We use the winding number and a combinatorial fact to prove the proposition.
Step I
: Since the boundaries of $\log\surfo$ contract to the core $\Core(\xi)$, the boundaries of $\surfo$ contract to $\Core(\xi)$. Consider $\surfo\setminus\core(\xi)$. Since the boundaries of $\log\surfo$ contract to the core $\Core(\xi)$, the boundaries of $\surfo$ contract to $\core(\xi)$. Thus, there are $b$ connected components of $\surfo\setminus\core(\xi)$, each of which is an annulus $\kong{A}_i$ with exactly one boundary component $\partial_i$ of $\surfo$. Suppose that $\partial_0$ is coming from a pole $p_0$ of type $(k_i,l_i)$. and $Z_1,\ldots, Z_k$ are the $s$-simple zeroes on the other boundary of $\kong{A}_i$.
Perturb $\widehat{\partial_0}$ towards $\partial_0$ to get a loop $L$, which can be used to calculate the winding number $$w_0={\operatorname{wind}_{\xi}}(\partial_0)=w_0=k_i({\operatorname{Re}}(s)-2)+l_i-2$$ of $\partial_0$. On the other hand:
- the closed arcs in $\widehat{\partial_0}$ are (images of) saddle trajectories (with zero winding) and;
- around each $s$-simple zero $Z_i$, the absolute value of the winding is ${\operatorname{Re}}(s)$, which implies near $Z_i$ the winding of $L$ is greater than $1-{\operatorname{Re}}(s)$ (see Figure \[fig:wind-1\]).
(0+1,0+.5+1)to(3,3+.5)to(6-1,0+.5+1)node\[right\][$\core(\xi)$]{};
(6-1,0+1)node\[right\][$L$]{}to(3+.69,3-.69); (3+.7,3-.7) arc(-45:-135:1); (3-.7,3-.7)to(0+1,0+1);
(3+.7+.1,3-.7-.1)to(3+.7,3-.7-.2)node\[below\]to(3+.7-.1,3-.7-.1); (3-.7+.1,3-.7-.1)to(3-.7,3-.7-.2)node\[below\]to(3-.7-.1,3-.7-.1);
(3+.35,3+.5-.35) arc(-45:-135:.5); (3,3)node\[below\]; (3,2)node\[above\];
(3,3+.7)node\[above\] (3,3+.5)node\[white\] [$\bullet$]{} node\[red\][$\circ$]{} circle(.3); (3,3+.8)to(3-.05,3+.8);
This provides the estimation of the winding number $w_0$ of $L$, namely $w_0>-k\cdot(1-{\operatorname{Re}}(s))$ or $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:calculation wind}
k>k_i-\frac{k_i+3-l_i}{{\operatorname{Re}}(s)}.\end{gathered}$$ By , we deduce that $k>k_i-1$ or $k\ge k_i$.
Step II
: Consider a bipartite (unoriented) graph $G$, consisting of white vertices labelled by $s$-simple zeroes in ${\bigtriangleup}$ and black vertices labelled by boundary components of $\surfo$. There is an edge in $G$ connecting the white vertex $W_Z$ labelled by $Z$ and the black vertex $B_i$ labelled by $\partial_i$ if and only if $Z\in{\bigtriangleup}$ are in the boundary of $\kong{A}_i$. We associate a number $k_i$ to $B_i$, where $(k_i, l_i)$ is the type of the corresponding $s$-pole of $B_i$. We have the following conditions on $G$:
- Step I says that the valence of $B_i$ is at least $k_i$;
- Lemma \[lem:core\] says that the valence of any $W_Z$ is at least 1.
We claim that for any bipartite graph $G$ with the conditions above, there is a matching $E$ of $G$, consisting of $\aleph$ edges of $G$, such that each white vertex $W_Z$ is incident in exactly one edge of $E$ and each black vertex $B_i$ is incident in exactly $k_i$ edges of $E$, where $k_i$ is the order of the pole corresponding to $B_i$.
Use induction on the number of edges in $G$, where the start step is trivial. There are two cases:
1. If there is a white vertex $Z$ with valence $1$, let $B_0$ be the only black vertex connected directly to $Z$ (by an edge $e$). Then delete $Z$ and reduce the associated number $k_0$ of $B$ to $k_0-1$ to get a graph $G'$ which also satisfies the conditions above. By inductive assumption, there is a matching $E'$ for $G'$ and then $E'\cup\{e\}$ is a matching for $G$.
2. Otherwise, the valence of each white vertex $Z$ is at least 2. The sum of valences of all white vertices is at least $$2\aleph=2\sum_{i=1}^b k_i,$$ which is also the sum of valences of all black vertices. Then we deduce that the valence $v_j$ of some black vertex $B_j$ is bigger then the associated number $k_i$. Delete any edge incident at $B_j$ from $G$ and we can apply the inductive assumption again.
Step III
: Combining the two facts above, the matching tells how to pair $k_i$ $s$-simple zeroes, which then induces a cut (by connecting them in each of the annulus $\kong{A}_i$). In fact, the cut can be chosen to be (images of) geodesics.
Up to the technical issue, i.e. Assumption \[ass:cuts\], the spaces of open and closed $q$-stability conditions coincide, which provide the ‘principal’ components of the space $\QStab_s\DX$ of $q$-stability conditions.
\[thm:q=x\] Suppose that ${\operatorname{Re}}(s)>2$ and Assumption \[ass:cuts\] holds. Then we have the following
1. $\OStab_s\DX=\CStab_s\DX$. Thus, $\XQuad_s(\log\surfo)\cong\OStab_s\DX$.
2. The image of the inclusion $\OStab_s\DX\hookrightarrow\QStab_s\DX$ is open and closed and hence consists of connected components.
Take a closed $q$-stability condition $(\sigma,s)$ in $\CStab_s\DX$, which is induced from some triple, i.e. $$(\sigma,s)=(\DI, {\widehat{\sigma}},s)\otimes_*R$$ with $\gldim{\widehat{\sigma}}={\operatorname{Re}}(s)-1$ (here we take the canonical $\XX$-baric heart without loss of generality). We will keep all the notations in Proposition \[pp:QS=QQ2\], i.e.
- $\Xi_s^{-1}(\sigma,s)=\Theta=(\rs,\xi,h;s)$ and there is a cut $\cut$ that corresponds to the quadratic differential $$\widehat{\xi}=\Xi_\infty^{-1}({\widehat{\sigma}})\in{\operatorname{Quad}}_\infty(\surf),$$ cf. and .
For the first statement, we need to show that there exists another cut $\cut'$ such that the corresponding quadratic differential $\widehat{\xi}'\in{\operatorname{Quad}}_\infty(\surf)$ and stability condition ${\widehat{\sigma}}'=\Xi_\infty(\widehat{\xi}')$ satisfying $$(\sigma,s)=(\hh{L}_0(\DI), {\widehat{\sigma}}_0,s)\otimes_{\oplus}R \quad\text{with}\quad
\gldim{\widehat{\sigma}}_0<{\operatorname{Re}}(s)-1.$$
Step 1
: Consider a pair of semistable objects $\widehat{M}_1$ and $\widehat{M}_2$ in $\DI$ such that $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:=gldim}
\Hom_{{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\infty}(\widehat{M}_1,\widehat{M}_2)\neq0\quad
\text{and}\quad \varphi(\widehat{M}_2)-\varphi(\widehat{M}_1)=\gldim{\widehat{\sigma}}.\end{gathered}$$ Let $\gamma_i$ be the open arcs on $\surf$, with grading $g_i$, that correspond to $\widehat{M}_i$ in $\DI$, as in the proof of Proposition \[pp:QS=QQ2\], the intersection between them which gives the non-zero $\Hom$ in is at an endpoint $Y$, cf. Figure \[fig:cut and lift\]. Then non-zero $\Hom$ in corresponds to the angle $\alpha=\gldim{\widehat{\sigma}}\cdot\pi$.
Step 2
: Pulling along the cut $\cut$, the arcs $\gamma_i$ becomes $\underline{\eta}_i$ on $\surfo$ and $Y$ becomes $Z\in{\bigtriangleup}$ again, cf. Figure \[fig:cut and lift\]. Then we have $$\underline{\beta}=\alpha=\gldim{\widehat{\sigma}}\cdot\pi=({\operatorname{Re}}(s)-1)\cdot\pi,$$ which implies the other angle $\underline{\beta}^c$ at $Z$ between $\underline{\eta}_i$ is exactly $\pi$. This also means that $\underline{\eta}_i$ are boundary arcs of (the zero sheet of) the core $\Core^0(\xi)$.
Step 3
: Now we can perturb the quadratic differential $\xi$ a little bit to get a new one $\xi'$, such that, for each pair of semistable objects as in Step 1, the corresponding angle $\underline{\beta}^c$ becomes less then $\pi$. Moreover, we require that the perturb is small so that the the cores $\core(\xi)$ and $\core(\xi')$ only differ at those angles $\underline{\beta}^c$. By Assumption \[ass:cuts\], $\xi'$ admits a compatible cut $\cut'$, which is also compatible with $\xi$ then.
Use the cut $\cut'$ to produce another quadratic differential $\underline{\xi}_0\in{\operatorname{Quad}}_\infty(\surf)$ that corresponds to another stability condition ${\widehat{\sigma}}_0$ in $\Stap\CLUS$. Note that $\cut'$ will cut any angle $\underline{\beta}$ as in Step 2, this implies that $$\gldim{\widehat{\sigma}}_0<\gldim{\widehat{\sigma}}={\operatorname{Re}}(s)-1.$$
With the Lagrangian immersion $\hh{L}_0$ that corresponds to $\cut_0$, we obtain another triple to induce $(\sigma,s)$: $$(\sigma,s)=(\hh{L}_0(\DI), {\widehat{\sigma}}_0,s)\otimes_{\oplus}R,$$ as required.
For the second statement, note that $\OStab_s\DX$ is open $\QStab_s\DX$ by Theorem \[thm:IQ\], we only need to show that it is closed in $\QStab_s\DX$ to finish the proof. This follows exactly the same as the closedness of the analogue map $K$ in [@BS § 11.5], where the support property is needed.
Hurwitz spaces via quadratic differentials in genus zero {#sec:Hurwitz}
========================================================
The aim of this section to identify the moduli space of CY-$s$ type quadratic differentials with the Hurwitz space in the case $g=0$.
Hurwitz spaces {#sec:HW}
--------------
Let $\uk=\{k_1,\dots,k_b\} $ be a multi-set of positive integers $k_i \in \ZZ_{\ge 1}$. A *Hurwitz cover of genus $g$ and a polar type $\uk$* is a pair of a compact Riemann surface $\rs$ of genus $g$ and a meromorphic function $f \colon \rs \to\PP^1$ such that poles of $f$ consists of $d$ points $f^{-1}(\infty)=\{z_1,\dots,z_b\}$ with orders ${\operatorname{ord}}_f(z_i)=-k_i$.
Two Hurwitz covers $(\rs,f)$ and $(\rs^{\prime},f^{\prime})$ are equivalent if there is a biholomorphism $h \colon \rs \to \rs^{\prime}$ such that $f=h^* f^{\prime} $. The *Hurwitz space ${\operatorname{HS}}(g,\uk)$* is the moduli space of Hurwitz covers of genus $g$ and a polar type $\uk$.
For a Hurwitz cover $(\rs,f)$, denote by $\Zer(f), \Pol(f) \subset S$ the set of zeros and poles of $f$ respectively. Write $\Crit(f)=\Zer(f) \cup \Pol(f)$. It is known that the dimension of the Hurwitz space in given by $$\dim_{\bC}{\operatorname{HS}}(g,\uk)=2g-2+b+\sum_{i=1}^b k_i,$$ which will be denoted by $n$.
The *regular locus* ${\operatorname{HS}}(g,\uk)_{\reg} \subset {\operatorname{HS}}(g,\uk) $ is defined to be the subset consisting of Hurwitz covers with simple zeros, which will be called regular Hurwitz covers. For $(\rs,f) \in {\operatorname{HS}}(g,\uk)_{\reg}$, denote by ${\bigtriangleup}=\zero(f)$. Then since $$0=\sum_{p \in \Crit(f)}\operatorname{ord}_f(p)=|\Delta|-\sum_{i=1}^b k_i,$$ we have $|\Delta|=\sum_{i=1}^b k_i$ in this case.
Marked surfaces and log surfaces from Hurwitz covers {#sec:log_HW}
----------------------------------------------------
In this section, we construct (ungraded) marked surfaces and (ungraded) log surfaces from Hurwitz covers. First consider the construction of marked surfaces.
\[con:MS\] For a Hurwitz cover $(\rs,f)$, we can associate a marked surface $(\SS,\M)$ as follows:
- A surface $\widetilde{\SS}$ is defined as the oriented real blow up of the underlying smooth surface of $S$ at the poles $f^{-1}(\infty)=\{z_1,\dots,z_b\}$.
- Define marked arcs $\widetilde{\M} \subset \partial \widetilde{\SS}$ as open intervals corresponding to asymptotic directions where $e^{f}$ decays exponentially as $z \to z_i$.
- By shrinking each marked arc of $\widetilde{\M}$ to a single point in $\widetilde{\SS}$, we obtain a marked surface $(\SS,\M)$.
Denote by $\partial_i$ the $S^1$-boundary component obtained from the real blow up at $z_i$ for $i=1,\dots,b$. Then by definition, there are $k_i=-\operatorname{ord}_f(z_i)$ points on the boundary component $\partial_i$.
Though we can construct the marked surface $(\SS,\M)$ from the Hurwitz cover $(\rs,f)$, this information is not enough to construct a grading $\eta$ on $(\SS,\M)$. In the next section (Section \[sec:framed\_HS\]), we introduce a primary quadratic differential in the case $g=0$, which allow us construct a natural grading $\eta$ on $(\SS,\M)$.
Next we consider the construction of log surfaces from Hurwitz covers. Let $(\rs,f)$ be a regular Hurwitz cover. Consider a multi-valued holomorphic function $\log f$ on $\rs^{\circ}:=\rs \setminus \Crit(f)$. Take a base point $* \in \rs^{\circ}$ and choose a value $\log f (*)$. First we note that the analytic continuation of $\log f(*)$ along with a cycle $\gamma \in \pi_1(\rs^{\circ},*)$ is given as the form $ \log f(*)+2\pi m$ for some $m \in \ZZ$. Then we obtain a representation $$\rho \colon \pi_1(\rs^{\circ},*) \to \langle q \rangle,
\quad \gamma \mapsto \rho(\gamma):= q^m.$$
\[def:log\] The [*logarithmic ($\log$) surface ${\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\rs^{\circ}$*]{} associated to a Hurwitz cover $(\rs,f)$ is defined to be the covering $\pi \colon {\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\rs^{\circ}\to \rs^{\circ}$ corresponding to the representation $\rho \colon \pi_1(\rs^{\circ},*) \to \langle q\rangle$. The infinite cyclic group $\langle q\rangle$ acts on ${\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}S^{\circ}$ as the group of deck transformations.
By definition, the multi-valued function ${\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}f$ can be lifted on the log surface ${\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\rs^{\circ}$ as a single-valued function through the analytic continuation. In other words, the surface ${\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\rs^{\circ}$ is the Riemann surface of the function $\log f$. We also note that for any complex number $s \in \bC$, the function $$f^{s-2}=e^{ (s-2)\log f }$$ is also a single-valued function on ${\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\rs^{\circ}$.
Finally we note that as in Section \[sec:MC\], for a log surface $\log \rs^{\circ}$ we can construct the topological (ungraded) log surface $({\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\rs_{\Delta}^{\circ})^f$ by adding zeros $\Delta$ of $f$ and doing the oriented real blow-ups at poles of $f$.
Primary quadratic differentials
-------------------------------
In the following, we assume $g=0$, namely $\rs \cong \PP^1$, and fix the coordinate $z \in \bC \cup \{\infty\}=\PP^1$. To simplify the notation, we will write $\PP$ instead of $\PP^1$.
Let $\ul=(l_1,\dots,l_b) \in \ZZ^b$ an ordered $b$ integers satisfying the condition $$\sum_{i=1}^b l_i=4.$$ For a Hurwitz cover $(\Pone,f)$ with poles $f^{-1}(\infty)=\{z_1,\dots,z_b\}$,we define a meromorphic quadratic differential $\Omega_{\ul}$ by $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:Omega l}
\Omega_{\ul}(z):=\prod_{i=1}^b \frac{{\mathrm{d}}z^2}{(z-z_i)^{l_i}}.\end{gathered}$$ We call $\Omega_{\ul}$ the *primary quadratic differential compatible with $(\Pone,f)$*.
For a Hurwitz cover $f \colon \Pone \to \Pone$ with poles of order $k_1,\dots,k_b$ at $z_1,\dots,z_b$ respectively, consider the primary quadratic differential $\Omega_{\ul}$. Then the quadratic differential $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:phi=e^f}
\phi:=e^f \Omega_{\ul}\end{gathered}$$ on $\Pone$ gives a quadratic differential with exponential-type singularities of indexes $$(\uk,\ul)=\{(k_1,l_1),\dots,(k_b,l_b)\}$$ at $z_1,\dots,z_b$ respectively. The following statement gives the other direction.
\[prop:exp\_HC\] Let $\phi$ be a quadratic differential on $\Pone$ with exponential-type singularities of indexes $(\uk,\ul)$ at $z_1,\dots,z_b$ respectively. Then there is a unique Hurwitz cover $f \colon \Pone \to \Pone$ with poles of order $k_1,\dots,k_b$ at $z_1,\dots,z_b$, up to $f \mapsto f+2 \pi \ii m$ for $m \in \ZZ$, such that $\phi=e^f \,\Omega_{\ul}$ for $\ul=(l_1,\dots,l_b)$.
First we consider the holomorphic function $g(z):= \phi(z) \slash \Omega_{\ul}(z)$ on $\Pone \setminus\{z_1,\dots,z_b\}$. Then by definition, $g(z)$ is non-zero on $\Pone \setminus\{z_1,\dots,z_b\}$ and points $z_1,\dots,z_b$ are essential singularities. Since $g(z)$ is non-zero away from $z_i$, it is sufficient to show that the function $\log g(z)$ has a pole of order $k_i$ at $z_i$ and is single-valued around $z_i$. By definition of exponential-type singularity, there is a coordinate change $V(z)$ satisfying $v(z_i)=0$ and $v^{\prime}(z_i) \neq 0$ near $z_i$ such that $$\phi=e^{v^{-k_i}}v^{-l_i}\cdot h_1(v){\mathrm{d}}v^2$$ where $h_1(v)$ is some non-zero holomorphic function near $v=0$. We also note that under the above coordinate change, the primary quadratic differential $\Omega_{\ul}$ can be written as $$\Omega_{\ul}=v^{-l_i}\cdot h_2(v){\mathrm{d}}v^2$$ where $h_2(v)$ is also some non-zero holomorphic function near $v=0$. Thus $g(z(v))=\exp(v^{-k_i} )\cdot h_1(v)\slash h_2(v)$ near $v=0$, which implies the proposition.
Similarly, we consider the analogue statement for CY-$s$ type quadratic differentials. Fix a complex number $s$ with ${\operatorname{Re}}(s)>2$. For a Hurwitz cover $f \colon \Pone \to \Pone$ with simple zeros and poles of order $k_1,\dots,k_b$ at $z_1,\dots,z_b$ respectively, define a multi-valued quadratic differential on $\Pone$ ramified at $\Crit(f)$ by $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:xxi}
\xi=f^{s-2} \,\Omega_{\ul}\end{gathered}$$ Then $\xi$ is a CY-$s$ type $q_s$-quadratic differential with $s$-poles of type $(\uk,\ul)$ at $z_1,\dots,z_b$. The following statement gives the other direction in this case.
\[prop:CY\_HC\] Let $\xi$ be a CY-$s$ type $q_s$-quadratic differential on $\Pone$ with $s$-poles of type $(k_1,l_1),\dots,(k_b,l_b)$ at $z_1,\dots,z_b$ together with a fixed value $\xi(*)$ on some point $* \in \log (\Pone )^{\circ}$. Then there is a unique regular Hurwitz cover $f \colon \Pone \to \Pone$ with poles of order $k_1,\dots,k_b$ at $z_1,\dots,z_b$ and a single valued function $\log f$ on $\log \Pone^{\circ}$, up to multiply by $\omega_{s-2}^m$ for $\omega_{s-2}=e^{2\pi \ii \slash (s-2)}$ and $m \in \ZZ$: $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:r^m}
f \mapsto \omega_{s-2} ^m f\quad\text{or}\quad\log f \mapsto \log f +\frac{2 \pi \ii m}{s-2},\end{gathered}$$ such that $$\xi=f^{s-2} \,\Omega_{\ul}
$$ where $\ul=(l_1,\dots,l_b)$ and the value $\log f(*)$ is determined by $\xi(*)=e^{(s-2)\log f(*)}\Omega_{\ul}(*)$.
First we note that the ambiguity $f \mapsto \omega_{s-2}^m f$ comes from $f^{s-2}=(\omega_{s-2}^mf)^{s-2}$ since $\omega_{s-2}^{s-2}=1$. Consider a multi-valued function $g(z):=\xi(z) \slash \Omega_{\ul}(z)$ and let $$f(z)\colon=g(z)^{1 \slash (s-2)}=e^{\frac{1}{s-2} \log g(z)}$$ up to multiplying $r^m$. We show that $f(z)$ has a pole of order $k_i$ at $z_i$ and is single-valued near $z_i$. Similar to the proof of Proposition \[prop:exp\_HC\], there is a coordinate change $v(z)$ satisfying $v(z_i)=0$ and $v^{\prime}(z_i) \neq 0$ near $z_i$ such that $$\xi=v^{-k_i(s-2)-l_i }{\mathrm{d}}v^2$$ and $$\Omega_{\ul}=v^{-l_i}\cdot h(v){\mathrm{d}}v^2$$ where $h(v)$ is also some non-zero holomorphic function near $v=0$. Then $g(z(v))=w^{-k_i(s-2)} \cdot h(v)^{-1}$ near $v=0$. Thus $f(z(v))=g(z(v))^{1 \slash (s-2)}$ has a pole of order $k_i$ at $w=0$ and is single-valued near $v=0$ since $h(v)^{-1}$ is non-zero.
Framed regular Hurwitz spaces {#sec:framed_HS}
-----------------------------
Let ${\P}=({\P},\M)$ be a (ungraded) marked surface of genus zero. Then the numerical data of ${\P}$ is just $$\num({\P})=(b;\uk,\ul)$$ since $g=0$ and ${\operatorname{LP}}_0$ is empty. Recall the definition of a topological log surface $\log \P_\Delta$ from Construction \[con:top log\]. Denote by ${\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\P_\Delta$ the topological log surface obtained by forgetting the grading from $\log \P_\Delta$.
Let $(\Pone,f)$ be a regular Hurwitz cover of a polar type $\uk$ and $(\log \Pone_{\Delta}^\circ)^f$ be the associated topological log surface constructed in Section \[sec:log\_HW\]. Then Proposition \[pp:winding\] implies that there is a homeomorphism $$h \colon {\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\P_\Delta \to ({\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\Pone_{\Delta}^\circ)^f$$ which commutes with the action of $\langle q \rangle$.
A *${\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\P_\Delta$-framed Hurwitz cover $(\Pone,f,\log f,h)$* consists of a regular Hurwitz cover $(\Pone,f)$, a fixed choice of the (single-valued) function $\log f$ on $\log \Pone^{ \circ}$ and a homeomorphism $$h \colon {\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\P_\Delta \to ({\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\Pone_{\Delta}^{\circ})^f$$ which commutes with the action of $\langle q \rangle$.
Two ${\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\P_\Delta$-framed Hurwitz cover $(\Pone,f_i,\log f_i,h_i)$ for $i=1,2$ are ${\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\P_\Delta$-equivalent if there is a biholomorphism $F \colon \Pone \to \Pone$ with the choice of a lift $\widetilde{F} \colon {\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\Pone^{ \circ} \to {\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\Pone^{ \circ}$ satisfies:
- $\widetilde{F}^* \log f_{2}=\log f_{1}$,
- $h_2^{-1} \circ \widetilde{F} \circ h_1\in\Homeo_0({\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\P_\Delta)$, where $$\widetilde{F} \colon (\log \Pone_{\Delta}^{\circ})^{f_1}\to
(\log \Pone_{\Delta}^{\circ})^{f_2}$$ is the induced homeomorphism.
Denote by ${\operatorname{HS}}({\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\P_\Delta)$ the moduli space of equivalence classes of ${\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\P_\Delta$-framed Hurwitz covers.
Recall that here ${\operatorname{MCG}}({\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\P_\Delta)$ is generated by the deck transformation $q$ and those homeomorphism induced from ${\operatorname{MCG}}(\P_\Delta)$. The right action of $g \in {\operatorname{MCG}}({\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\P_\Delta)$ on ${\operatorname{HS}}({\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\P_\Delta)$ is given by $$[(\Pone,f,\log f,h)]\cdot g:=[(\Pone,f,\log f,h\circ g)].$$ In particular, for the deck transformation $q \in {\operatorname{MCG}}(\log \P_\Delta)$, we have $$[(\Pone,f,\log f,h)]\cdot q=[(\Pone,f,\log f+2\pi \ii,h)]$$ since $[(\Pone,f,\log f,h\circ q)]$ and $[(\Pone,f,\log f+2\pi \ii,h)]$ are equivalent through the biholomorphism $q \colon {\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\Pone^{ \circ} \to {\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\Pone^{ \circ} $.
Choose a boundary component $\partial_1 \subset \P_\Delta$ with $k_1$ marked points and set $\widetilde{\partial}_1:=\pi^{-1}(\partial_1)$ for the covering map $\pi \colon {\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\P_\Delta \to \P_\Delta$. For an equivalence class of $\log \P_\Delta$-framed Hurwitz cover $[(\Pone,f,\log f,h)]$, assume that a pole $z_1$ of $f$ corresponds to $\widetilde{\partial}_1$ through the framing $h$. Then by the automorphism of $\Pone$, we can always take the representative $(\Pone,f,\log f,h)$ with $z_1=\infty$ and the coefficient of the pole of $f$ at $z_1=\infty$ is one, namely $f=z^{k_1}+\cdots$.
Recall from Definition \[def:x.f.quad\] that $\XQuad_s(\log \P_\Delta)$ is the moduli space of $q$-quadratic differentials with the numerical data $\num(\log \P_\Delta)=(b,\uk,\ul)$.
\[thm:HW\_Quad\_iso\] There is an isomorphism of complex manifolds $$\phi_s \colon {\operatorname{HS}}({\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\P_\Delta)\to \XQuad_s(\log \P_\Delta)$$ given by $$[(\Pone,f,\log f, h)] \mapsto [(\Pone,e^{(s-2)\log f}\Omega_{\ul},h,s)].$$ Here we use the representative $f$ with the form $f=z^{k_1}+\cdots$ as above.
It is easy to check the injectivity of $\phi_s$. We show the surjectivity of $\phi_s$. For an equivalence class of $q$-quadratic differential $[(\Pone,\xi,h,s)]$, by the automorphism of $\Pone$, we can take the representative $(\Pone,\xi,h,s)$ with $z_1=\infty$ where $z_1$ is an $s$-pole corresponding to $\widetilde{\partial}_1$. In addition, we can normalize as $$\xi=c ( z^{k_1(s-2)}+\cdots)\Omega_{\ul}$$ where $c=q_s^{2m}$ for some $m \in \ZZ$. Take some point $* $ from the interior of $\log \P_\Delta$. Then by Proposition \[prop:CY\_HC\], there is a regular Hurwitz cover $f \colon \Pone \to \Pone$ and a single valued function $\log f$ on $\log \Pone^{\circ}$, up to multiply by $\omega_{s-2}^m$ as in , such that $$\xi=f^{s-2} \,\Omega_{\ul} \quad \text{and} \quad \xi(h(*))=
e^{(s-2)\log f(h(*))}\Omega_{\ul}(h(*)).$$ By the construction of $f$ in the proof of Proposition \[prop:CY\_HC\], we can take $f$ with the form $f=z^{k_1}+\cdots$. This implies the surjectivity of $\phi_s$.
As a complex manifold, the moduli space $\XQuad_s(\log \P_\Delta)$ is independent of the date $\ul$ of $\num(\log \P_\Delta)$. However, the period map $$\Pi_s=\int \sqrt{\xi}$$ strongly depends on $\ul$ since $\xi=f^{s-2}\Omega_{\ul}$. The choice $\ul$ corresponds to the choice of the primitive form [@Sa; @SaTa] (the primary differential [@Dub1 Section 5]) and controls the Frobenius structure on ${\operatorname{HS}}({\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\P_\Delta)$.
Consider the union $$\XQuad(\log \P_\Delta):=\bigcup_{s \in \bC_{>2}} \XQuad_s(\log \P_\Delta).$$ where $\bC_{>2}=\{s \in \bC \,\vert\, {\operatorname{Re}}(s)>2\}$. Then the space $\XQuad(\log \P_\Delta)$ has the structure of a complex manifold of dimension $(n+1)$ induced from the bijection $$\XQuad(\log \P_\Delta) \cong {\operatorname{HS}}({\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\P_\Delta) \times \bC_{>2}$$ given by Theorem \[thm:HW\_Quad\_iso\].
In the case of disk: type A example
-----------------------------------
Now consider the type A case, where $\rs=\Pone$, $b=1$, $\uk=\{n+1\}$ and $\ul=\{4\}$. In this case, the marked surface is a disk with $n+1$ points on the boundary, which will be denoted by $\dd$. Consider the space of polynomials of degree $n+1$ $$\Poly_{n}:=\left\{f(z)\,\vert\, f(z)=z^{n+1}+a_1 \,
z^{n-1}+a_2\, z^{n-2}+\cdots+a_n,\,a_i \in \bC \right\} \cong \bC^n$$ and its regular subset $$\Poly_{n,\reg}
:=\{f(z) \in \Poly_n \,\vert\, \text{all zeros of $f(z)$ are simple}\}.$$ Then we can regard $f(z) \in \Poly_{n,\reg}$ as a genus $0$ regular Hurwitz cover $$f \colon \Pone \to \Pone$$ with a unique pole of order $n+1$ at $z =\infty$. Let $\mathfrak{h}$ be the Cartan subalgebra of type $A_n$ and $\mathfrak{h}_{\reg} \subset \mathfrak{h}$ be the regular subset. Then the space $\Poly_{n,\reg}$ can be identified with the quotient $\mathfrak{h}_{\reg} \slash W$ where $W$ is the Weyl group of type $A_n$, namely the symmetric group of degree $n+1$. Denote by $\widetilde{\Poly}_{n,\reg}$ the universal cover of $\Poly_{n,\reg}=\mathfrak{h}_{\reg} \slash W$.
Let $\omega_{n+1}=e^{2\pi \ii \slash (n+1) }$ the $(n+1)$-th root of unity and denote by $C_{n+1}:=\langle \omega_{n+1} \rangle$ the cyclic group of order $n+1$ generated by $\omega$. We define the action of $C_{n+1}$ on $\Poly_{n,\reg}$ by $$(\omega_{n+1} \cdot f) (z):=f(\omega_{n+1}^{-1} z).$$ Alternatively, we can write $\omega_{n+1} \cdot (a_i)_i=(\omega_{n+1}^{i+1}a_i)_i$ for coefficients $(a_i)_i$ of $f(z)$.
\[lem:HS\_poly\] There is an isomorphism $$\Poly_{n,\reg}\, \slash \, C_{n+1} \cong {\operatorname{HS}}(0,\{(n+1)\})_{\reg}.$$
It is easy to check that automorphisms of $\Pone$ which preserve $\Poly_{n,\reg}$ are $z \mapsto \omega z$ for $\omega \in C_{n+1}$.
We note that the cyclic group $C_{n+1}$ can be identified with the mapping class group ${\operatorname{MCG}}(\dd)$ and $\tau$ corresponds to the one step rotation of each point on the boundary of $\dd$. Let $\ddo$ be the decorated version of $\dd$ and it is well-know that $${\operatorname{MCG}}(\ddo)=\left( \Br_{n+1}\times\<\tau\> \right)/ \<\tau^{n+1}\>$$ where the mapping class group here allows permutation of marked points. More precisely, the $\tau^{n+1}$ is the Dehn twist $D_0$ along $\partial\ddo$, which is also the generator of the center of $\Br_{n+1}$.
Let ${\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\ddo$ be the topological (ungraded) log surface of type A. Then first we note the that the lift of the action $\tau \in {\operatorname{MCG}}(\dd)$ on ${\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\ddo$ can be identified with the deck transformation $q \in {\operatorname{MCG}}({\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\ddo)$. Then we have the following description of the mapping group ${\operatorname{MCG}}({\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\ddo)$.
\[prop:MCG\_braid\] There is an isomorphism of the group $${\operatorname{MCG}}({\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\ddo) \cong \left( \Br_{n+1} \times \langle q \rangle\right) \slash \langle q^{n+1} \rangle$$ where $q^{n+1}$ acts on $\Br_{n+1}$ as the lift of $D_0$.
In particular, we ahve $${\operatorname{MCG}}({\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\ddo)\slash \Br_{n+1} \cong {\operatorname{MCG}}(\dd) \cong C_{n+1}.$$
\[prop:uc=HS\] There is an isomorphism of complex manifolds $$\psi \colon \widetilde{\Poly}_{n,\reg}\to {\operatorname{HS}}({\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\ddo)$$
First we note that by definition there is an isomorphism $${\operatorname{HS}}({\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\ddo) \slash {\operatorname{MCG}}({\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\ddo) \cong {\operatorname{HS}}(0,\{(n+1)\})_{\reg}.$$ On the other hand, Proposition \[prop:MCG\_braid\] ipmlies $${\operatorname{MCG}}({\underline{\operatorname{log}}\,}\ddo) \cong \Br_{n+1} \times C_{n+1}.$$ Combining with Lemma \[lem:HS\_poly\], we have $$\widetilde{\Poly}_{n,\reg}\slash (\Br_{n+1}\times C_{n+1})
\cong \Poly_{n,\reg} \slash C_{n+1} \cong {\operatorname{HS}}(0,\{(n+1)\})_{\reg}.$$ Since all group actions in the above are free, the result follows.
Almost Frobenius structure in type A case
-----------------------------------------
In the prequel [@IQ], we describe the conjectural Almost Frobenius structure on $\QStab_s^{\circ}\DXQ$ for a Dynkin quiver $Q$. When $Q$ is of type A, $\DXQ=\DX$ where $\surf$ is a (graded) disk with $n+1$ marked point on its boudnary (and $\TT$ a full formal arc system of $\surf$). Then putting the results of Theorem \[thm:q=x\], Theorem \[thm:HW\_Quad\_iso\] and Proposition \[prop:uc=HS\], that identifying space $\QStab_s^{\circ}{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX(A_n)$ of $q$-stability conditions and $$\widetilde{\Poly}_{n,\reg}=\widetilde{\mathfrak{h}_\reg/W}.$$ via moduli spaces of (framed) $q$-quadratic differentials and (framed) Hurwitz spaces. we have the following.
[@IQ Thm. 6.14]\[cor:above\] The complex manifold $\QStab_s^{\circ}{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_\XX(A_n)$ can be identified with $\widetilde{\mathfrak{h}_\reg/W}$ and the central charge becomes the twisted period.
For detailed description of almost Frobenius structure (and twisted periods), cf. [@IQ § 6] or [@Dub2].
Bridgeland-Smith theory on orbit categories {#sec:BS-N}
===========================================
$N$-reductions
--------------
Suppose that $N\geq\gldim\ha_\TT+1$ and $\Gamma_\TT^N$ is the Calabi-Yau-$N$ Ginzburg algebra obtained from $\GAX$ by collapsing the double degree $(a,b)$ into a single degree $a+bN$. Then there is a projection between dg algebras $\pi_N\colon\GAX\to\GAN$, which induces a fully faithful exact functor $$\pi_N\colon\DX/[\XX-N]\to\DN\,(\colon={\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\Gamma_\TT^N)),$$ that makes $\DN$ the $N$-reduction of ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{\XX} {\mathbin{/\mkern-6mu/}}[\XX-N]$, in the sense that
- $\DN$ is the unique triangulated hull of the orbit category $\DX/[\XX-N]$,
- $K({\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_N) \cong \ZZ^{\oplus n}$ and the induced $R$-linear map $$[\pi_N] \colon K(\DX) \to K(\DN)$$ is a surjection given by sending $q \mapsto (-1)^N$.
Thus, we have the following by [@IQ Prop. 2.16].
There is an embedding $$\OStab_N \DX \to \Stab{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\Gamma_\TT^N)$$ between complex manifolds.
One interesting question is what is the condition for $\DX{\mathbin{/\mkern-6mu/}}[\XX-N]$ to be $N$-reductive. The condition $N\geq\gldim\ha_\TT+1$ is sufficient but may not be necessary. A better sufficient condition is $$N\geq\min\gldim\Stab\DI+1.$$ See the discussion of the minimal value of global dimension function on $\CC\backslash\Stab{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}/\Aut$ for certain triangulated categories ${\operatorname{\hh{D}}}$ in [@Q3].
We also the the following conjecture.
$\hh{C}(\GAX)$ admits the Serre functor $\tau\circ[1]$ (which should correspond to $[\XX-1]$) and $\hh{C}(\GAN)$ is the (unique) triangulated hull of $\hh{C}(\GAX){\mathbin{/\mkern-6mu/}}\tau[2-N]$ that fits into the commutative diagram. $$\xymatrix{
0 \ar[r] &
\DX \ar[r]\ar[d]^{_{{\mathbin{/\mkern-6mu/}}[\XX-N]}} &
{\operatorname{per}}\GAX \ar[r]\ar[d]^{_{{\mathbin{/\mkern-6mu/}}[\XX-N]}} &
\hh{C}(\GAX) \ar[r]\ar[d]^{_{{\mathbin{/\mkern-6mu/}}\tau[2-N]}} &0 \\
0 \ar[r] & {\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\GAN) \ar[r]& {\operatorname{per}}\GAN \ar[r] & \hh{C}(\GAN) \ar[r] &0
}$$
Quadratic differentials for Calabi-Yau-$N$ case
-----------------------------------------------
Finally, we have the following. The differential of an element of $\XQuad^\circ_N(\log\surfo)$ can be described as a CY-$s$ type quadratic differential on the Riemann surface $\rs$ of the following singularity type
- there are $\aleph$ zeros, each of which is an order $N-2$ zero.
- there are polar type is $\{k_i(N-2)+l_i\}$, each of which is a higher order pole.
Denoted by $\surf_N$ the real below-up of $\rs$ by such a differential then the isomorphism $$\XQuad_s(\log\surfo)\cong\OStab_s\DX$$ in Theorem \[thm:q=x\] gives an $N$-analogue of Bridgeland-Smith’s result: $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:BS N}
\Stap{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\Gamma_\TT^N)/\Aut\cong{\operatorname{Quad}}_N(\surf_N),\end{gathered}$$ where $\Stap{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\Gamma_\TT^N)$ is some subspace of $\Stab{\operatorname{\hh{D}}}_{fd}(\Gamma_\TT^N)$.
When $\surf$ is the disk (i.e. type A case), the $N$-analogue of is proved in [@I], which also can be read from Corollary \[cor:above\].
[99]{}
[,]{} [,]{} [*Ann. Inst. Fourier*]{} [**59**]{} [(2009)]{} [2525–2590.]{} ([[arXiv:0805.1035](http://arxiv.org/abs/0805.1035)]{})
[,]{} [,]{} [*Ann. Math.*]{} [**166**]{} [(2007)]{} [317–345.]{} ([arXiv:0212237](http://arxiv.org/abs/math/0212237))
[,]{} [,]{} [*J. Reine Angew. Math.*]{} to appear. ([[arXiv:1406.2566](http://arxiv.org/abs/1406.2566)]{})
[,]{} [,]{} [*Publ. Math. de l’IHÉS*]{} [**121**]{} [(2015)]{} [155–278.]{} ([[arXiv:1302.7030](http://arxiv.org/abs/1302.7030)]{})
[,]{} [,]{} [*Algebra Number Theory*]{} [**5**]{} [(2011)]{} [529–566.]{}
[,]{} [,]{} [*Compositio Mathematica*]{} [**148**]{} [(2012)]{} [1833–1866.]{} ([[arXiv:1108.1774](http://arxiv.org/abs/1108.1774)]{})
[,]{} [,]{} [*Selecta Mathematica*]{} [**14**]{} [(2008)]{} [59–119.]{} ([[arXiv:0704.0649](http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.0649)]{})
[,]{} [,]{} The influence of Solomon Lefschetz in geometry and topology, [*Contemp. Math.*]{} [**621**]{} [(2014)]{} [133–170.]{} ([[arXiv:1307.8418](http://arxiv.org/abs/1307.8418)]{})
[,]{} [,]{} [*Integrable systems and quantum groups ([M]{}ontecatini [T]{}erme*]{} [120–348.]{} [*ecture Notes in Math.*]{} [**1620**]{}, [*Adv. Math. Sci.*]{} [**55**]{} [*Springer, Berlin*]{} [(1996)]{} ([arxiv:math/9407018](https://arxiv.org/abs/math/9407018))
[,]{} [,]{} [*Geometry, topology, and mathematical physics*]{} [75–132.]{} [*Amer. Math. Soc. Transl. Ser.*]{} [**212**]{}, [*Adv. Math. Sci.*]{} [**55**]{} [*Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI*]{} [(2004)]{} ([arxiv:math/0307374](https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0307374))
[,]{} [,]{} [*Acta Math.*]{} [**201**]{} [(2008)]{} [83–146.]{} ([arXiv:0608367](http://arxiv.org/abs/math/0608367))
[,]{} [,]{} [*Adv. Math.*]{} [**234**]{} [(2013)]{} [239–403.]{} ([[arXiv:0907.3987](http://arxiv.org/abs/0907.3987)]{})
[,]{} Personal communication (emails).
[,]{} [,]{} [*Publ. Math. de l’IHÉS*]{} [**126**]{} [(2017)]{} [247–318.]{} [[arXiv:1409.8611](http://arxiv.org/abs/1409.8611)]{}.
[,]{} [,]{} [*Math. Ann.*]{} [**367**]{} [(2017)]{} [1–49.]{} [[arXiv:1405.5492](http://arxiv.org/abs/1405.5492)]{}.
[,]{} [,]{} [[arXiv:1807.00469](http://arxiv.org/abs/1807.00469)]{}.
[,]{} [,]{} in preparation. O. Iyama, D. Yang, [,]{} [[arXiv:1702.04475](http://arxiv.org/abs/1702.04475)]{}.
[,]{} [,]{} [[arXiv:1705.06023](http://arxiv.org/abs/1705.06023)]{}
[,]{} [,]{} [[arXiv:1801.06370](http://arxiv.org/abs/1801.06370)]{}
B. Keller, On differential graded categories, [arxiv:0601185](https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0601185).
B. Keller, [,]{} [*Doc. Math.*]{} [**10**]{} [(2005)]{} [551–581.]{}
B. Keller, Deformed Calabi-Yau completions, [*J. Reine Angew. Math.*]{} [**654**]{} [(2011)]{} [125–180.]{} [[arXiv:0908.3499](http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.3499)]{}
B. Keller, Triangulated Calabi-Yau categories, Trends in Representation Theory of Algebras (Zurich) (A. Skowronski, ed.), [*European Mathematical Society*]{} [(2008)]{} [467–489.]{}
[,]{} [,]{} ([[arXiv:1109.2924](http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.2924)]{})
[,]{} [,]{} [*Adv. Math.*]{} [**285**]{} [(2015)]{} [1106–1154.]{} ([[arXiv:1109.2924](http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.2924)]{})
[,]{} [,]{} ([[arXiv:1805.00030](http://arxiv.org/abs/1805.00030)]{})
[,]{} [,]{} [*J. Amer. Math. Soc.*]{} [**15**]{} [(2002)]{} [203–271.]{} ([arxiv:0006056](https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0006056))
M. Kontsevich, Homological algebra of mirror symmetry, *Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians* (Zürich, 1994), Birkhäuser, 1995, pp. 120�C139.
[,]{} [,]{} [[arXiv:0811.2435](http://arxiv.org/abs/0811.2435)]{}.
[,]{} [,]{} [[arXiv:1801.09659](http://arxiv.org/abs/1801.09659)]{}
[,]{} [,]{} [*Adv. Math.* ]{} [**307**]{} [(2017)]{} [684–714.]{} ([[arXiv:1504.02617](http://arxiv.org/abs/1504.02617)]{})
[,]{} [,]{} [*Adv. Math.*]{} [**269**]{} [(2015)]{} [220–264.]{} ([[arXiv:1111.1010](http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1010)]{})
[,]{} [,]{} [*Math. Ann.*]{} [**365**]{} [(2016)]{} [595–633.]{} ([[arXiv:1407.0806](http://arxiv.org/abs/1407.0806)]{})
[,]{} [,]{} [[arXiv:1807.00010](http://arxiv.org/abs/1807.00010)]{}
[,]{} [,]{} [*Proceeding of first Annual Meeting of ICCM*]{}, to appear. ([[arXiv:1806.00010](http://arxiv.org/abs/1806.00010)]{})
[,]{} [,]{} [*Math. Z.*]{} [**288**]{} [(2018)]{} [39–53.]{}. (Appendix of [[arXiv:1407.0806](http://arxiv.org/abs/1407.0806)]{})
[,]{} [,]{} [*Geom. Topol.*]{} [**22**]{} [(2018)]{} [3701–3760.]{} ([[arXiv:1407.5986](http://arxiv.org/abs/1407.5986)]{})
[,]{} [,]{}, [*Compos. Math.*]{} [**153**]{} [(2017)]{} [1779–1819.]{} ([[arXiv:1311.0010](http://arxiv.org/abs/1311.0010)]{})
[,]{} [,]{} [*Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.*]{} [online first.](https://doi.org/10.1090/tran/7598) ([[arXiv:1411.4003](http://arxiv.org/abs/1411.4003)]{})
[,]{} [,]{} [*Publ. RIMS.*]{} [**19**]{} [(1983)]{} [1231–1264.]{}
[,]{} [,]{} [*From Hodge theory to integrability and TQFT $tt^*$-geometry*]{} [31–48.]{} [*Proc. Sympos. Pure Math.*]{} [**78**]{} [*Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI*]{} [(2008)]{} ([arxiv:math/0307374](https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0307374))
[,]{} [,]{} [*Duke Math. J.*]{} [**108**]{} [(2001)]{} [37–108.]{} ([arxiv:0001043](https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0001043))
[,]{} [,]{} [*Geom. Topol.*]{} [**19**]{} [(2015)]{} [2557–2617.]{} ([[arXiv:1309.0452](http://arxiv.org/abs/1309.0452)]{})
[,]{} [,]{} [[arXiv:1612.06352](http://arxiv.org/abs/1612.06352)]{}.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
In this paper, we propose a novel convolutional neural network (CNN) for image denoising, which uses exponential linear unit (ELU) as the activation function. We investigate the suitability by analyzing ELU’s connection with trainable nonlinear reaction diffusion model (TNRD) and residual denoising. On the other hand, batch normalization (BN) is indispensable for residual denoising and convergence purpose. However, direct stacking of BN and ELU degrades the performance of CNN. To mitigate this issue, we design an innovative combination of activation layer and normalization layer to exploit and leverage the ELU network, and discuss the corresponding rationale. Moreover, inspired by the fact that minimizing total variation (TV) can be applied to image denoising, we propose a TV regularized L2 loss to evaluate the training effect during the iterations. Finally, we conduct extensive experiments, showing that our model outperforms some recent and popular approaches on Gaussian denoising with specific or randomized noise levels for both gray and color images.
[***Keywords—*** Image Denoising $\boldsymbol{\cdot}$ Convolutional Neural Network $\boldsymbol{\cdot}$ ELU $\boldsymbol{\cdot}$ Total Variation $\boldsymbol{\cdot}$ Deep Learning $\boldsymbol{\cdot}$ Image Processing]{}
author:
- Tianyang Wang
- Zhengrui Qin
- Michelle Zhu
bibliography:
- 'Reference.bib'
title: An ELU Network with Total Variation for Image Denoising
---
Introduction
============
Image denoising has been a long-time open and challenging research topic in computer vision, aiming to restore the latent clean image from a noisy observation. Generally, a noisy image can be modeled as $y$ = $x$ + $v$, where $x$ is the latent clean image and $v$ is the additive Gaussian white noise. To restore the clean mapping $x$ from a noisy observation $y$, there are two main categories of methods, namely image prior modeling based and discriminative learning based. Traditional methods, such as BM3D [@dabov2007image], LSSC [@mairal2009non], EPLL [@zoran2011learning], and WNNM [@gu2014weighted], lie in the first category. And the second category, pioneered by Jain et al. [@jain2009natural], includes MLP [@burger2012image], CSF[@schmidt2014shrinkage], DGCRF [@vemulapalli2016deep], NLNet [@lefkimmiatis2016non], and TNRD [@chen2017trainable]. Until recently, Zhang et al. [@zhang2017beyond] discovered a deep residual denoising method to learn the noisy mapping with excellent results. However, there is still leeway to boost the denoising performance by reconsidering the activation and the loss function in convolutional neural network (CNN).
In this paper, we propose a deep CNN with exponential linear unit (ELU) [@clevert2015fast] as the activation function and total variation (TV) as the regularizer of L2 loss function for image denoising, which achieves noticeable improvement compared to the state-of-the art work [@zhang2017beyond] in which the rectified linear unit (ReLU) [@krizhevsky2012imagenet] was used as the activation function. By analyzing the traits of ELU and its connection with trainable nonlinear reaction diffusion (TNRD) [@chen2017trainable] and residual denoising [@zhang2017beyond], we show that ELU is more suitable for image denoising applications. Specifically, our method is based on residual learning, and the noisy mapping learned with ELU has a higher probability to obtain a desired energy value than that learned with ReLU. It indicates that more noise can be removed from the original noisy observation, hence the denoising performance can be improved. On the other hand, batch normalization (BN) [@ioffe2015batch] is also applied in the model for the purpose of training convergence. However, Clevert et al. [@clevert2015fast] pointed out that the direct combination of BN and ELU would degrade the network performance. Instead, we construct a new combination of layers by incorporating $1\times$1 convolutional layers, which can better integrate the BN and ELU layers. In our model, we set Conv-ELU-Conv-BN as the fundamental block, where the second Conv denotes the $1\times$1 convolutional layer. Furthermore, we utilize TV, which is a powerful regularizer in traditional denoising methods [@chan2005recent; @goldluecke2010approach; @wang2011mtv], to regularize L2 loss to further improve the network training performance. Without considering the dual formulation, the TV regularizer can still be solved by stochastic gradient decent (SGD) algorithm during the network training. Finally, we conduct extensive experiments to validate the effectiveness of our proposed approach.
The main contributions of this work can be generalized in three-folds. First, we have analyzed the suitability of ELU to denoising task. Second, we have proposed a novel combination of layers to better accommodate ELU and BN. Third, we have applied total variation to regularize L2 loss function. The rest of paper is organized as follows. The proposed network with ELU and TV is presented in section 2 with the analysis of rationale. Extensive experiments and evaluation results can be found in section 3. Section 4 concludes our work with future plan.
The Proposed Network
====================
In our approach, a noisy mapping, rather than a clean mapping, is learned since residual learning had been proven successful for image denoising [@zhang2017beyond]. Besides, residual learning had been validated effective for scatter correction in medical image processing [@xu2017CT] which requires higher reliability. Before presenting our network architecture, we first discuss the ELU and its intrinsic property for denoising task, followed by how to regularize L2 loss with total variation. Our analysis on both ELU and TV are mainly derived from the energy perspective as denoising is closely relevant to energy reduction.
Exponential Linear Unit
-----------------------
The primary contribution of an activation function is to incorporate nonlinearity into a stack of linear convolutional layers to increase the network ability of capturing discriminative image features. As one of the activation functions, ELU [@clevert2015fast] is defined as: $$f(x) =
\begin{cases}
x & \quad \text{if } x > 0 \\
\alpha (e^x-1) & \quad \text{if } x \leq 0\\
\end{cases}
$$ where parameter $\alpha$ is used to control the level of ELU’s saturation for negative inputs and a pre-determined value can be used for the entire training procedure. Unlike ReLU, the most frequently used activation function, ELU does not force the negative input to be zero, which can make the mean unit activation approach zero value since both positive and negative values can counteract each other in the resulted matrix. The near zero mean unit activation not only speeds up learning with a faster convergence but also enhances system robustness to noise. Although ELU has higher time complexity than other activation functions due to the exponential calculation, it can be tolerated if better domain performance is desired.
Motivation of Using ELU {#Motivation}
-----------------------
For ELU network, Clevert et al. [@clevert2015fast] reported a significant improvement on CIFAR-100 classification over the ReLU network with batch normalization. On ImageNet, ELU network also obtained a competitive performance with faster convergence compared to ReLU network. To the best of our knowledge, there is no existing work exploring the connection of ELU with Gaussian image denoising. In our work, we note that using different activation functions can generate residual mappings with different energy, which can be interpreted as angular second moment (ASM) and computed as follows： $$\label{equation2}
ASM=\sum_{i,j=0}^{N-1}P_{i,j}^2$$ In practice, $P_{i,j}$ is an element of the gray-level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM) of a noisy mapping: $P_{i,j}$ $\in$ GLCM($v$). Since noisy image has lower ASM compared to a clean one, learning a noisy mapping with lower ASM can be expected. For better clarification, we study the connection between the residual denoising and TNRD [@chen2017trainable] which was initially analyzed by Zhang et al. in [@zhang2017beyond]. According to their work, such a relation can be described by $$\label{equation3}
v=y-x= \lambda \sum_{k=1}^K (\bar{f_k}*\phi_k(f_k*y))$$ where $v$ is the estimated residual of the latent clean image $x$ with respect to the noisy observation $y$. $f_k$ is a convolutional filter used in a typical CNN, and $\bar{f_k}$ is the filter obtained by rotating the filter $f_k$ by 180 degrees. We ignore the constant parameter $\lambda$ since it only weights the right side term in Eq. (\[equation3\]). The influence function $\phi$ can be an activation function applied to feature maps or the original input. For residual denoising problem, the noisy mapping $v$ should contain as much noise as possible. Therefore, the ASM is expected to be low. According to Eq. (\[equation2\]), (\[equation3\]), our goal is to choose the right activation function $\phi$ to have $ASM(v)_{\phi} < ASM(v)_{ReLU}$. To choose an appropriate $\phi$, we conduct a simple experiment on three benchmark datasets, namely Pascal VOC2011, Caltech101, and 400 images of size $180\times$180 from BSD500 dataset that we use to train our network in section \[experiments\]. For each clean image, Gaussian white noise ($\sigma = 25$) is added to obtain the noisy observation denoted by $y$. We generate a randomized $3\times$3 filter as $f_k$, and take ELU as the function $\phi$. The parameter $\alpha$ in Eq. (1) is set to 0.1 for ELU. The comparison of $ASM(v)_{ELU}$ and $ASM(v)_{ReLU}$ is given in Table \[table1\].
\[table1\]
VOC 2011 Caltech 101 BSD 400
---------------------------------------------- ---------- ------------- ---------
$ASM(v)_{ELU} > ASM(v)_{ReLU}$ 5310 3275 130
$ASM(v)_{ELU} < ASM(v)_{ReLU}$ 9651 5868 270
Percentage of $ASM(v)_{ELU} < ASM(v)_{ReLU}$ 65% 64% 68%
: The comparison of $ASM(v)_{ELU}$ and $ASM(v)_{ReLU}$
It can be observed that there is a higher probability to get a lower ASM value when ELU is utilized as the activation function. As mentioned above, a low ASM corresponds to high noisy image. In residual denoising, higher noisy mapping means that more noise can be removed from the original noisy input, resulting in a better denoising effect. In other words, $ASM(v)$ should be small. Therefore, based on Table \[table1\], ELU is preferred over ReLU as the activation function for higher noisy residual mapping.
TV Regularizer
--------------
In Section \[Motivation\], we discuss activation selection to reduce ASM energy of a noisy mapping, and we know that the ASM for a noisy image is smaller than that of a clean counterpart. Unlike the ASM, total variation (TV) evaluates the energy directly from the original input signal. A noisy image has larger TV value than that of a clean one, and image denoising can be performed by minimizing the TV value [@chan2005recent]. Similarly, in residual denoising, the original L2 loss which measures the distance between the residual mapping and the ground truth noise also needs to be minimized. We thus use TV to regularize L2 loss function which is to be minimized by CNN, and the new loss function is defined as: $$\label{equation4}
L=\frac{1}{2N}\sum_{i=1}^N||R-(y_i-x_i)||^2+\beta TV(y_i-R)$$ and according to [@chan2005recent], the TV value can be computed by $$TV(u) \approx \sum_{i,j} \sqrt{(\nabla_x u)^2_{i,j}+(\nabla_y u)^2_{i,j}}$$ where we take $R$ as the learned noisy mapping of the latent clean image $x_i$ with respect to the noisy observation $y_i$, and $\nabla_x$, $\nabla_y$ are discretizations of the horizontal and vertical derivatives, respectively. Here, $\{(y_i,x_i )\}_{i=1}^N$ represents the noisy-clean image patch for training. $\beta$ is used to weigh the total variation term. Though $\beta$ can be a fixed value during training, our experiments show that updating its value with the change of training epochs could achieve better results. In general, solving a TV regularizer usually requires the dual formulation, however, it can be solved by stochastic gradient decent (SGD) algorithm during training without considering the dual formulation in our work. In Eq. (\[equation4\]), the minimization of the first term (L2 loss) will learn the noisy mapping, and the second term (TV) can be regarded as further denoising the obtained clean mapping.
Network Architecture {#Architecture}
--------------------
Our model is derived from the vgg-verydeep-19 pre-trained network [@simonyan2014very], and includes a total of 15 convolutional layer blocks and 2 separate convolutional layers. There is no fully connected layer. The network architecture is shown in Fig. \[fig1\].
{width="80.00000%"}
\[fig1\]
The first convolutional layer is connected to an ELU layer to add nonlinearity, and the output of the last convolutional layer is fed into the loss layer. Between the two ends, the network is composed of 15 convolutional layer blocks with Conv-ELU-Conv-BN pattern.
It has been shown that ELU can replace ReLU as the activation function in section \[Motivation\]. Therefore, Conv-ELU is built in each convolutional block. Batch normalization (BN) is necessary for residual denoising as reported by Zhang et al. [@zhang2017beyond]. However, direct combination of BN and ELU will adversely affect the network performance [@clevert2015fast]. Fortunately, it is known that the pixel-wise co-efficient transformation can be achieved by a $1\times$1 convolutional layer, which can also increase the non-linearity of the decision function [@simonyan2014very; @he2016deep]. We thus utilize a $1\times$1 convolutional layer between ELU and BN layer. Every second Conv in each block holds $1\times$1 filters, and other filters are all in the size of $3\times$3. Such configuration not only exerts the advantages of $1\times$1 convolutional layer, but also avoids direct connection of BN and ELU.
Note that our model does not contain any pooling layer since the final output must have the same size as the original input. One may argue that fully convolutional networks (FCN) [@long2015fully] can also restore the output size, however it cannot be used in our case because it contains a pooling layer and thus needs up-sampling operation, which is not desirable for image denoising. Furthermore, FCN was originally designed for pixel-level classification without fully considering the relationships between pixels.
Experiments
===========
Our experiments are conducted in Matlab using MatConvNet framework [@vedaldi2015matconvnet], which provides convenient interface to design network structure by adding or removing predefined layers. One NVidia Geforce TITAN X GPU is used to accelerate the mini-batch processing. To validate the efficacy of our method, we train three networks. The first network is for gray image Gaussian denoising with specific noise levels; the second and the third one are for color image Gaussian denoising with specific and randomized noise levels, respectively.
Data sets
---------
We choose the experiment datasets similar to the work from [@zhang2017beyond]. For gray image denoising with a specific noise level, 400 images of size $180\times$180 from Berkeley segmentation dataset (BSD500) are used for training and $128\times$1600 patches are cropped with size $40\times$40 for each. All color images are converted to gray ones prior to training. Three noise levels are considered, namely $\sigma =15, 25, 50$. Two testing datasets are used: BSD68 that contains 68 images, and the other set of 12 most frequently used gray images[^1] in image processing community. Note that there is no overlapping between the training and the testing datasets.
For color image denoising, the color version of BSD68 is employed as the testing data and the remaining 432 images from BSD500 are used for training. $\sigma =15, 25, 50$ are still used as the specific noise levels, and $128\times$3000 patches with size $50\times$50 are cropped. However, for blind denoising, the noise levels are randomly selected from range \[0, 55\].
Compared Methods
----------------
Besides the well-known methods such as BM3D[@dabov2007image], LSSC[@mairal2009non], WNNM[@gu2014weighted], EPLL[@zoran2011learning], MLP[@burger2012image], CSF[@schmidt2014shrinkage], we also consider another four similar neural network based methods, namely DGCRF[@vemulapalli2016deep], NLNet[@lefkimmiatis2016non], TNRD[@chen2017trainable] and DnCNN[@zhang2017beyond], since these methods have reported promising results.
Network Training
----------------
As explained in Section \[Architecture\], our network has 15 convolutional blocks and 2 separate convolutional layers. We use the same depth for both gray and color image denoising. We initialize the weights using MSRA as He et al. [@he2015delving] did for image classification. The TV regularizer is incorporated into the L2 loss function, and the entire network is trained by SGD with a momentum of 0.9. The initial learning rate is set to be 0.001, and changed to 0.0001 after 30 out of 50 epochs. The initial value of $\beta$ in Eq. (\[equation4\]) is set to 0.0001, and increased to 0.0005 after 30 epochs. The weight decay is set to 0.0001. It is worth noting that weight decay regularizes the filter weights, whereas total variation regularizes the L2 loss.
Results Analysis
----------------
In our work, peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) is utilized to evaluate the denoising effect. We first compare our method with other well-known methods on BSD68 gray images. The results are given in Table \[table2\], where the best ones are highlighted in bold. It can be seen that our model shows the best average PSNR for all the three specific noise levels. When $\sigma =50$, our method outperforms BM3D by 0.7dB, which reaches the estimated upper bound over BM3D in [@dabov2007image]. We further validate our method on the 12 commonly used test images for image processing task, and the average PSNR is compared in Table \[table3\]. Our method outperforms DnCNN by around 0.1dB, which gives similar increments as in Table \[table2\].
\[table2\]
--------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -----------
$\sigma$ = 15 31.08 - 31.21 31.27 31.24 31.37 31.43 31.42 31.52 31.73 **31.82**
$\sigma$ = 25 28.57 28.96 28.68 28.71 28.74 28.83 28.89 28.92 29.03 29.23 **29.34**
$\sigma$ = 50 25.62 26.03 25.67 25.72 - 25.87 - 25.96 26.07 26.23 **26.32**
--------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -----------
: The average PSNR of different methods on the gray version of BSD68 dataset.
\[table3\]
Methods BM3D WNNM EPLL MLP CSF TNRD DnCNN Ours
--------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -----------
$\sigma$ = 15 32.37 32.70 32.14 - 32.32 32.50 32.86 **32.96**
$\sigma$ = 25 29.97 30.26 29.69 30.03 29.84 30.06 30.44 **30.55**
$\sigma$ = 50 26.72 27.05 26.47 26.78 - 26.81 27.21 **27.29**
: The average PSNR of different methods on the 12 most commonly used gray images in image processing community.
Besides gray image denoising, we also train our model with specific and randomized noise levels for color image denoising. Table \[table4\] depicts the competency of our model trained with specific noise levels. Similar to gray image case, our method increases the PSNR by about 0.1dB compared to DnCNN, which is trained with specific noise levels as well. Note that training with randomized noise levels also generates satisfied results, which, however, are inferior to the results achieved by the models trained with specific noise levels.
\[table4\]
Methods CBM3D MLP TNRD NLNet DnCNN Ours
--------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -----------
$\sigma$ = 15 33.50 - 31.37 33.69 33.99 **34.10**
$\sigma$ = 25 30.69 28.92 28.88 30.96 31.31 **31.41**
$\sigma$ = 50 27.37 26.01 25.96 27.64 28.01 **28.11**
: The average PSNR of different methods on the color version of BSD68 dataset.
The visual comparison between our method and other well-known methods are given in Fig. 2 $\sim$ Fig. 4. We add noise ($\sigma =25$) for one gray image, and our model is trained with a specific noise level ($\sigma =25$). The denoising effect is shown in Fig. 2. While in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4, to validate randomized level (blind) denoising effect, we add two different noise levels ($\sigma = 35,50$) for each color image, respectively. Note that color denoising visual comparison is carried only between our method and DnCNN, since DnCNN, to our best knowledge, is the state-of-the-art denoising method. Moreover, DnCNN also supports blind denoising. We compare our model with the version of DnCNN which was trained with randomized noise levels in the range of \[0,55\]. To achieve fair comparison, our model is also trained with randomized noise levels within the same range. Results show that our model preserves more image details. Moreover, the over-smooth issue of the background scene is also alleviated. Hence, the utilization of total variation does not over-smooth the image.
\[figure2\]
\[figure3\]
Conclusion
==========
In this paper, we propose a deep convolutional neural network with exponential linear unit as the activation function and total variation as the regularizer of L2 loss for Gaussian image denoising. By analyzing the advantages of ELU and the connection with residual denoising and trainable nonlinear reaction diffusion model, we have validated that ELU is more suitable for image denoising problem. To better accommodate ELU and BN layer, we design a novel structure by incorporating $1\times$1 convolutional layer. By studying the traits of total variation, we have shown the feasibility of regularizing L2 loss with TV in convolutional nets. Extensive experiments show promising quantitative and visual results compared with other reputed denoising methods which are based on image prior modeling or discriminative learning. Furthermore, since we have observed the improvement in image denoising by replacing ReLU with ELU in convolutional nets, we will continue to investigate other improved versions of ReLU, such as PReLU, RReLU, and LReLU for denoising task in future work.
Acknowledgments {#sec:Acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
This project was partially supported by the new faculty start-up research grant at Montclair State University.
[^1]: https://github.com/cszn/DnCNN/tree/master/testsets/Set12
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'It is well known that the sum of points of the period five cycle of the quadratic polynomial $f_{c}(x)=x^{2}+c$ is generally not one-valued. In this paper we will show that the sum of cycle points of the curves of period five is at most three-valued on a new coordinate plane, and that this result is essentially the best possible. The method of our proof relies on a implementing Gröbner-bases and especially extension theory from the theory of polynomial algebra.'
address: 'Department of Physics and Mathematics, University of Eastern Finland, P. O. Box 111, FI-80101 Joensuu, Finland;'
author:
- Pekka Kosunen
title: Uniqueness of the sum of points of the period five cycle of quadratic polynomials
---
Introduction
============
The dynamics of quadratic polynomials is commonly studied by using the family of maps $f_{c}(x)=x^{2}+c$, where $c\in \mathbb{C}$ and $x_{i+1}=f_{c}(x_{i})=x_{i}^{2}+c$. In the article [@5] we presented the corresponding iterating system on a new coordinate plane using the change of variables $$\left\{\begin{array}{l}
u=x+y=x_{0}+x_{1} \\
v=x+y^2+y-x^2 =x_{0}+x_{1}^{2}+x_{1}-x_{0}^{2} \label{3}
\end{array}\right.$$ to the $(x,y)$-plane model (see [@1]). In this new $(u,v)$-plane model, equations of periodic curves are of remarkably lower degree than in earlier models. Now the dynamics of the $(u,v)$-plane is determined by the iteration of the function $$\begin{aligned}
G(u,v)&=&(R(u,v),Q(u,v)) \\
&=&\left(\frac{-u+v+uv}{u},\frac{u^2-u+v-u^2v-uv+uv^2+v^2}{u}\right),\end{aligned}$$ which is a two-dimensional quadratic polynomial map defined in the complex $2$-space $\mathbb{C}^{2}$. The new iteration system is defined recursively as follows: $$\left\{\begin{array}{l}
(R_{0}(u,v),Q_{0}(u,v))=(u,v)=(u_{0},v_{0}), \\ \\
(R_{1}(u,v),Q_{1}(u,v))=(R(u,v),Q(u,v))=(u_{1},v_{1}), \\ \\
(R_{n+1}(u,v),Q_{n+1}(u,v))=G(R_{n}(u,v),Q_{n}(u,v))=(u_{n+1},v_{n+1}),\label{5}
\end{array}\right.$$ where $$\left\{\begin{array}{l}
R_{n+1}(u,v)=Q_{n}(u,v)-1+Q_{n}(u,v)/R_{n}(u,v) \\ \\
Q_{n+1}(u,v)=R_{n+1}(u,v)(1+Q_{n}(u,v)-R_{n}(u,v)),\label{6}
\end{array}\right.$$ and $n\in \mathbb{N}\cup\{0\}$. Now $(u,v)$ is fixed $G^{n}$, so $G^{n}(u,v)=(u,v)$, if and only if $(R_{n}(u,v),Q_{n}(u,v))=(u,v)$. The set of such points is the union of all orbits, whose period divides $n$, and the set of periodic points of period $n$ are the points with exact period dividing $n$.
In complex dynamics, the sum of period cycle points has been a commonly used parameter in many connections (see, for example, [@4], [@13], [@1], [@17] and [@2]). In the article [@17] Giarrusso and Fisher used it to the parameterization of the period $3$ hyperbolic components of the Mandelbrot set. Later, in the article [@1], Erkama studied the case of the period $3-4$ hyperbolic components of the Mandelbrot set on the $(x,y)$-plane and completely solved both cases.
Moreover, Erkama [@1] has shown that the sum of periodic orbit points $$S_{n}=x_{0}+x_{1}+x_{2}+ \ldots +x_{n-2}+x_{n-1}$$ is unique when $n=3$ or $n=4$. Conversely, the sum of cyclic points of period three and four determines these orbits uniquely. In the period five case this situation changes and the sum of the cycle points is no longer unique. We can see this property in the articles [@4] and [@2], in which Brown and Morton have formed the so called *trace* formulas in the cases of period five and six using $c$ and the sum of period cycle points as parameters. In this paper we will show that by implementing the change of variables ($\ref{3}$), we obtain a new coordinate plane where the sum of period five cycle points is at most three-valued, and show that no better result is obtainable in this coordinate plane. This is done by applying methods of polynomial algebra (without the classical trace formula), as our proof relies on the use of the elimination theory and especially the extension theorem [@12]. The extension theorem tells us the best possible result (which the trace formula does not necessarily do) due to the use of Gröbner-basis. In the next section we present the most central tools and constructions related to these theorems.
A brief introduction to the elimination theorem
===============================================
We start with the *Hilbert basis theorem*: Every *ideal* $I \subset \mathbb{C}[x_{1},
\ldots ,x_{n}]$ has a finite generating set. That is $I=\langle g_{1}, \ldots , g_{t} \rangle$ for some $g_{1}, \ldots , g_{t} \in I$. Hence $\langle g_{1}, \ldots , g_{t} \rangle$ is the ideal generated by the elements $ g_{1}, \ldots , g_{t}$, in other words $ g_{1}, \ldots , g_{t}$ is the basis of the ideal. The so called *Gröbner-basis* has proved to be especially useful in many connections [@12], for example in kinematic analysis of mechanisms (see [@16] and [@15]). In order to introduce this basis we need the following constructions. Let the $f\in \mathbb{C}[x_{1}, \ldots ,x_{n}]$ be the polynomial given by $$f=\sum_{\alpha}a_{\alpha}x^{\alpha},$$ where $a_{\alpha}\in \mathbb{C}$, $\alpha=(\alpha_{1},\ldots ,\alpha_{n})$ and $x^{\alpha}=x_{1}^{\alpha_{1}} \cdot x_{2}^{\alpha_{2}} \cdots x_{n}^{\alpha_{n}}$ is a monomial. Then the *multidegree* of $f$ is $$\displaystyle{mdeg}(f)=max \{\alpha \mid a_{\alpha}\neq 0\},$$ the *leading coefficent* of $f$ is $$LC(f)=a_{mdeg(f)},$$ the *leading monomial* of $f$ is $$LM(f)=x^{mdeg(f)},$$ and the *leading term* of $f$ is $$LT(f)=LC(f)LM(f).$$
To calculate a Gröbner basis of an ideal we need to order terms of polynomials by using a *monomial ordering*. A Gröbner basis can be calculated by using any monomial ordering, but differences in the number of operations can be very significant. An effective tool to calculate the Gröbner basis is the software *Singular*, which has been especially designed for operating with polynomial equations. Next we will define a monomial ordering of nonlinear polynomials.
Relation $<$ is the *linear ordering* in the set $S$, if $x<y$, $x=y$ or $y<x$ for all $x,y \in S$. A monomial ordering in the set $\mathbb{N}^{n}$ is a relation $\prec$ if $$\begin{array}{lll}
1. && \prec \ \textrm{is} \ \textrm{linear} \ \textrm{ordering}, \\
2. && \textrm{implication} \ x^{\alpha} \prec x^{\beta} \Rightarrow x^{\alpha+\gamma} \prec x^{\beta +\gamma} \ \textrm{holds} \ \textrm{for} \ \textrm{all} \ \alpha,\beta,\gamma \in \mathbb{N}^{n}, \\
3. && x^{\alpha}>1.
\end{array}$$ To compute elimination ideals we need *product orderings*. Let $\succ_{A}$ be an ordering for the variable $x$, and let $\succ_{B}$ be ordering for the variable $y$ in the ring\
$\mathbb{C}[x_{1},
\ldots ,x_{n},y_{1}, \ldots ,y_{m}]$. Now we can define the product ordering as follows: $$x^{\alpha}y^{\beta}\succ x^{\gamma}y^{\delta} \qquad \textrm{if} \qquad
\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
x^{\alpha} \succ_{A} x^{\gamma} \quad & \textrm{or} \\
x^{\alpha} = x^{\gamma} \quad &\textrm{and} \quad y^{\beta} \succ_{B} y^{\delta}.
\end{array}\right.$$ There are several monomial orders but we need only the *lexicographic order* $\prec_{lex}$ in the elimination theory. Let $\alpha,\beta\in \mathbb{N}^{n}$. Then we say that $x^{\alpha} \prec_{lex} x^{\beta}$ if $x^{\alpha_{1}}=x^{\beta_{1}}, \ldots, x^{\alpha_{k-1}}=x^{\beta_{k-1}}, x^{\alpha_{k}} \succeq x^{\beta_{k}}$ and $x^{\alpha_{k+1}} \prec x^{\beta_{k+1}}$. One of the most important tools in the elimination theory is the *Gröbner basis of an ideal*: Fix a monomial order. A finite subset $$G_{I}=\{g_{1}, \ldots , g_{t}\} \subset I$$ of an ideal $I$ is said to be a Gröbner basis (or standard basis) if $$\langle LT(g_{1}) , \ldots , LT(g_{t}) \rangle=\langle LT(I) \rangle.$$ Based on the Hilbert basis theorem we know that every ideal $I \subset \mathbb{C}[x_{1},
\ldots ,x_{n}]$ has a Gröbner basis $G_{I}=\{g_{1}, \ldots , g_{s}\}$ so that $$\langle G_{I} \rangle=I.$$
It is essential to construct also an affine variety corresponding to the ideal. Let $f_{1}, \ldots , f_{s}$ be polynomials in the ring $\mathbb{C}[x_{1},
\ldots ,x_{n}]$. Then we set $$\mathbf{V}(f_{1}, \ldots , f_{s})=\{(a_{1} , \ldots ,a_{n}) \in
\mathbb{C}^{n}:f_{i}(a_{1} , \ldots ,a_{n})=0 \ \textrm{for} \ \textrm{all} \ 1\leq i \leq s \},$$ and we call $\mathbf{V}(f_{1}, \ldots , f_{s})$ as the *affine variety* defined by $f_{1}, \ldots ,f_{s}$. Now if $I=\langle f_{1}, \ldots , f_{s} \rangle$, so $\mathbf{V}(I)=\mathbf{V}(f_{1}, \ldots , f_{s})$ and naturally we obtain the variety of the ideal as the variety of its Gröbner basis: $\mathbf{V}(I)=\mathbf{V}(\langle G_{I} \rangle)$.
When we consider ideals and their algebraic varieties we are sometimes just interested about polynomials $f\in \mathbb{C}[x_{1},
\ldots ,x_{n}]$, which belong to the original ideal $f\in I$, but contain only certain variables of the ring variables of $\mathbb{C}[x_{1},
\ldots ,x_{n}]$. For this purpose we need *elimination ideals*. Let $I=\langle f_{1}, \ldots ,f_{s} \rangle \subset \mathbb{C}[x_{1},
\ldots ,x_{n}]$. The $k$:th elimination ideal $I_{k}$ is the ideal of $\mathbb{C}[x_{k+1}, \ldots ,x_{n}]$ defined by $$I_{k}=I \cap \mathbb{C}[x_{k+1}, \ldots ,x_{n}].$$ Next we give the an important *elimination theorem* which we use in our proof.
\[elim\] Let $I \subset \mathbb{C}[x_{1},
\ldots ,x_{n}]$ be an ideal and let $G$ be a Gröbner basis of $I$ with respect to lexicographic order, where $x_{1}
\succ x_{2} \succ \ldots \succ x_{n}$. Then for every $0\leq k \leq n$, the set $$G_{k}=G \cap \mathbb{C}[x_{k+1}, \ldots ,x_{n}]$$ is a Gröbner basis of the $k$:th elimination ideal $I_{k}$.
The elimination theorem is closely related to the *extension theorem*, which tells us the correspondence between varieties of the original ideal and the elimination ideal. In other words, if we apply this theorem to a system of equations we see whether the partial solution $V(I_{k})$ of the system of equations is also a solution of the whole system $V(I)$.
\[5a\] Let $I=\langle f_{1}, \ldots ,f_{s} \rangle \subset
\mathbb{C}[x_{1}, \ldots ,x_{n}]$ and let $I_{1}$ be the first elimination ideal of $I$. For each $1\leq i \leq s$ write $f_{i}$ in the form $$f_{i}=g_{i}(x_{2}, \ldots , x_{n})x_{1}^{N_{i}}+ \ \textrm{terms} \ \textrm{in} \ \textrm{which} \ \textrm{deg}(x_{1}) < N_{i},$$ where $N_{i}\geq 0$ and $g_{i} \subset \mathbb{C}[x_{2}, \ldots
,x_{n}]$ , $g_{i}\neq 0$. Suppose that we have a partial solution $(a_{2}, \ldots , a_{n})\in
\mathbf{V}(I_{1})$. If $(a_{2}, \ldots , a_{n}) \notin
\mathbf{V}(g_{1}, \ldots ,g_{s})$, then there exists $a_{1}\in
\mathbb{C}$ such that $(a_{1},a_{2}, \ldots , a_{n}) \in \mathbf{V}(I)$.
On properties of points sums of period $3-5$ cycles
===================================================
In this section we first prove the uniqueness properties of points sums of cycles of period three and four by using methods from polynomial algebra in a new way. After this we concentrate on the period five case and show that the sum of period five cycle points is at most three-valued. The next result shows the relation between the sums of cycle points of the $(x,y)$-plane [@1] and the $(u,v)$-plane [@5]:
\[a\] Let $x_{0}, x_{1}, x_{2}, \ldots, x_{n-1}$ periodic $n$ orbit points. If $$S_{n}=x_{0}+x_{1}+x_{2}+ \ldots +x_{n-2}+x_{n-1},$$ then by transformation $(\ref{3})$ and $(\ref{5})$ $$S_{n}=\frac{1}{2}S_{n}^{1}=\frac{1}{2}S_{n}^{2},$$ where $$S_{n}^{1}=u_{0}+u_{1}+u_{2}+ \ldots +u_{n-2}+u_{n-1}$$ and $$S_{n}^{2}=v_{0}+v_{1}+v_{2}+ \ldots +v_{n-2}+v_{n-1}.$$
By writing out both components we obtain $$\begin{array}{lll}
S_{n}^{1}&=&u_{0}+u_{1}+u_{2}+ \ldots +u_{n-2}+u_{n-1}\\
&=&x_{0}+x_{1}+x_{1}+x_{2}+x_{2}+x_{3}+ \ldots +x_{n-2}+x_{n-1}+x_{n-1}+x_{n} \\
&=&x_{0}+x_{1}+x_{1}+x_{2}+x_{2}+x_{3}+ \ldots +x_{n-2}+x_{n-1}+x_{n-1}+x_{0} \\
&=&2(x_{0}+x_{1}+x_{2}+x_{3}+ \ldots +x_{n-2}+x_{n-1})
\end{array}$$ and similarly $$\begin{array}{lll}
S_{n}^{2}&=&v_{0}+v_{1}+v_{2}+ \ldots +v_{n-2}+v_{n-1}\\
&=&x_{0}+x_{2}+x_{1}+x_{3}+x_{2}+x_{4}+ \ldots +x_{n-2}+x_{n}+x_{n-1}+x_{n+1}\\
&=&2(x_{0}+x_{1}+x_{2}+ \ldots x_{n-2}+x_{n-1}).
\end{array}$$
The uniqueness of cycle points sums of period three and four orbits
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The sums of points of the period three and four cycles are obtained in [@1] as $$S_{3}=x_{0}+x_{1}+x_{2} \label{cc1}$$ and $$S_{4}=x_{0}+x_{1}+x_{2}+x_{3}. \label{cc2}$$ According to Theorem $\ref{a}$ and by using the formula ($\ref{5}$) we obtain on the $(u,v)$-plane $$S_{3}(u,v)=\frac{1}{2}(u_{0}+u_{1}+u_{2})= \,{\frac {{u}^{2}-u+v+2\,uv}{2u}} \label{2aa1}$$ and $$S_{4}(u,v)=\frac{1}{2}(u_{0}+u_{1}+u_{2}+u_{3})= -{\frac {-v+u-{u}^{2}+{u}^{2}v-u{v}^{2}-{v}^{2}}{u}}. \label{2aa2}$$ Based on the article [@5], the equations of periodic orbits of period three and four are $P_{3}(u,v)=0$ and $P_{4}(u,v)=0$, where $$P_{3}(u,v)=uv+1+v,$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
P_{4}(u,v)&=&-{u}^{2}v+{u}^{2}{v}^{2}-u+uv+u{v}^{2}-{v}^{2}-{v}^{3}-u{v}^{3} \nonumber \\
&=&u^{2}(-v^{2}+v)+u(v^{3}-v^{2}-v+1)+v^{3}+v^{2}.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ Now we form polynomials $B_{3}(u,v,S_{3})=0$ and $B_{4}(u,v,S_{4})=0$ based on formulas ($\ref{2aa1}$) and ($\ref{2aa2}$) as $$\begin{aligned}
B_{3}(u,v,S_{3})&=&2uS_{3}-({u}^{2}-u+v+2\,uv) \nonumber \\
&=&-{u}^{2}+ \left( 2\,S_{3}+1-2\,v \right) u-v \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
B_{4}(u,v,S_{4})&=&uS_{4}-v+u-{u}^{2}+{u}^{2}v-u{v}^{2}-{v}^{2} \nonumber \\
&=&\left( -1+v \right) {u}^{2}+ \left( S_{4}-{v}^{2}+1 \right) u-v-{v}^{2}.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ Based on the previous equations we can form the pair of equations $$\left\{\begin{array}{lll}
P_{3}(u,v)&=& 0 \\
B_{3}(u,v,S_{3})&=& 0 \label{222a}
\end{array}\right.$$ and $$\left\{\begin{array}{lll}
P_{4}(u,v)&=& 0 \\
B_{4}(u,v,S_{4})&=& 0, \label{222b}
\end{array}\right.$$ and obtain the ideals $$\begin{aligned}
I_{3}&=& \langle P_{3}(u,v),B_{3}(u,v,S_{3})\rangle \nonumber \\
&=&\langle uv+1+v, -{u}^{2}+ \left( 2\,S_{3}+1-2\,v \right) u-v \rangle, \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
I_{4}&=&\langle
P_{4}(u,v),B_{4}(u,v,S_{4}) \rangle \nonumber \\ &=& \langle u^{2}(-v^{2}+v)+u(v^{3}-v^{2}-v+1)+v^{3}+v^{2}, \nonumber \\
&& \left( -1+v \right) {u}^{2}+ \left( S_{4}-{v}^{2}+1 \right) u-v-{v}^{2} \rangle. \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ We eliminate from these ideals the variable $u$ and obtain the Gröbner-basis of the eliminated ideals $I_{3u}$ and $I_{4u}$ to calculate the Gröbner-basis of the ideals $I_{3}$ and $I_{4}$ using the Singular program ([@10]). Gröbner-bases of the ideals $I_{3}$ and $I_{4}$, by using the ordering $\prec_{lex}$, where $S_{3} \prec_{lex} v \prec_{lex} u$ and $S_{4} \prec_{lex} v \prec_{lex} u$, are $$G_{3}=\{g_{31},g_{32}\},$$ where $$\begin{array}{lll}
g_{31}&=&v^{3}-2v^{2}S_{3}-2vS_{3}-3v-1, \\
g_{32}&=&u+v^{2}-2vS_{3}-2S_{3}-2,
\end{array}$$ and $$G_{4}=\{g_{41},g_{42},g_{43},g_{44}\},$$ where $$\begin{array}{lll}
g_{41}&=& v^{4}-v^{3}S_{4}+v^{3}-v^{2}S_{4}-v^{2}-v, \\
g_{42} &=& uv^{2}-uvS_{4}-u, \\
g_{43}&=& u^{2}S_{4}-uv^{3}+uv^{2}S_{4}-uv^{2}+uvS_{4}+uv-uS_{4}^{2}+u-v^{3}+v^{2}S_{4} \\
&&-2v^{2}+vS_{4}-v, \\
g_{44}&=& u^{2}v-u^{2}-uv^{2}+uS_{4}+u-v^{2}-v.
\end{array}$$ Thus $g_{31}$ and $g_{41}$ depend only on the variables $v$ and $S_{5}$. Based on the elimination Theorem $\ref{elim}$ the set $$G_{3u}=G_{3} \cap \mathbb{C}[v,S_{3}]=\{g_{31}\}$$ is the Gröbner-basis of the elimination ideal $I_{3u}$ and so $V(I_{3u})=V(g_{31})$. At the same way the set $$G_{4u}=G_{4} \cap \mathbb{C}[v,S_{4}]=\{g_{41}\}$$ is the Gröbner-basis of the elimination ideal $I_{4u}$ and so $V(I_{4u})=V(g_{41})$. In the case $g_{31}=0$ it follows that $$S_{3}=\,{\frac {-1-3\,v+{v}^{3}}{2v \left( v+1 \right) }}. \label{ab1}$$ If $g_{41}=0$ we have $$S_{4}={\frac {-{v}^{4}-{v}^{3}+{v}^{2}+v}{-{v}^{3}-{v}^{2}}}=\frac{v^{2}-1}{v}. \label{ab2}$$ As we can see, in both cases the sum of the points of cycles of the given period is unique. In other words, the orbit sums $S_{3}$ and $S_{4}$ uniquely determine the orbit. If we eliminate in the first case the variable $v$ instead of the variable $u$, we obtain the Gröbner-basis $$G_{3v}=u^{3}-2u^{2}S_{3}-2uS_{3}-3u-1,$$ which gives the same result as ($\ref{ab1}$). However, the same procedure in the period four case produces the Gröbner-basis $$\begin{array}{ll}
G_{4v}&=u^{5}S_{4}-2u^{4}S_{4}^{2}+u^{3}S_{4}^{3}-u^{3}S_{4}^{2}-2u^{3}S_{4}-4u^{3}+u^{2}S_{4}^{3}+2u^{2}S_{4}^{2}+4u^{2}S_{4}+uS_{4} \\
&=\left( {u}^{3}+{u}^{2} \right) {S_{4}}^{3}+ \left( -{u}^{3}+2\,{u}^{2}-2
\,{u}^{4} \right) {S_{4}}^{2}+ \left( {u}^{5}-2\,{u}^{3}+u+4\,{u}^{2}
\right) S_{4}-4\,{u}^{3}
\end{array}$$ and this is of higher degree than ($\ref{ab2}$).
On the uniqueness of the cycle points sum of period five orbits
---------------------------------------------------------------
Next we prove that in the case of period five cycles, the sum of period five points is at most three-valued. We use in this proof the Gröbner-basis of an ideal, like before in period three and four cases, which produce for us the Gröbner-basis of the elimination ideal. Because this method relies on bases, the following result is optimal.
\[per5\] The sum of period five cycle points is at most three-valued.
By the article [@5], the equation for period five orbit on the $(u,v)$-plane is of the form $P_{5}(u,v)=0$, where $$\begin{aligned}
P_{5}(u,v)&=&u^{7}(-{v}^{4}+2{v}^{3}-{v}^{2})+u^{6}(3{v}^{5}-8{v}^{4}+5{v}^{3}+{v}^{2}-v) \nonumber \\
&&+u^{5}(3{v}^{6}+14{v}^{5}-12{v}^{4}-5{v}^{3}+7{v}^{2}-v)+u^{4}({v}^{7} \nonumber \\
&& -12{v}^{6}+18{v}^{5}+6{v}^{4}-16{v}^{3}+3{v}^{2}+2v)+u^{3}(4{v}^{7} \label{1123} \\
&& -16{v}^{6}+19{v}^{4}-5{v}^{3}-4{v}^{2}+2v+1)+u^{2}(6{v}^{7}-6{v}^{6} \nonumber \\
&& -12{v}^{5}+6{v}^{4}+4{v}^{3}-2{v}^{2})+u(4{v}^{7}+3{v}^{6}-4{v}^{5} \nonumber \\
&& -2{v}^{4}+{v}^{3})+{v}^{7}+2{v}^{6}+{v}^{5}.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ According to the Theorem $\ref{a}$, the sum $$S_{5}=x_{0}+x_{1}+x_{2}+x_{3}+x_{4} \label{cc}$$ of the period five points satisfies $$S_{n}=\frac{1}{2}S_{n}^{1}=\frac{1}{2}S_{n}^{2},$$ and based on the formula ($\ref{5}$) we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
S_{5}(u,v)&=& \frac{1}{2}(u_{0}+u_{1}+u_{2}+u_{3}+u_{4}) \nonumber \\ \label{2aa}
&=& \displaystyle\frac
{-3\,{u}^{2}+4\,{u}^{2}v+3\,uv-4\,{u}^{3}{v}^{3}+2\,{u}^{2
}{v}^{4}+4\,u{v}^{4}+{u}^{3}-2\,{u}^{4}v-2\,{u}^{3}v}{2{u}^{2}}
\\ \nonumber & &+\frac{+2\,{u}^{2}{v}^{2}
-2\,u{v}^{2}+2\,{v}^{3}+2\,{u}^{4}{v}^{2}+6\,{u}^{3}{v}^{2}-8\,{u}^{2}
{v}^{3}-2\,u{v}^{3}+2\,{v}^{4}}{2{u}^{2}} \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ on the $(u,v)$-plane. We form from this the polynomial $$\begin{array}{lll}
B_{5}(u,v,S_{5})&=&u^{4}(2{v}^{2}-2v)+u^{3}(-4{v}^{3}+6{v}^{2}-2v+1)\\
&&+u^{2}(-2S_{5}+2{v}^{4}-8{v}^{3}+2{v}^{2}+4v-3)\\
&&+u(4{v}^{4}-2{v}^{3}-2{v}^{2}+3v)+2{v}^{4}+2{v}^{3}.
\end{array}$$ Now we can form the pair of equations $$\left\{\begin{array}{lll}
P_{5}(u,v)&=& 0 \\
B_{5}(u,v,S_{5})&=& 0, \label{222}
\end{array}\right.$$ and the two polynomials $P_{5}(u,v)$ and $B_{5}(u,v,S_{5})$ form an ideal $$\begin{aligned}
I_{5}&=&\langle
P_{5}(u,v),B_{5}(u,v,S_{5})\rangle \nonumber \\ &=&\langle a_{7}u^{7}+a_{6}u^{6}+a_{5}u^{5}+a_{4}u^{4}+a_{3}u^{3}+a_{2}u^{2}+a_{1}u+a_{0}, \nonumber \\
&& b_{4}u^{4}+b_{3}u^{3}+b_{2}u^{2}+b_{1}u+b_{0} \rangle, \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
&&a_{0}= {v}^{7}+2{v}^{6}+{v}^{5}\nonumber\\
&&a_{1}=4{v}^{7}+3{v}^{6}-4{v}^{5}-2{v}^{4}+{v}^{3} \nonumber\\
&&a_{2}= 6{v}^{7}-6{v}^{6}-12{v}^{5}+6{v}^{4}+4{v}^{3}-2{v}^{2}\nonumber\\
&&a_{3}=4{v}^{7}-16{v}^{6}+19{v}^{4}-5{v}^{3}-4{v}^{2}+2v+1 \nonumber\\
&&a_{4}={v}^{7}-12{v}^{6}+18{v}^{5}+6{v}^{4}-16{v}^{3}+3{v}^{2}+2v \nonumber\\
&&a_{5}= 3{v}^{6}+14{v}^{5}-12{v}^{4}-5{v}^{3}+7{v}^{2}-v\nonumber\\
&&a_{6}= 3{v}^{5}-8{v}^{4}+5{v}^{3}+{v}^{2}-v\nonumber\\
&&a_{7}= -{v}^{4}+2{v}^{3}-{v}^{2}\nonumber\\
&&b_{0}= 2{v}^{3}\nonumber\\
&&b_{1}= 4{v}^{4}-2{v}^{3}-2{v}^{2}+3v\nonumber\\
&&b_{2}= -2S_{5}+2{v}^{4}-8{v}^{3}+2{v}^{2}+4v-3\nonumber\\
&&b_{3}= -4{v}^{3}+6{v}^{2}-2v+1\nonumber\\
&&b_{4}=2{v}^{2}-2v. \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ We eliminate from this the variable $u$ by forming the Gröbner-basis $G_{5u}$ of the elimination ideal $I_{5u}$ in order to calculate the Gröbner-basis $G_{5}$ of the ideal $I_{5}$ using Singular. We obtain the Gröbner-basis of the ideal $I$ as $$G_{5}=\{g_{51},g_{52},g_{53},g_{54},g_{55},g_{56}\}$$ using ordering $\prec_{lex}$, where $S_{5} \prec_{lex} v \prec_{lex} u$. Here $g_{51},g_{52},g_{53},g_{54}$ and $g_{55}$ depend on the variables $u$, $v$ and $S_{5}$, and $g_{56}$ depends only on the variables $v$ and $S_{5}$. By the elimination theorem the set $$G_{5u}=G \cap \mathbb{C}[v,S_{5}]=\{g_{56}\}$$ is the Gröbner-basis of the elimination ideal $I_{5u}$ and so $V(I_{5u})=V(g_{56})$. Now the Gröbner-basis of the elimination ideal $I_{5u}$ is of the form $$\begin{aligned}
&G_{5u}=&v^{6}(v+1)^{2}(c_{0}{v}^{15}+c_{1}{v}^{14}+c_{2}{v}^{13}+c_{3}{v}^{12}+c_{4}{v}^{11}+c_{5}{v}^{10}+c_{6}{v}^{9} \label{G5} \\
&&+c_{7}{v}^{8}+c_{8}{v}^{7}+ c_{9}{v}^{6}+c_{10}{v}^{5}+c_{11}{v}^{4}+c_{12}{v}^{3}+c_{13}{v}^{2}+c_{14}v+c_{15}), \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where
$$\begin{aligned}
c_{0}&=&27 \nonumber \\
c_{1}&=&-162S_{5} \nonumber \\
c_{2}&=& 252S_{5}^{2}-432\,S_{5}-684 \nonumber \\
c_{3}&=& 280S_{5}^{3}+2592S_{5}^{2}+4128\,S_{5}+556 \nonumber \\
c_{4}&=& -1264S_{5}^{4}-5760S_{5}^{3}-8712S_{5}^{2}+
236\,S_{5}+4002 \nonumber \\
c_{5}&=& 1440S_{5}^{5}+5888S_{5}^{4}+6864
S_{5}^{3}-8440S_{5}^{2}-19596\,S_{5}-4336 \nonumber \\
c_{6}&=&-704S_{5}^{6}-2816S_{5}^{5}+320S_{5}
^{4}-8380+19584
S_{5}^{3}+37536S_{5}^{2}+11528\,S_{5} \nonumber \\
c_{7}&=& 128S_{5}^{7}+512S_{5}^{6}-3328S_{5}^{5}-18112S_{5}^{4}-30144S_{5}^{3}+
1120S_{5}^{2}\nonumber \\
&&+39192\,S_{5}+14868 \nonumber \\
c_{8}&=& 1664S_{5}^{6}+7488S_{5}^{5}+7824S_{5}^{4}-
21520S_{5}^{3}-64076S_{5}^{2}-38238\,S_{5} +4003\nonumber \\
c_{9}&=&-256S_{5}^{7}-1152S_{5}^{6}+1952S_{5}^{5}+19360
S_{5}^{4}+44040S_{5}^{3}+22980S_{5}^{2}\nonumber \\
&&-29970\,S_{5}-
19924 \nonumber \\
c_{10}&=& -
1216S_{5}^{6}-6336S_{5}^{5}-11216S_{5}^{4}+5848S_{5}^{3}+46108S_{5}^{2}\nonumber \\
&&+43516\,
S_{5}+5736 \nonumber \\
c_{11}&=& 128S_{5}^{7}+640S_{5}^
{6}-160S_{5}^{5}-8208S_{5}^{4}-25384S_{5}^{3}-25368S_{5}^{2}\nonumber \\
&&+3504\,S_{5} +10380\nonumber \\
c_{12}&=& 256S_{5}^{6}+1664S_{5}^{5}-16730\,S_{5}+4432S_{5}^{4}+2056S_{5}^{3}-11160
S_{5}^{2}-4909 \nonumber \\
c_{13}&=&96S_{5}^{5}+1104S_{5
}^{4}+4240S_{5}^{3}+6396S_{5}^{2}+2070\,S_{5} -1934 \nonumber \\
c_{14}&=&216S_{5}^{3}+1068S_{5}^{2}+1974\,S_{5}+1347 \nonumber \\
c_{15}&=&-27. \nonumber\end{aligned}$$
By ($\ref{G5}$) $G_{5u}$ is formed as a product of three terms. We denote the last of these terms in ($\ref{G5}$) by $C(v,S_{5})$. Now we obtain the variety $V(I_{u})$ of the elimination ideal as the union of three varieties corresponding to the factors of $G_{5u}$ of as follows $$\begin{aligned}
\mathbf{V}(I_{5u})&=&\mathbf{V}(v^{6}) \bigcup
\mathbf{V}\left((v+1)^{2}\right) \bigcup
\mathbf{V}\left(C(v,S_{5})\right) \nonumber \\
&=& \left\{(0,S_{5}),(-1,S_{5})\right\} \bigcup
\mathbf{V}\left(C(v,S_{5})\right). \nonumber\end{aligned}$$\
Note that $G_{5u}$ is of degree $23$ with respect to the variable $v$ and of degree $7$ with respect to the variable $S_{5}$. We denote, according to the extension theorem, $$f_{i}=g_{i}(v,S_{5})u^{N_{i}}+ \ \textrm{terms} \ \textrm{such} \ \textrm{that} \ \textrm{deg}(u) < N_{i},\ i=1,2$$ where $$g_{1}=a_{7}=-{v}^{4}+2{v}^{3}-{v}^{2}$$ and $$g_{2}=b_{4}=2{v}^{2}-2v .$$ The corresponding varieties are $$\mathbf{V}(g_{1})=\{(0,S_{5}),(1,S_{5})\}=\mathbf{V}(g_{2}),$$ so $$\mathbf{V}(g_{1},g_{2})=\mathbf{V}(g_{1}) \bigcap
\mathbf{V}(g_{2})=\{(0,S_{5}),(1,S_{5})\}.$$ In other words for all $v\neq 0$ and $v\neq 1$ we have $(v, S_{5}) \notin
\mathbf{V}(g_{1}, g_{2})$ and in that case by the extension theorem $\ref{5a}$ then there exists $u\in \mathbb{C}$ so that $(u,v, S_{5}) \in \mathbf{V}(I_{5})$, so all partial solutions $\mathbf{V}(I_{5u})=((v,S_{5})|v\neq 0,v\neq 1)$ extend as solutions of the original system $(\ref{222})$. Since the term $C(v,S_{5})$ is of degree $15$ with respect to the variable $v$, it follows by the fundamental theorem of algebra that the equation $C(v,S_{5})=0$ has at most $15$ different roots. For example, for the value $S_{5}=0$ we obtain the Gröbner-basis of the elimination polynomial $$\begin{aligned}
G_{5u}&=&27\,{v}^{15}-684\,{v}^{13}+556\,{v}^{12}+4002\,{v}^{11}-4336\,{v}^{10}-8380\,{v}^{9}+14868\,{v}^{8}+ \\ && 4003\,{v}^{7} -19924\,{v}^{6}+5736\,{v}^{5}+
10380\,{v}^{4}-4909\,{v}^{3}-1934\,{v}^{2}+1347\,v-27,\end{aligned}$$ for which the variety $\mathbf{V}(I_{5u})$ includes $15$ different values. From these five are real and the rest ten are complex numbers. According to the extension theorem, for every pair of points $(v_{1},0),\ldots ,(v_{15},0)$ we find the corresponding value of the variable $u$ so that $(u_{1},v_{1},0),\ldots
,(u_{15},v_{15},0) \in \mathbf{V}(I_{5})$. Consequently the sum of period five cycle points attains the same value at most three times.
We obtain also the same result if we eliminate the variable $v$ from the pair of equations ($\ref{222}$) using the ordering $\prec_{lex}$, where $S_{5} \prec_{lex} u \prec_{lex} v$.
Conflict of interest
====================
The author declares that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this paper.
[9]{} Arponen, T.; Müller, A.; Piipponen, S.; Tuomela, J.: Computational algebraic geometry and global analysis of regional manipulators, Appl. Math. Comput. 232 (2014), 820–835. Arponen, T.; Müller, A.; Piipponen, S.; Tuomela, J.: Kinematical analysis of overconstrained and underconstrained mechanisms by means of computational algebraic geometry, Meccanica 49 (2014), no. 4, 843–862. Brown, A.: Equations for periodic solutions of a logistic difference equation, Australian mathematical Society 1981, no. 1, 78–94. Cox, D.; Little, J.; O’Shea, D.: Ideals, varieties and algorithms (1997). \[DGPS\] Decker, W.; Greuel, G.-M.; Pfister, G.; Sch[ö]{}nemann, H.: — [A]{} computer algebra system for polynomial computations. (2015). Flynn, E. V.; Poonen, B.; Schaefer, E. F.: Cycles of quadratic polynomials and rational points on a genus-$2$ curve, Duke mathematical journal (1997) vol.90, no.3, 435–463. Erkama, T.: Periodic orbits of quadratic polynomials, Bull. London Math. Soc. 38 (2006), no. 5, 804-814. Giarrusso, D.; Fisher, Y.: A parameterization of the period $3$ hyperbolic components of the Mandelbrot set, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 123 (1995), no. 12, 3731–3737. Kosunen, P.: Periodic orbits $1-5$ of quadratic polynomials on a new coordinate plane, forthcoming, arXiv:1703.05146. Morton, P.: Arithmetic properties of periodic points of quadratic maps II, Acta Arithmetica 87 (1998), no. 2, 89–102.
\
\
\
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- Adrian Drăgulescu
- 'Victor M. Yakovenko'
date: 'http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/cond-mat/0008305, v.1 21 August 2000, v.2 24 September 2000'
title: Evidence for the exponential distribution of income in the USA
---
Introduction {#sec:introduction}
============
The study of income distribution has a long history. Pareto [@Pareto] proposed in 1897 that income distribution obeys a universal power law valid for all times and countries. Subsequent studies have often disputed this conjecture. In 1935, Shirras [@Shirras] concluded: “There is indeed no Pareto Law. It is time it should be entirely discarded in studies on distribution”. Mandelbrot [@Mandelbrot] proposed a “weak Pareto law” applicable only asymptotically to the high incomes. In such a form, Pareto’s proposal is useless for describing the great majority of the population.
Many other distributions of income were proposed: Levy, log-normal, Champernowne, Gamma, and two other forms by Pareto himself (see a systematic survey in the World Bank research publication [@Kakwani]). Theoretical justifications for these proposals form two schools: socio-economic and statistical. The former appeals to economic, political, and demographic factors to explain the distribution of income (e. g. [@Levy]), whereas the latter invokes stochastic processes. Gibrat [@Gibrat] proposed in 1931 that income is governed by a multiplicative random process, which results in a log-normal distribution (see also [@Montroll]). However, Kalecki [@Kalecki] pointed out that the width of this distribution is not stationary, but increases in time. Levy and Solomon [@Solomon] proposed a cut-off at lower incomes, which stabilizes the distribution to a power law.
In this paper, we propose that the distribution of individual income is given by an exponential function. This conjecture is inspired by our previous work [@DY], where we argued that the probability distribution of money in a closed system of agents is given by the exponential Boltzmann-Gibbs function, in analogy with the distribution of energy in statistical physics. In Sec. \[sec:individual\], we compare our proposal with the census and tax data for individual income in USA. In Sec. \[sec:family\], we derive the distribution function of income for families with two earners and compare it with the census data. The good agreement we found is discussed in Sec.\[sec:discussion\]. Speculations on the possible origins of the exponential distribution of income are given in Sec.\[sec:origin\].
Distribution of individual income {#sec:individual}
=================================
We denote income by the letter $r$ (for “revenue”). The probability distribution function of income, $P(r)$, (called the probability density in book [@Kakwani]) is defined so that the fraction of individuals with income between $r$ and $r+dr$ is $P(r)\,dr$. This function is normalized to unity (100%): $\int_0^\infty
P(r)\,dr=1$. We propose that the probability distribution of individual income is exponential: $$P_1(r)=\exp(-r/R)/R,
\label{eq:BG}$$ where the subscript 1 indicates individuals. Function (\[eq:BG\]) contains one parameter $R$, equal to the average income: $\int_0^\infty r\,P_1(r)\,dr=R$, and analogous to temperature in the Boltzmann-Gibbs distribution [@DY].
From the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) [@census], we downloaded the variable TPTOINC (total income of a person for a month) for the first “wave” (a four-month period) in 1996. Then we eliminated the entries with zero income, grouped the remaining entries into bins of the size 10/3 k\$, counted the numbers of entries inside each bin, and normalized to the total number of entries. The results are shown as the histogram in Fig.\[fig:census\], where the horizontal scale has been multiplied by 12 to convert monthly income to an annual figure. The solid line represents a fit to the exponential function (\[eq:BG\]). In the inset, plot A shows the same data with the logarithmic vertical scale. The data fall onto a straight line, whose slope gives the parameter $R$ in Eq. (\[eq:BG\]). The exponential law is also often written with the bases 2 and 10: $P_1(r)\propto2^{-r/R_2}\propto10^{-r/R_{10}}$. The parameters $R$, $R_2$ and $R_{10}$ are given in line (c) of Table \[tab:R\].
1.1ex
Source Year $R$ (\$) $R_2$ (\$) $R_{10}$ (\$) Set size
--- ----------------------- ------ ---------- ------------ --------------- ------------------
a PSID [@Michigan] 1992 18,844 13,062 43,390 1.39$\times10^3$
b IRS [@SailerWeber] 1993 19,686 13,645 45,329 1.15$\times10^8$
c SIPP$\rm_p$ [@census] 1996 20,286 14,061 46,710 2.57$\times10^5$
d SIPP$\rm_f$ [@census] 1996 23,242 16,110 53,517 1.64$\times10^5$
e IRS [@Pub1304] 1997 35,200 24,399 81,051 1.22$\times10^8$
: Parameters $R$, $R_2$, and $R_{10}$ obtained by fitting data from different sources to the exponential law (\[eq:BG\]) with the bases $e$, 2, and 10, and the sizes of the statistical data sets.[]{data-label="tab:R"}
Plot B in the inset of Fig. \[fig:census\] shows the data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) conducted by the Institute for Social Research of the University of Michigan [@Michigan]. We downloaded the variable V30821 “Total 1992 labor income” for individuals from the Final Release 1993 and processed the data in a similar manner. Shown is the cumulative probability distribution of income $N(r)$ (called the probability distribution in book [@Kakwani]). It is defined as $N(r)=\int_r^\infty P(r')\, dr'$ and gives the fraction of individuals with income greater than $r$. For the exponential distribution (\[eq:BG\]), the cumulative distribution is also exponential: $N_1(r)=\int_r^\infty P_1(r')\,
dr'=\exp(-r/R)$. Thus, $R_2$ is the median income; 10% of population have income greater than $R_{10}$ and only 1% greater than $2R_{10}$. The points in the inset fall onto a straight line in the logarithmic scale. The slope is given in line (a) of Table \[tab:R\].
The points in Fig. \[fig:IRS\] show the cumulative distribution of tax returns vs income in 1997 from column 1 of Table 1.1 of Ref. [@Pub1304]. (We merged 1 k\$ bins into 5 k\$ bins in the interval 1–20 k\$.) The solid line is a fit to the exponential law. Plot A in the inset of Fig. \[fig:IRS\] shows the same data with the logarithmic vertical scale. The slope is given in line (e) of Table \[tab:R\]. Plot B in the inset of Fig. \[fig:IRS\] shows the distribution of individual income from tax returns in 1993 [@SailerWeber]. The logarithmic slope is given in line (b) of Table \[tab:R\].
While Figs. \[fig:census\] and \[fig:IRS\] clearly demostrate the fit of income distribution to the exponential form, they have the following drawback. Their horizontal axes extend to $+\infty$, so the high-income data are left outside of the plots. The standard way to represent the full range of data is the so-called Lorenz curve (for an introduction to the Lorenz curve and Gini coefficient, see book [@Kakwani]). The horizontal axis of the Lorenz curve, $x(r)$, represents the cumulative fraction of population with income below $r$, and the vertical axis $y(r)$ represents the fraction of income this population accounts for: $$x(r)=\int_0^r P(r')\,dr',\quad
y(r)=\frac{\int_0^r r' P(r')\,dr'}{\int_0^\infty r' P(r')\,dr'}.
\label{eq:xy}$$ As $r$ changes from 0 to $\infty$, $x$ and $y$ change from 0 to 1, and Eq. (\[eq:xy\]) parametrically defines a curve in the $(x,y)$-space.
Substituting Eq. (\[eq:BG\]) into Eq. (\[eq:xy\]), we find $$x(\tilde{r})=1-\exp(-\tilde{r}), \quad
y(\tilde{r})=x(\tilde{r})-\tilde{r}\exp(-\tilde{r}),
\label{eq:xy1}$$ where $\tilde{r}=r/R$. Excluding $\tilde{r}$, we find the explicit form of the Lorenz curve for the exponential distribution: $$y=x+(1-x)\ln(1-x).
\label{eq:Lorenz}$$ $R$ drops out, so Eq. (\[eq:Lorenz\]) has no fitting parameters.
The function (\[eq:Lorenz\]) is shown as the solid curve in Fig. \[fig:Lorenz\_1\]. The straight diagonal line represents the Lorenz curve in the case where all population has equal income. Inequality of income distribution is measured by the Gini coefficient $G$, the ratio of the area between the diagonal and the Lorenz curve to the area of the triangle beneath the diagonal: $G=2\int_0^1(x-y)\,dx$. The Gini coefficient is confined between 0 (no inequality) and 1 (extreme inequality). By substituting Eq. (\[eq:Lorenz\]) into the integral, we find the Gini coefficient for the exponential distribution: $G_1=1/2$.
The points in Fig. \[fig:Lorenz\_1\] represent the tax data during 1979–1997 from Ref. [@Petska]. With the progress of time, the Lorenz points shifted downward and the Gini coefficient increased from 0.47 to 0.56, which indicates increasing inequality during this period. However, overall the Gini coefficient is close to the value 0.5 calculated for the exponential distribution, as shown in the inset of Fig. \[fig:Lorenz\_1\].
Income distribution for two-earners families {#sec:family}
============================================
Now let us discuss the distribution of income for families with two earners. The family income $r$ is the sum of two individual incomes: $r=r_1+r_2$. Thus, the probability distribution of the family income is given by the convolution of the individual probability distributions [@Feller]. If the latter are given by the exponential function (\[eq:BG\]), the two-earners probability distribution function $P_2(r)$ is $$P_2(r)=\int_0^{r}P_1(r')P_1(r-r')\,dr'= \frac{r}{R^2}e^{-r/R}.
\label{eq:family}$$ The function $P_2(r)$ (\[eq:family\]) differs from the function $P_1(r)$ (\[eq:BG\]) by the prefactor $r/R$, which reflects the phase space available to compose a given total income out of two individual ones. It is shown as the solid curve in Fig. \[fig:census\_2\]. Unlike $P_1(r)$, which has a maximum at zero income, $P_2(r)$ has a maximum at $r=R$ and looks qualitatively similar to the family income distribution curves in literature [@Levy].
From the same 1996 SIPP that we used in Sec. \[sec:individual\] [@census], we downloaded the variable TFTOTINC (the total family income for a month), which we then multiplied by 12 to get annual income. Using the number of family members (the variable EFNP) and the number of children under 18 (the variable RFNKIDS), we selected the families with two adults. Their distribution of family income is shown by the histogram in Fig. \[fig:census\_2\]. The fit to the function (\[eq:family\]), shown by the solid line, gives the parameter $R$ listed in line (d) of Table \[tab:R\]. The families with two adults and more than two adults constitute 44% and 11% of all families in the studied set of data. The remaining 45% are the families with one adult. Assuming that these two classes of families have two and one earners, we expect the income distribution for all families to be given by the superposition of Eqs. (\[eq:BG\]) and (\[eq:family\]): $0.45P_1(r)+0.55P_2(r)$. It is shown by the solid line in the inset of Fig. \[fig:census\_2\] (with $R$ from line (d) of Table \[tab:R\]) with the all families data histogram.
By substituting Eq. (\[eq:family\]) into Eq. (\[eq:xy\]), we calculate the Lorenz curve for two-earners families: $$x(\tilde{r})= 1 - (1+\tilde{r}) e^{-\tilde{r}}, \;\;
y(\tilde{r})= x(\tilde{r}) -\tilde{r}^2 e^{-\tilde{r}}/2.
\label{eq:xy2}$$ It is shown by the solid curve in Fig. \[fig:Lorenz\_2\]. Given that $x-y=\tilde{r}^2\exp(-\tilde{r})/2$ and $dx=\tilde{r}\exp(-\tilde{r})\,d\tilde{r}$, the Gini coefficient for two-earners families is: $G_2=2\int_0^1(x-y)\,dx=
\int_0^\infty\tilde{r}^3\exp(-2\tilde{r})\,d\tilde{r}=3/8=0.375$. The points in Fig. \[fig:Lorenz\_2\] show the Lorenz data and Gini coefficient for family income during 1947–1994 from Table 1 of Ref.[@history]. The Gini coefficient is very close to the calculated value 0.375.
Discussion {#sec:discussion}
==========
Figs. \[fig:census\] and \[fig:IRS\] demonstrate that the exponential law (\[eq:BG\]) fits the individual income distribution very well. The Lorenz data for the individual income follow Eq.(\[eq:Lorenz\]) without fitting parameters, and the Gini coefficient is close to the calculated value 0.5 (Fig. \[fig:Lorenz\_1\]). The distributions of the individual and family income differ qualitatively. The former monotonically increases toward the low end and has a maximum at zero income (Fig. \[fig:census\]). The latter, typically being a sum of two individual incomes, has a maximum at a finite income and vanishes at zero (Fig. \[fig:census\_2\]). Thus, the inequality of the family income distribution is smaller. The Lorenz data for families follow the different Eq. (\[eq:xy2\]), again without fitting parameters, and the Gini coefficient is close to the smaller calculated value 0.375 (Fig. \[fig:Lorenz\_2\]). Despite different definitions of income by different agencies, the parameters extracted from the fits (Table \[tab:R\]) are consistent, except for line (e).
The qualitative difference between the individual and family income distributions was emphasized in Ref. [@SailerWeber], which split up joint tax returns of families into individual incomes and combined separately filed tax returns of married couples into family incomes. However, Refs. [@Pub1304] and [@Petska] counted only “individual tax returns”, which also include joint tax returns. Since only a fraction of families file jointly, we assume that the latter contribution is small enough not to distort the tax returns distribution from the individual income distribution significantly. Similarly, the definition of a family for the data shown in the inset of Fig. \[fig:census\_2\] includes single adults and one-adult families with children, which constitute 35% and 10% of all families. The former category is excluded from the definition of a family for the data [@history] shown in Fig. \[fig:Lorenz\_2\], but the latter is included. Because the latter contribution is relatively small, we expect the family data in Fig.\[fig:Lorenz\_2\] to approximately represent the two-earners distribution (\[eq:family\]). Technically, even for the families with two (or more) adults shown in Fig. \[fig:census\_2\], we do not know the exact number of earners.
With all these complications, one should not expect perfect accuracy for our fits. There are deviations around zero income in Figs.\[fig:census\], \[fig:IRS\], and \[fig:census\_2\]. The fits could be improved there by multiplying the exponential function by a polynomial. However, the data may not be accurate at the low end because of underreporting. For example, filing a tax return is not required for incomes below a certain threshold, which ranged in 1999 from \$2,750 to \$14,400 [@Pub1040]. As the Lorenz curves in Figs. \[fig:Lorenz\_1\] and \[fig:Lorenz\_2\] show, there are also deviations at the high end, possibly where Pareto’s power law is supposed to work. Nevertheless, the exponential law gives an overall good description of income distribution for the great majority of the population.
Possible origins of exponential distribution {#sec:origin}
============================================
The exponential Boltzmann-Gibbs distribution naturally applies to the quantities that obey a conservation law, such as energy or money [@DY]. However, there is no fundamental reason why the sum of incomes (unlike the sum of money) must be conserved. Indeed, income is a term in the time derivative of one’s money balance (the other term is spending). Maybe incomes obey an approximate conservation law, or somehow the distribution of income is simply proportional to the distribution of money, which is exponential [@DY].
Another explanation involves hierarchy. Groups of people have leaders, which have leaders of a higher order, and so on. The number of people decreases geometrically (exponentially) with the hierarchical level. If individual income increases linearly with the hierarchical level, then the income distribution is exponential. However, if income increases multiplicatively, then the distribution follows a power law [@hierarchy]. For moderate incomes below \$100,000, the linear increase may be more realistic. A similar scenario is the Bernoulli trials [@Feller], where individuals have a constant probability of increasing their income by a fixed amount.
We are grateful to D. Jordan, M. Weber, and T. Petska for sending us the data from Refs. [@Pub1304], [@SailerWeber], and [@Petska], to T. Cranshaw for discussion of income distribution in Britain, and to M. Gubrud for proofreading of the manuscript.
[99]{}
V. Pareto, [*Cours d’Economie Politique*]{} (Lausanne, 1897).
G.F. Shirras, Economic Journal [**45**]{}, 663 (1935).
B. Mandelbrot, Internat. Economic Review [**1**]{}, 79 (1960).
N. Kakwani, [*Income Inequality and Poverty*]{} (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1980).
F. Levy, Science [**236**]{}, 923 (1987).
R. Gibrat, [*Les Inégalités Economique*]{} (Sirely, Paris, 1931).
E.W. Montroll, M.F. Shlesinger, J. Stat. Phys. [**32**]{}, 209 (1983).
M. Kalecki, Econometrica [**13**]{}, 161 (1945).
M. Levy, S. Solomon, Int. J. Mod. Phys. C [**7**]{}, 595 (1996); D. Sornette, R. Cont, J. Phys. I (France) [**7**]{}, 431 (1997).
A. Drăgulescu, V.M. Yakovenko, cond-mat/0001432, Eur. Phys. J. B (to be published).
The U.S. Census data, http://ferret.bls.census.gov/.
The PSID Web site, http://www.isr.umich.edu/src/psid/.
, Pub. 1304, Rev. 12-99 (IRS, Washington DC, 1999). See http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/prod/tax\_stats/soi/.
P. Sailer, M. Weber, [*Household and Individual Income Data from Tax Returns*]{} (IRS, Washington DC, 1998), http://ftp.fedworld.gov/pub/irs-soi/petasa98.pdf.
T. Petska, M. Strudler, R. Petska, [*Further Examination of the Distribution of Individual Income and Taxes Using a Consistent and Comprehensive Measure of Income*]{} (IRS, 2000), http://ftp.fedworld.gov/pub/irs-soi/disindit.exe.
W. Feller, [*An Introduction to Probability Theory and Its Applications*]{}, vol. 2 (John Willey, New York, 1966) p. 10.
D.H. Weinberg, [*A Brief Look at Postwar U.S. Income Inequality*]{}, P60-191 (Census Bureau, Washington, 1996), http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/p60191.html.
(IRS, Washington, 1999).
H.F. Lydall, Econometrica [**27**]{}, 110 (1959).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We explore time-resolved Coulomb explosion induced by intense, extreme ultraviolet (XUV) femtosecond pulses from the FLASH free-electron laser as a method to image photo-induced molecular dynamics in two molecules, iodomethane and 2,6-difluoroiodobenzene. At an excitation wavelength of 267nm, the dominant reaction pathway in both molecules is neutral dissociation via cleavage of the carbon–iodine bond. This allows investigating the influence of the molecular environment on the absorption of an intense, femtosecond XUV pulse and the subsequent Coulomb explosion process. We find that the XUV probe pulse induces local inner-shell ionization of atomic iodine in dissociating iodomethane, in contrast to non-selective ionization of all photofragments in difluoroiodobenzene. The results reveal evidence of electron transfer from methyl and phenyl moieties to a multiply charged iodine ion. In addition, indications for ultrafast charge rearrangement on the phenyl radical are found, suggesting that time-resolved Coulomb explosion imaging is sensitive to the localization of charge in extended molecules.'
author:
- Kasra Amini
- Evgeny Savelyev
- 'Felix Brau[ß]{}e'
- Nora Berrah
- Cédric Bomme
- Mark Brouard
- Michael Burt
- Lauge Christensen
- 'Stefan D[ü]{}sterer'
- Benjamin Erk
- Hauke Hœppner
- Thomas Kierspel
- Faruk Krecinic
- Alexandra Lauer
- 'Jason W.L. Lee'
- 'Maria M[ü]{}ller'
- 'Erland M[ü]{}ller'
- Terence Mullins
- Harald Redlin
- Nora Schirmel
- 'Jan Th[ø]{}gersen'
- Simone Techert
- Sven Toleikis
- Rolf Treusch
- Sebastian Trippel
- Anatoli Ulmer
- Claire Vallance
- Joss Wiese
- Per Johnsson
- 'Jochen K[ü]{}pper'
- Artem Rudenko
- Arnaud Rouzée
- Henrik Stapelfeldt
- Daniel Rolles
- Rebecca Boll
bibliography:
- 'FLASH2014.bib'
title: 'Photodissociation of Aligned CH$_\text{3}$I and C$_\text{6}$H$_\text{3}$F$_\text{2}$I Molecules probed with Time-Resolved Coulomb Explosion Imaging by Site-Selective XUV Ionization'
---
Introduction
============
If several electrons are rapidly removed from a molecule, it fragments into cations by a process termed Coulomb explosion [@vager_coulomb_1989]. Provided the break-up occurs faster than vibrational motion, the momenta of the fragments can be used to determine the structure of gas-phase molecules. Coulomb explosion induced by intense femtosecond (fs) laser pulses in the visible or the near-infrared region [@posthumus_dynamics_2004] can be used as a time-resolved structural probe of molecular dynamics. A molecular reaction, such as photodissociation, is initiated with a fs pump pulse, and the evolving structure is measured as a function of time using a delayed, intense Coulomb explosion pulse. Such time-resolved Coulomb explosion imaging (CEI) has been used to study photoisomerization [@Hishikawa-PhysRevLett.99.258302; @ibrahim_tabletop_2014], photodissociation [@stapelfeldt_wave_1995; @legare_imaging_2005; @skovsen_imaging_2002], and torsional motion in an axially chiral molecule [@madsen_manipulating_2009; @christensen_dynamic_2014]. An alternative method for inducing Coulomb explosion employs irradiation with extreme ultraviolet (XUV) or X-ray femtosecond pulses, notably from intense free-electron laser sources [@ackermann_operation_2007; @shintake_compact_2008; @emma_first_2010; @ishikawa_compact_2012; @allaria_highly_2013]. Several recent experiments have demonstrated the feasibility of studying molecular dynamics such as fragmentation [@picon_hetero-site-specific_2016], isomerization[@jiang_ultrafast_2010; @liekhus-schmaltz_ultrafast_2015], charge transfer [@erk_imaging_2014; @boll_charge_2016], and interatomic Coulombic decay [@schnorr_time-resolved_2013] in real time.
XUV or X-ray induced Coulomb explosion differs from its strong-field induced equivalent in several respects: While strong-field ionization removes electrons from the molecular valence shell, which is typically highly delocalized, the XUV or X-ray photon energy can be tuned to an inner-shell absorption edge, thus making the photoabsorption site- and element specific. Furthermore, the kinetic energies and angular correlations of the ionic fragments resulting from strong-field induced Coulomb explosion typically strongly depend on the pulse duration [@legare_laser_2005; @legare_imaging_2005; @legare_laser_2006], while this dependence can be less pronounced in the case of inner-shell ionization, where the time-scale of the Auger decay is often the most relevant parameter, especially for Coulomb explosion induced by single-photon absorption.
Here, we focus on the role of site-selective ionization in time-resolved Coulomb explosion imaging experiments. To this end, we investigate the ultraviolet (UV)-induced photoexcitation and subsequent XUV ionization and fragmentation of isolated iodomethane (CH$_3$I) and 2,6-difluoroiodobenzene (C$_6$H$_3$F$_2$I, DFIB) molecules, see Fig. \[pecs\]. The photochemistry of iodomethane in the A-band (210–350nm) has been the subject of previous experimental and theoretical studies, see for example Refs. and references therein. In this energy range, the photoexcitation (purple arrow in Fig. \[pecs\]) triggers almost exclusively a resonant one-photon dissociation into two neutrals, by promoting an electron to the $\sigma^*$orbital along the C–I bond. This results either in ground state iodine, CH$_3$+I, with a yield of $\sim$30%, or in spin-orbit excited iodine, CH$_3$+I$^*$, with a yield of $\sim$70% [@eppink_methyl_1998], as illustrated in Fig. \[pecs\](a). The UV-photochemistry of fluorinated aryl iodides is less well studied, but can be regarded as largely similar to the case of iodobenzene [@murdock_uv_2012]. Two channels analogous to the case of CH$_3$I are accessible through single-photon UV excitation, but leading to opposite yield in the two spin-orbit components ($\sim$70% I, $\sim$30% I$^*$) [@sage_n*_2011]. In addition, bound states involving electron density on the phenyl ring are overlapped with the A-band (240–320nm), and can thus form a predissociative state by mixing with the C–I dissociative state, see the dashed blue line in Fig. \[pecs\](b). Creation of ground-state iodine atoms via the predissociative channel is strongly suppressed as compared to the direct dissociation [@murdock_uv_2012].
\[tb\]
The similarity of the UV-pump step for both molecules gives us the opportunity to study the role of site-selective ionization and the influence of the molecular environment, i.e., methyl versus phenyl moiety, on the XUV-probe step (grey arrow in Fig. \[pecs\]). At a certain time delay after the UV excitation, the dissociating molecule is ionized by the FEL probe pulse, leading to a highly excited molecular ion that fragments through Coulomb explosion. This is illustrated in Fig. \[pecs\], showing one-dimensional cuts through the potential energy hypersurfaces of the multiply charged molecular ion that are formed following (multiple) ionization of the excited molecules by the FEL pulse. Note that absorption of more than one XUV photon in the same molecule is possible in our experiment, due to the high peak intensity of the XUV pulse in the focus. The PECs involving three or more charges on the iodine, as illustrated in Fig. \[pecs\], are created by absorption of two or more XUV photons. While the XUV-ionization can be regarded as site-selective in CH$_3$I, as $\sim$90% of the absorbed photons are absorbed at the iodine atom at 108eV photon energy, in DFIB $\sim$70% of the absorbed photons are absorbed at the difluorobenzene (DFB) radical [@yeh_atomic_1993].
Experiment
==========
The experiment was carried out in the CAMP endstation [@struder_large-format_2010; @erk_campflash_2016] at the Free-Electron Laser in Hamburg (FLASH) [@feldhaus_flashfirst_2010]. The experimental setup as well as the data treatment have been described in detail in Refs. . In brief, CH$_3$I or C$_6$H$_3$F$_2$I molecules were mixed with neon (20bar) at room temperature and supersonically expanded through a pulsed Even-Lavie valve (opening time 12.5$\mu$s) and then passed through two skimmers. An electrostatic deflector positioned between the skimmers selected the lowest-lying rotational quantum states and also partially separated the molecules from the neon, as the atomic carrier gas is unaffected by the deflector. This increases the maximum degree of molecular alignment that can be achieved [@chang_spatially-controlled_2015; @filsinger_quantum-state_2009], and, moreover, reduces significantly the amount of background ions from the neon carrier gas and thus prevents detector saturation. In the interaction region, the molecular beam was intersected by the free-electron laser (FEL) and two additional laser beams, which propagated collinearly to the FEL. A near-infrared (NIR) pulse from an Nd:YAG laser (1064nm, 12ns(FWHM), 1.2J, 50$\mu$m focus (FWHM)) was used to adiabatically align the molecules [@stapelfeldt_colloquium:_2003], such that their most polarizable axes, the C–I axes, were aligned along the laser polarization direction, parallel to the detector plane. At the peak of the alignment pulse, where the degree of alignment is highest [@stapelfeldt_colloquium:_2003], the molecules were first photoexcited by an ultraviolet laser pulse (267nm, 150fs(FWHM), 35$\mu$J, 50$\mu$m focus(FWHM)) and then probed by an intense extreme-ultraviolet FEL pulse (108eV, 120fs(FWHM), 37$\mu$J on average, 20$\mu$m focus(FWHM)) after a tunable time delay. The polarizations of the UV and the FEL pulse were parallel to each other, in the detection plane. The repetition rate of the experiment was 10Hz. The delay between the UV pump pulse and the XUV probe pulse was set using a motorized delay stage in the UV arm. The data was acquired by recording 1000 shots per delay step of 83fs in a range of $\pm$1ps, i.e. 24000 shots for all of the CH$_3$I data. For DFIB, the delay step size was 66fs for I$^{2+}$, 20fs for I$^{3+}$, and 53fs for I$^{4+}$, and the total number of shots contained in the delay scans of the different ion species was 30000, 105000, and 15000, respectively. In the data analysis, these shots are resorted and rebinned according to the information from the beam arrival time monitor of the electron bunch. [@savelyev_jitter-correction_2017]
Ions and electrons resulting from the photoionization were recorded simultaneously with a double-sided velocity-map imaging (VMI) spectrometer [@struder_large-format_2010; @rolles_femtosecond_2014] by multichannel plates coupled to phosphor screens. The corresponding two-dimensional ion momentum distributions were recorded by a commercial [[ ]{}one-Megapixel CCD camera (Allied Vision Pike F-145B) or a 72x72 pixels time-stamping camera (PImMS) [@john_pimms_2012; @amini_three-dimensional_2015]. The cameras were mounted outside of vacuum and could be interchanged easily, such that pump-probe scans were recorded for both molecules with both cameras. The CCD camera provides much higher spatial resolution, but it does not have the timing resolution to distinguish between the different ionic species that arrive at the detector with flight-time differences of several hundred nanoseconds after a total flight time of a few microseconds. Therefore, the high voltage on the MCP detector was gated using a fast high-voltage switch such that only a specific ion species was detected at a time, and the pump-probe scans for different ion species were recorded consecutively. The PImMS camera, on the other hand, can record and time-stamp up to four ions hits per pixel with a 12.5ns timing precision, which is sufficient to distinguish the different iodine charge states and most other ionic species in this experiment (the corresponding time-of-flight spectra and further details are given in Ref. ). With the PImMS camera, the yields and 2D momentum distributions of all ionic species can therefore be recorded within the *same* pump-probe scan, albeit with lower spatial resolution than with the CCD camera.]{}
[[ ]{}In the subsequent data analysis, the 2D momentum distributions of each ionic species recorded with the CCD or the PImMS camera]{} were angularly integrated, and the radii were then converted to kinetic energies (KE) based on ion trajectory simulations carried out using the Simion 8.0 software package, from which an empirical formula was constructed that connects the hit position on the detector with the fragment’s kinetic energy. Further discussion of the observed ion kinetic energies in the Coulomb explosion of DFIB is also given in Ref. . [[ ]{}Here, we concentrate on discussing the yields and kinetic energies of the multiply charged iodine fragments from CH$_3$I and DFIB and, in particular, their dependence on the delay between the UV and XUV pulses.]{} The iodine ion KE distributions were converted to a total kinetic energy release (TKER) based on the assumption that the cofragment is momentum-matched with the recorded iodine ion. This assumption is exact for a two-body fragmentation, as is induced by the UV pulse. It is expected to also apply to the majority of the XUV ionization events that occur in already dissociated molecules.
Note that by using strong, adiabatic alignment of the C–I axes parallel to the detector plane, the component of the ion momentum along the spectrometer axis is effectively confined to zero, such that the recorded radial distribution of iodine ions on the detector corresponds to the momentum distribution to a very good approximation, thus making image inversion algorithms that are normally used in VMI spectroscopy unnecessary in this case.[^1] The degree of alignment determined from the I$^{3+}$ ion images was $\big\langle$cos$^2 \Theta_{2\textnormal{D}}\big\rangle = 0.92$ for CH$_3$I and 0.94 for DFIB, corresponding to a standard deviation of 17$^\circ$ and 15$^\circ$ with respect to the XUV polarization direction, respectively.
Adiabatic alignment is an alternative to the retrieval of molecular structure by coincident ion momentum spectroscopy employing delay-line anodes. Our approach allows for experimental conditions with high ion count rates per shot when an MCP/phosphor screen detector is used. Molecular alignment parallel to the detection plane is particularly powerful in combination with a time-stamping camera such as PImMS [@john_pimms_2012; @amini_three-dimensional_2015] or TimepixCam [@fisher-levine_timepixcam:_2016; @fisher-levine_time-resolved_2017], or an in-vacuum pixel detector [@long_ion-ion_2017], facilitating the recording of all ionic species simultaneously. These images provide the opportunity to study angular correlations between different ionic fragments, which, with the help of laser alignment, can be interpreted in a straightforward way, allowing detailed conclusions to be drawn about structure and fragmentation dynamics [@slater_covariance_2014; @christensen_dynamic_2014; @slater_coulomb-explosion_2015; @christensen_using_2015; @christensen_deconvoluting_2016; @pickering_communication:_2016; @hansen_control_2012].
Results
=======
\[tb\]
Details of the static Coulomb explosion imaging of laser-aligned DFIB molecules, as well as more technical aspects of the laser/FEL pump-probe data analysis have been discussed before [@amini_alignment_2017; @savelyev_jitter-correction_2017]. In the present manuscript, we focus on the molecular dynamics due to the UV-dissociation and the subsequent XUV-induced Coulomb explosion, and on the comparison between DFIB and CH$_3$I molecules.
As described in the introduction, the dominant process upon UV-excitation of both molecules is neutral C–I bond cleavage. In the following, we describe how the XUV-probe signal resulting from the dissociated molecules depends on the molecular environment. At the intensity used in this experiment, [[ ]{}ionization by the UV laser pulse and the Nd:YAG laser pulse alone was minimal and, in particular, neither laser pulse produced any multiply charged ions]{}. Figure \[I3\](a) and (b) show the low-energy region of the delay-dependent total kinetic energy releases determined for the two molecules from the triply charged iodine ions. Two dynamic features are visible: a strong feature (III), which has a TKER independent of the delay; and a second feature (II), which is strong in DFIB and weak in CH$_3$I and which corresponds to a TKER that varies as a function of the delay. The numbering of the fragmentation channels follows the nomenclature of our earlier publications [@erk_imaging_2014; @boll_charge_2016]. Similar features appear also for I$^{2+}$ and I$^{4+}$, as shown in Fig. \[fig\]. Outside the axis range chosen here, an additional broad feature at higher TKER values is present, corresponding to Coulomb explosion of bound molecules by the XUV pulse alone, as discussed in more detail in Ref. .
Local XUV ionization at iodine (channel III)
--------------------------------------------
\[bt\]
Channel III can be assigned to neutral C–I bond cleavage induced by absorption of one UV photon, followed by XUV-ionization of the isolated iodine atom. The cofragment does not interact with the XUV pulse and remains neutral, therefore the resulting TKER in channel III is determined solely by the translational energy gained during the UV-dissociation when the molecule has dissociated into two independent fragments.
[ ]{}However, closer inspection of the delay-dependencies in the CH$_3$I and C$_6$H$_3$F$_2$I data (Figs. \[I3\] and \[fig\]) reveal that these channels are not centered around zero pump-probe delay, but are instead shifted towards positive delays. To show this more clearly, Fig. \[yields\] displays the delay-dependent ion yield of channel III for different iodine charge states. The shift in the onset of this channel for both molecules is attributed to the existence of ultrafast intramolecular electron transfer from the methyl or difluorophenyl radical to the multiply charged iodine ion, which can not happen at large internuclear separations. This process was discussed in detail in Refs. for iodomethane. If the two moieties are at close proximity to each other, which is the case at small delays between the UV and the XUV pulses, the methyl or difluorophenyl radical will not remain neutral in the vicinity of a multiply charged iodine ion but become singly charged via electron transfer. The corresponding fragment pair will gain additional Coulomb energy and thus will not appear in channel III, but rather at higher TKERs and with an iodine charge state reduced by one.
It was shown in Refs. that for iodine 3d ionization of iodomethane, the critical internuclear distance up to which charge rearrangement is observed, can be well reproduced by a classical over-the-barrier model [@ryufuku_oscillatory_1980; @niehaus_classical_1986; @schnorr_electron_2014], which describes the electron transfer as a result of the supression of the potential barrier between the multiply charged iodine ion and the neutral radical at close proximity. The values for the critical internuclear distance resulting from this classical over-the-barrier model applied to the present case are indicated by the large inverted triangles in Fig. \[yields\].
Before discussing these results further, we would like to note that Fig. \[yields\] shows the delay-dependent ion yields obtained from multiple pump-probe scans using the CCD (gray circles) and the PImMS camera (colored symbols). In the former case, the data sets were measured consecutively over the course of several days of beamtime. Long-term timing drifts, which could not be measured and corrected for accurately enough, made it impossible to determine one absolute time zero for all delay scans. Therefore, the time zero was determined for each delay scan individually by matching the simulated Coulomb curves for channel II (see next section) to the experimental data. The accuracy of this method is of the same order as the temporal resolution of the experiment, which was estimated to be 200fs (FHWH) [@savelyev_jitter-correction_2017] and which was limited by the FEL and laser pulse durations.
In contrast, for the data sets recorded with PImMS camera, the delay-dependence of the different iodine charge states with respect to each other is well defined since all ions were recorded within the same pump-probe run and only the common time zero had to be determined, which was done by fitting channel II in the I$^{3+}$ ion yield. Therefore, the uncertainty of the absolute time-zero determination does not affect the relative differences observed between different charge states. Furthermore, it is worth pointing out that although time zero has been determined *independently* for the data recorded with the PImMS and the CCD camera, the data sets are in good agreement, suggesting that the method for determining time zero is rather robust.
Unfortunately, in the case of DFIB, the 12.5-ns time resolution of the PImMS camera was not sufficient to distinguish the I$^{4+}$ fragment from the nearby CF$^+$, which has a mass-to-charge ratio that differs by less than one unit and which therefore has a very similar time of flight. Furthermore, the lower spatial resolution of the PImMS camera resulted in a lower kinetic energy resolution, such that channels II and III could not be well separated at large delays, most notably in the case of I$^{4+}$ from CH$_3$I.
\[tb\]
[[ ]{}In order to analyze the relative shift in the onset of channel III for each of the iodine charge states, a Gaussian cumulative distribution function (CDF) was fitted to the PImMS data in Fig. \[yields\]. For CH$_3$I, the CDF fits yield center positions of 87$\pm$20fs, 104$\pm$7fs, and 122$\pm$11fs for I$^{2+}$, I$^{3+}$, and I$^{4+}$, respectively. For DFIB, the center positions are 111$\pm$14fs and 242$\pm$13fs for I$^{2+}$ and I$^{3+}$, respectively. The indicated errors are the statistical errors of the fits. We can thus conclude that the charge transfer process, which was previously observed to occur after iodine 3d ionization of iodomethane, also occurs after iodine 4d ionization of both iodomethane and difluoroiodobenzene, demonstrating that the electron transfer from a neutral molecular fragment to a multiply charged atomic ion as introduced in Refs. is not particular to iodomethane, but also occurs from a phenyl moiety. Furthermore, within the experimental uncertainties and temporal resolution, the classical over-the-barrier-model is consistent with the data. In particular,]{} the onset of channel III appears to be shifted to later delays in DFIB as compared to iodomethane. This can, to a large extent, be explained by pure kinematics when taking into account that the UV-excitation of DFIB preferentially results in a two-body dissociation into an iodine atom (mass 127) and a difluorobenzene radical (DFB, mass 113), i.e., two almost equally heavy partners. By momentum conservation, this leads to a slower dissociation velocity as compared to iodomethane, where the CH$_3$ radical (mass 15) gains a much higher kinetic energy. Therefore, the internuclear distance in DFIB increases much slower than in CH$_3$I, and the critical distance, at which electron transfer between the two fragments can no longer occur, is reached at larger delays. [[ ]{}The top axes in Fig. \[yields\], which indicate the C–I internuclear distance for a given pump-probe delay and which were used to position the inverted triangles in this plot, were calculated assuming constant velocities of the neutral fragments created by the UV pulse. These velocities were calculated from the corresponding asymptotic TKER values given in the literature [@eppink_methyl_1998; @murdock_uv_2012]. The assumption of constant velocities is an approximation that overestimates how quickly the internuclear distances increase since the fragments certainly do not reach their asymptotic energy value instantaneously. A more precise model, which shall not be developed here, would thus require a quantitative knowledge of the dissociative potential curves in the neutral molecule.]{}
We would also like to point out that without coincident electron spectroscopy and/or detailed quantum chemistry calculations, we can not draw conclusions about the absolute charge transfer probabilities or any details about the underlying electronic processes that lead to the charge transfer in the two molecules. These processes are expected to differ significantly between the methyl and phenyl radicals, as DFIB has many more electrons, which are partly delocalized over the ring. The influence of the molecular environment on the charge rearrangement in iodomethane and iodobenzene molecules has been recently investigated for ultraintense hard X-rays, both experimentally and theoretically [@rudenko_femtosecond_2017].
Interestingly, in our two earlier experiments on iodomethane, channel III appeared only for charge states I$^{4+}$ and higher [@erk_imaging_2014; @boll_charge_2016]. In the XUV regime however, it can also be observed for I$^{2+}$ and I$^{3+}$ ions, but not for I$^+$ (not shown). This can be understood when considering the fact that in the experiments, the iodine M-shell was accessible for ionization, whereas at 108eV, iodine 4d is the deepest energy level that can be ionized by a single photon [@thompson_x-ray_2009]. In the former case, ionization of an isolated iodine atom results predominantly in I$^{4+}$ and I$^{5+}$, as can be concluded by comparison to the M-shell ionization of Xe atoms [@saito_multiple_1992], which are isoelectronic to I$^-$ and thus have similar cross section and Auger relaxation pathways. I$^{2+}$ and I$^{3+}$ are produced only after ionization of the intact molecule and thus do not exhibit the low-energy channel III that stems from dissociated molecules. At 108 eV, in contrast, ionization of an isolated iodine atom results predominantly in I$^{2+}$ and I$^{3+}$ (again, we refer to the case of Xe for comparison [@saito_multiple_1992]), while I$^{+}$ is only produced from intact molecules and is thus the only charge state where the low-energy channel III does not occur. We note that iodine atoms recorded with four or more charges must be created through absorption of at least two XUV photons, thus confirming that multiphoton absorption plays a significant role in this experiment.
[[ ]{}Finally, we would like to investigate the delay-dependence of the two components of channel III, labeled IIIa and IIIb in Figure \[I3\](a), which]{} correspond to the two different spin-orbit components that contribute to the UV excitation, as illustrated in the PECs in Fig. \[pecs\]. Initially, excitation at 267nm occurs to the $^3$Q$_0$ state, but a fraction of the dissociating wavepacket is transferred to the $^1$Q$_1$ potential energy surface via nonadiabatic coupling, resulting in a relative population of roughly 70% in the CH$_3$+I$^*$ channel and 30% in the CH$_3$+I channel [@eppink_methyl_1998]. According to Ref. , the total kinetic energy release expected for channels IIIa and IIIb is 1.33 and 2.27eV, respectively. The relative ion yield as well as the TKER values of both channels in the present data set are in accordance with these literature values within the uncertainty of our experimental energy calibration, which is of the order of $\sim$20%.
[[ ]{}As shown in the delay-dependent ion yields in Fig. \[yields\](c),]{} channels IIIa and IIIb exhibit the same delay-dependence within the uncertainties of the present measurement, which is to be expected, as the non-adiabatic curve crossing between the $^3$Q$_0$ and the $^1$Q$_1$ state takes place within $<$50fs, i.e., at very short internuclear distance [@de_nalda_detailed_2008]. At such early delays, channel III is not yet observed, since ultrafast charge rearrangement necessarily results in a charged cofragment at such small internuclear distances. Note that the two sub-components were not resolved in our earlier UV-pump, soft X-ray-probe experiment on CH$_3$I [@boll_charge_2016], utilizing a time-of-flight mass spectrometer with a small aperture and without a position-sensitive detector.
For DFIB, channel III comprises two analogous components, with a TKER of 0.7eV for the ejection of I$^*$ and 1.1eV for the ground state, and an I$^*$ to I ratio of 30/70 (opposite to the case of CH$_3$I) [@murdock_uv_2012]. These components are, however, not resolved in the present data, probably because the DFIB data have been recorded at a factor of four higher spectrometer voltages as compared to CH$_3$I in order to allow for simultaneous 4$\pi$ electron detection on the opposite side of the VMI. The mean value of 0.7eV is in accordance with the published TKER values [@murdock_uv_2012] within the limited energy resolution of this data set.
Non-selective XUV ionization of both photofragments (channel II) {#ch2}
----------------------------------------------------------------
We now turn to the feature exhibiting a rapidly decreasing kinetic energy as a function of the pump-probe delay, labeled channel II in Figs. \[I3\] and \[fig\]. The decreasing kinetic energy indicates that this channel is the result of a Coulomb repulsion between two *charged* fragments, whose distance increases as the pump-probe delay increases. Given that the pulse intensity was tuned such that almost no ionization was induced by the UV pulse alone, and noting that channel II is also present at long pump-probe delays when charge transfer between the two fragments is no longer possible, the origin of this channel must be the absorption of *two* XUV photons, one by each of the fragments.
The observation that channel II is much stronger for DFIB than for CH$_3$I for all iodine charge states, relative to the yield in channel III can be understood as follows: considering the sum of the atomic photoabsorption cross sections for each of the fragments at a photon energy of 108eV, $\sim$90% of the absorbed photons are absorbed by the iodine atom and only $\sim$10% by the CH$_3$ fragment (for the case of iodomethane), whereas in DFIB, $\sim$70% of the absorbed photons are absorbed by the difluorobenzene radical and only $\sim$30% by the iodine [@yeh_atomic_1993]. Following the neutral UV-dissociation, it is thus significantly more probable that an XUV photon is absorbed by the DFB radical than by the isolated methyl group. Therefore, channel II is much stronger in DFIB than in iodomethane. We note that channel II, similar to channel III discussed above, also seems to start appearing at slightly positive delays, especially for the higher iodine charge states in DFIB. The most likely reason is again an ultrafast charge transfer process, by which an electron from the singly charged methyl fragment is transferred to the highly charged iodine ion when the latter is in very close proximity, thereby increasing the total Coulomb energy of this fragment pair.
In order to further investigate the origin of channel II and to assign it to a specific Coulomb explosion channel, numerical 2-step Coulomb explosion simulations have been carried out. The fragments resulting from the initial UV-induced dissociation are assumed to travel with a constant velocity (calculated from the corresponding TKER values given in the literature [@eppink_methyl_1998; @murdock_uv_2012]) before being ionized by the XUV pulse after a certain time delay $\tau$. The final TKER is thus a function of the delay, $\tau$, and can be calculated as the sum of the TKER of the neutral dissociation, TKER$_{\rm UV}$, and the Coulombic potential energy gained after the two charged fragments, A and B, are created at time $\tau$. $$\textnormal{TKER}(\tau) = \textnormal{TKER}_{\rm UV} + \frac{k_{\rm e}q_{\rm A}q_{\rm B}}{r_{{\rm AB}}(\tau)}
\label{eq}$$ Here, *k$_{{\rm e}}$*, *q*, and *r$_{{\rm AB}}$* are the electrostatic constant, fragment charge, and distance between the charges on fragments A and B. The distance *r$_{{\rm AB}}$* is calculated for each pump-probe delay. The model assumes an instantaneous charging of both fragmentation partners to the final charge states at the given delay time, and a purely Coulombic repulsion between point charges. The TKER$_{\rm UV}$ of the UV-excitation with the higher probability, i.e., I$^*$ for CH$_3$I and I for DFIB, has been used for the calculations of the two molecules, respectively. [[ ]{}As noted in section III.A, the assumption that the full TKER$_{\rm UV}$ is added to the Coulomb energy independent of $\tau$ is an approximation, since the fragments do not have this asymptotic energy value for small delays. However, given the difference in magnitude between the Coulomb energy at small delays and the possible change in TKER$_{\rm UV}$, we have neglected the latter for the sake of simplicity]{}. Further details on the calculations are also given in Refs. .
The results are overlaid with the TKER maps in Fig. \[fig\]. According to the simulations, the kinetic energy of channel II in all of the iodine charge states and for both molecules is best matched when assuming a singly charged co-fragment. This is reasonable since absorption of one XUV photon by the CH$_3$ or DFB radical leads, with high probability, to only one charge on this fragment since the photon is absorbed by a valence electron. Core levels of carbon or fluorine are not accessible at 108eV photon energy. In Fig. \[fig\](e), a second, weaker feature, labeled IIb, is visible in addition to the strong feature, IIa. Channel IIb has an initially higher, but more rapidly decreasing TKER, which could be attributed to Coulomb explosion with a doubly charged co-fragment. However, the agreement with the corresponding simulated TKER curve is not very good. It might be that there is a mixture of DFB$^{2+}$ and DFB$^{3+}$ fragmentation partners, but it seems that, in particular at delays $>$400fs, neither of the two simulated curves agree very well with the data. The fact that at least three XUV photoabsorptions are involved in channel IIb makes a more quantitative analysis difficult, because there is an unknown delay between the ionization events occurring within the XUV pulse duration.
Finally, for the case of DFIB, we can use the Coulomb explosion simulations to investigate the location of the charge on the co-fragment. For that purpose, we take into consideration two limiting cases for the localization of a point charge on the DFB radical, either at the carbon atom located closest to the iodine (grey curves in Fig. \[fig\]), or at the carbon atom furthest away (black curves in Fig. \[fig\]), see also inset in Fig. \[pecs\](b). In accordance with recent results from a static synchrotron measurement [@ablikim_isomer-dependent_2017], the time-resolved TKER data agree much better with the simulations using the largest distance between the charges, i.e., a situation in which two charges are preferentially located at opposite ends of the molecule when the Coulomb repulsion starts. This suggests that the delocalized charge distribution on the phenyl ring is shifted with respect to the center-of-mass of the DFB radical, due to the dipole moment which is induced by the multiply charged iodine ion that is initially in close vicinity of the DFB radical. It is also consistent with an ultrafast charge migration that is instantaneous within the temporal resolution of our experiment, as is expected for purely electronic intramolecular charge rearrangement [@kuleff_core_2016]. Given the pulse durations of the UV and the XUV pulses in the present experiment, the temporal resolution of the data is not sufficient to draw further conclusions at this point, but experiments with shorter pulse durations may enable studies of such ultrafast charge migration in the near future.
Conclusion and Outlook
======================
Time-resolved Coulomb explosion imaging of two molecules, iodomethane (CH$_3$I) and difluoroiodobenzene (C$_6$H$_3$F$_2$I, DFIB) allowed the influence of the molecular environment on inner-shell ionization to be investigated by an intense, femtosecond XUV pulse at the Free-Electron Laser in Hamburg (FLASH). UV-excitation at 267nm induced a two-body dissociation, resulting in cleavage of the C–I bond into two neutral fragments. At a photon energy of 108eV, the XUV probe pulse is absorbed locally at the iodine atom for the case of CH$_3$I, while in DFIB, the photoabsorption is less selective. Both molecules exhibit charge transfer from the multiply charged iodine ion to the methyl and phenyl moieties, respectively, at short internuclear distance. The timescale of this electron rearrangement is slower in DFIB than in iodomethane, because of its slower dissociation velocity.
A non-selective probe pulse ionizing all photofragments can probe the potential energy landscape of a molecule in detail, and enables information about both/all partners of the photoexcitation to be obtained, in particular when used in combination with ion-ion coincidences or covariances. In contrast, site-selective absorption at only one fragment, as is the case in CH$_3$I, leaves the second partner undetected. However, it facilitates, for example, the creation of a localized source of charge in order to study the electron rearrangement [@erk_imaging_2014; @boll_charge_2016; @erk_ultrafast_2013; @erk_inner-shell_2013; @rudenko_femtosecond_2017]. In the XUV regime, the internuclear charge transfer process can be probed for smaller internuclear distances as compared to X-ray CEI experiments, therefore these data provide, in principle, better sensitivity to the orbitals of the intact molecule. CEI is suitable for investigating dynamics in halogen-substituted benzene following a simple, two-body dissociation, and we plan to extend this technique to other systems and more complex photochemical reactions in the future. The combination with simultaneous femtosecond-resolved electron spectroscopy is a very promising avenue to gain insight into the electronic dynamics that are interconnected with the nuclear motion [@brausse_time-resolved_2017], and carrying out complementary pump-probe experiments using either inner-shell or strong-field ionization as a probe can provide valuable additional information on the influence of the probe process [@burt_coulomb_2017; @amini_alignment_2017]. Furthermore, we have presented results indicating that with shorter pump and probe pulse durations and, possibly, in combination with coincident or covariant ion detection, time-resolved CEI might be suitable to directly probe charge localization in polyatomic systems.
Acknowledgments
===============
We gratefully acknowledge the work of the scientific and technical teams at FLASH, who have made these experiments possible. We also acknowledge the Max Planck Society for funding the development of the CAMP instrument within the ASG at CFEL. In addition, the installation of CAMP at FLASH was partially funded by BMBF Grant No. 05K10KT2. The support of the UK EPSRC (to M.B. and C.V. via Programme Grant Nos. EP/G00224X/1 and EP/L005913/1), the EU (to M.B. via FP7 EU People ITN Project No. 238671 and to J.K., P.J., H.S., and D.R. via the MEDEA project that has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No 641789), STFC through PNPAS award and a mini-IPS Grant (No. ST/J002895/1), and a proof of concept grant from ISIS Innovation Ltd. are gratefully acknowledged. K.A. thanks the EPSRC, Merton College, Oxford University, and RSC for support. A.L. thanks the DFG via Grant No. La 3209/1-1 for support. N.B., A.Ru., and D.R. acknowledge support from the Chemical Sciences, Geosciences, and Biosciences Division, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy, Grant Nos. DE-FG02-86ER13491 (Kansas group) and DE-SC0012376 (U Conn group). D.R., E.S., R.B., C.B., and B.E. were also supported by the Helmholtz Gemeinschaft through the Helmholtz Young Investigator Program. J.K. and CFEL–CMI were, in addition to DESY, supported by the excellence cluster “The Hamburg Center for Ultrafast Imaging–Structure, Dynamics, and Control of Matter at the Atomic Scale” of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (CUI, DFG-EXC1074), by the Helmholtz Virtual Institute 419 “Dynamic Pathways in Multidimensional Landscapes”, by the Helmholtz Networking and Initiative Funds, and by the European Research Council under the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) through the Consolidator Grant COMOTION (ERC-K[ü]{}pper-614507)." S.Te., E.S., and R.B. are grateful for support through the German Science Foundation, project B03/SFB755 “Nanoscale Photonic Imaging”. S.Te. is also grateful for financial support project through project C02/SFB1073 “Atomic Control of Energy Conversion". P.J. acknowledges support from the Swedish Research Council and the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research. A.Ro. is grateful for support through the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft Project No.RO 4577/1-1.
[^1]: The finite width of the molecular axis distribution perpendicular to the detector plane leads to an effective smearing out of the extracted kinetic energy spectra towards lower kinetic energies. However, for the data presented here, no significant improvement was found when inverting the ion images, so non-inverted data is shown throughout the manuscript.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'In the last years the Prisoner Dilemma (PD) has become a paradigm for the study of the emergence of cooperation in spatially structured populations. Such structure is usually assumed to be given by a graph. In general, the success of cooperative strategies is associated with the possibility of forming globular clusters, which in turn depends on a feature of the network that is measured by its clustering coefficient. In this work we test the dependence of the success of cooperation with the clustering coefficient of the network, for several different families of networks. We have found that this dependence is far from trivial. Additionally, for both stochastic and deterministic dynamics we have also found that there is a strong dependence on the initial composition of the population. This hints at the existence of several different mechanisms that could promote or hinder cluster expansion. We have studied in detail some of these mechanisms by concentrating on completely ordered networks (large clustering coefficient) or completely random networks (vanishing clustering coefficient).'
address:
- 'Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cient[í]{}ficas y T[é]{}cnicas, Argentina'
- 'Centro At[ó]{}mico Bariloche and Instituto Balseiro, 8400 S. C. de Bariloche, Argentina '
- 'Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cient[í]{}ficas y T[é]{}cnicas, Argentina'
- 'Centro At[ó]{}mico Bariloche, 8400 S. C. de Bariloche, Argentina'
author:
- 'M. N. Kuperman'
- 'S. Risau-Gusman'
title: The topological issues of cooperation
---
Introduction
============
The emergence of cooperation in different real systems has been puzzling researchers in several areas devoted to the study of systems involving social, economic or biological organization. Even though each of these systems is conformed by single units with natural competitive tendencies, the emergence of collective behaviours is undeniable. While natural selection operates through competition, cooperation is essential to the evolution and emergence of higher degrees of complexity. The struggle between competition and cooperation is then one of the keys in understanding the self organization of complex systems conformed by interacting units. Still, many questions arise regarding how such opposites forces can coexist.
The survival of the cooperative behavior is a classical problem of game theoretical approaches [@mayn]. In this context, the paradigmatic Prisoner’s Dilemma game [@axel] has been widely studied in different versions. It is usually formulated as a standard model for the confrontation between cooperative and selfish behaviors. For many years it was implemented in zero dimensional systems, where every player can interact with any other, until the crucial effects of spatial distribution were finally noticed [@now0; @now3]. Since then, several mechanisms for the evolution of cooperation have been proposed. Some of them are summarized in [@now1]: kin selection, direct reciprocity, indirect reciprocity, group selection and network reciprocity. Here we have chosen to focus on this last mechanism, which is associated to the fact that a cooperative individual can take advantage of the topology of the network to form clusters of cooperators that are often resilient to the invasion of cooperators.
Studies about the effect of network reciprocity have dominated the literature on spatial distributed games in the last years [@now3; @kup1; @kup2; @sza2; @lib; @oht; @roc]. They were the response to the need of studying the evolution of the strategies of players of a game beyond the simplifying assumption of a well-mixed population, where everybody interacts equally likely with everybody else. The observation that real populations are not well mixed and the fact that spatial structures could affect the evolution of a game and the strategies of the players demanded a new approach. A natural step was to consider complex networks as models for the underlying topology characterizing the spatial or social structures. In the case of a game played on top of a network or graph, the individuals of a population are located on the vertices of the graph. The edges of the graph determine the links through which individuals can interact. In a spatial model for the prisoner dilemma, the players are classified either as cooperators or defectors, and it is assumed that every agent can only play with his/her neighbours.
It has been shown that extremely simple rules determine whether network reciprocity can favor cooperation [@oht]. But it is the concept that cooperators can prevail by forming clusters what we want to analyze here. This idea has been discussed and analyzed in many works. In [@now1] it is found that cooperators can prevail by forming network clusters, where they help each other. In one of the pioneering works on spatially extended games [@now3] the authors have analyzed several shapes for a cluster of cooperators and test the stability of each one against the invasion by defectors. They found that cooperators can only survive and grow if they form clusters. Another work pointing out the clustering effect is [@doe] where it was stated that cooperators can survive by forming clusters within which they benefit from mutual cooperation, that in turn, allows them screening the exploitation by defectors throughout the borders of the cluster. It must be mentioned that some authors found an inverse relationship between the formation of clusters and the success of cooperation [@hauert].
In this work we intend to show that the survival of cooperators involves much more than the conformation of clusters. If it depended only on that, cooperation success would increase monotonically with the clustering coefficient of the underlying network. By focusing on the analysis of networks which only differ in their clustering coefficient, in the next sections we show not only that this does not happen (i.e. the equilibrium fraction of cooperators is a non monotonic function of $C$) but also that there is a strong dependence on the composition of the initial population. This hints at the existence of several mechanisms responsible for the expansion or extinction of cluster of cooperators. To find these mechanisms, in the last section we focus on what happens for populations in completely ordered and completely disordered networks. A detailed analysis allows us to understand the important of the initial fraction of cooperators for the evolution of the different systems.
The model
=========
The prisoner dilemma is a caricature of a real situation in which selfish and altruist tendencies compete. It has been the subject of study of game theory for the last 60 years [@rapo; @axel; @now1]. Its name and formal elaboration is attributed to A. Tucker, who mentioned it in a classroom in 1950, but it was not until 1952 that the first results about it were published [@floo].
The formulation of the prisoner dilemma as a game is rather simple. It is played by two players who must choose their moves between two strategies: to cooperate (C) or to defect (D). The reward, or [*payoff*]{}, obtained by each player after one round of the game is given by Table \[tabla1\]:
[**C**]{} [**D**]{}
----------- ----------- -----------
[**C**]{} $r$ $s$
[**D**]{} $t$ $p$
: Payoff table for the prisoner’s dilemma: the strategy in each row gets the payoff given by the table when playing again the strategies in the columns.[]{data-label="tabla1"}
Each element in the payoff matrix represents the payoff of a player using the strategies in the rows, when confronting a player choosing the strategies in the columns. A defector ${\bf D}$ receives $t$, the temptation to defect, when its opponent is a cooperator (${\bf C}$), who in turn gets $s$, the sucker’s payoff. In case of mutual cooperation, each player obtains a reward $r$, while mutual defection punishes both players with the payoff $p$. The table is in fact very general, because the payoffs of the Prisoner’s Dilemma must satisfy the additional constraints $t>r>p>s$ and $2r>t+s$. Other relationships between the parameters define the Snowdrift and Stag Hunt games [@sza2].
In some versions of the game a different set of parameters is used: $r=c-b$, $s=-b$, $t=c$ and $p=0$ [@oht], to account for a slightly different interpretation of the game: a cooperator (C) is someone who pays a cost $c$ for any other individual to receive a benefit $b$. In turn, a defector does not distribute any benefits and gets those delivered by the cooperators at no cost.
To simplify the analysis, in the following we use a reduced version of the payoff table (Table 2), which has only one free parameter. It has been show that this parameter eduction preserves the most relevant features of the prisoner’s dilemma [@now0].
[**C**]{} [**D**]{}
----------- ----------- -----------
[**C**]{} $1$ $1-t$
[**D**]{} $t$ $0$
: Reduced payoff table for the prisoner’s dilemma: the strategy in each row gets the payoff given by the table when playing again the strategies in the columns.[]{data-label="tabla2"}
In order to study the possibility that the players can change their strategies as a result of their previous interactions, thus generating an evolutionary dynamics of strategies, many authors started to work with the iterated Prisoner Dilemma, in which players interact by iteratively playing the game several times. The history of successes or failures of each player is recorded in what is called his cumulative payoff. How the players use the information accumulated in their own and others cumulative payoffs is what defines the rules of evolution. Operationally, the evolutionary dynamics acts at a certain instance of the game, for example after everybody has played against everybody else, when players decide whether to change strategies or not, following certain update rules. Before all the players start again playing the game, all the cumulative payoffs are set to $0$. The spectra of rules of evolution is wide and ranges from purely deterministic to stochastic dynamics [@oht; @sza; @now2; @moy; @hau].
Complementary to the evolutionary aspects mentioned above, many authors started to analyze spatial games in order to cope with the limitations associated with the assumption that players were always part of a well mixed population. [@now0; @now3; @sza2].
The evolutionary behaviour of the populations of surviving strategies of spatial games on networks can be affected by several features of the underlying topology as, for example, the degree distribution of the graph, the average distance between nodes, or the clustering coefficient [@kup1; @kup2; @dur; @moy; @roc].
The concept that cooperators can survive by grouping in clusters has been discussed and analyzed in many works [@oht; @now3; @doe]. Intuitively, the reasoning goes as follows. The effect of the cluster would be to screen the nodes at the interior from the presence of defectors. As defectors can only get an advantage from their interaction with cooperators, only those located next to the border of a cluster of cooperators should collect any benefits. In turn, although the cooperators at the border of the cluster should have lower payoffs because of their interaction with defectors, their cooperator neighbours at the interior of the cluster should perform better than the defectors at the border. Thus, imitating the internal cooperators should be always more convenient than imitating the bordering defectors, which should lead to the survival, and even expansion, of the cluster of cooperators. The problem is that all these arguments, as well as the very definition of ‘cluster’, depend crucially on the structure of the network. The most important feature in this regard is the clustering coefficient $C$, which measures how connected is the neighbourhood of each node, on average. The existence of local transitive relationships, closely related to the clustering [@was], is what defines the possibility of survival of small clusters of cooperators. Paradoxically, it will be also responsible for the negative effect that an isolated cooperator may have on incipient cooperative clusters.
Here we use the definition of global clustering coefficient of Watts and Strogatz [@watts]. For each node $i$, its local clustering coefficient is defined as the quotient between the number of links joining nodes of the neighbourhood of $i$ divided by the total number of possible links ($k_i(k_i+1)$). $C$ is then defined as the average over $i$ of all local clustering coefficients. We study the influence of $C$ on the evolutionary dynamics of the iterated prisoner’s dilemma, but keeping the degree distribution constant, to disentangle both contributions. For this we analyze regular networks (i.e. with the same number of neighbours for every node) with different values of $C$, generated with the following algorithm. Starting from an ordered network (defined below) we select at random two pairs of connected nodes. Then we ‘cut’ both connections and connect each individual to one of the individuals it had not been connected before. In other words, the connections are swapped. If this change gives a network with larger $C$, it is accepted and the network is updated. If it does not increase $C$, the change is only accepted with a fixed (and typically small) probability. This process goes on until the clustering coefficient has reached the desired value. Notice that this procedure leaves the degree distribution of the original network unchanged. When the desired clustering coefficient is very low, it is to be expected that the resulting networks is very close to a regular random network, independently of the starting one. On the other hand, for larger values of $C$ it is to be expected that the effect of the starting network is much larger. For this reason we use two different starting networks: ring networks where each node is connected symmetrically to the closest $k$ nodes, and 2-dimensional lattice networks. The networks generated from these two classes are called, respectively, random ring networks or random lattice networks. Three different starting lattice networks are used: regular square lattices ($k=4$), triangular lattices ($k=6$) and square lattices where each node is connected to its Moore neighbourhood ($k=8$). For all values of $k$ ring networks can be considered as one-dimensional because for a given cluster of nodes the size of the surface is independent of the volume whereas for lattice network the relationship is $V
\approx S^2$.
Throughout our simulations, we have considered two types of evolutionary dynamics, one deterministic [@sza2] and the other stochastic [@oht]. In both cases, each player either copies the strategy of one of its neighbours or sticks to the same strategy used in the previous round. In the deterministic dynamics each player copies the strategy of its most successful neighbour, if the payoff of that neighbour is larger than its own. In the probabilistic dynamics, previously used in [@oht], it copies the strategy of a neighbour chosen at random, with a probability proportional to its relative payoff. His own strategy is also included in the pool of eligible strategies. As the results we have obtained are qualitatively the same for both types of dynamics, in the following we focus on the deterministic dynamics, and comment briefly on the small differences obtained when using the stochastic dynamics
Numerical Results
=================
As mentioned in the previous section, we consider two different dynamics, though explicit results corresponding to only one of them will be shown in the following paragraphs. In all the cases we consider regular networks with 1000 to 10000 nodes with even degrees between 4 and 8. We observe no dependence on the size but different regimes associated to the degree. The state of the nodes is synchronically updated and the payoff of each player is not cumulative in time. Even though we observe that different initial concentrations of cooperators, $\rho_c(0)$, lead to qualitatively the same results, when properly scaled, there are some important differences. To show this we use two different initial concentrations of cooperators, $\rho_c(0)=0.1$ and $\rho_c(0)=0.5$ for every network analyzed in this paper.
If the equilibrium value of $\rho_c$ is plotted as a function of $t$, leaving all the other parameters constant, a piecewise constant function is obtained as is shown in Fig.1. This has also been previously noticed [@dur], but with a different payoff table (in the case considered in [@dur] a cooperator gets $0$ payoff when playing against a defector). To understand the origin, and quantify the limits, of these steps, we must consider the necessary conditions for the propagation of the cooperating behavior. For a cooperator to have a chance to turn a defecting neighbour into a cooperating one, its payoff should be at least larger than that of the defecting neighbour. This leads to the condition $n_{CC}+(k-n_{CC})(1-t) > n_{DC} t$, where $n_{CC}$ is the number of cooperator neighbors of the cooperator and $n_{DC}$ is the number of cooperator neighbors of the defector. The condition on $t$ can be written as $t>k/(k-n)$ where $n=n_{CC}-n_{DC}$. Note that, as $n_{CC} \leq k-1$ and $n_{DC}
\geq 1$, $n$ is a natural number that must satisfy $1 \leq n \leq
k-2$. This gives a maximum of $k-1$ possible steps. Note however that in some networks the range of possible values for $n$ is smaller, and therefore the number of steps of $\rho_c$ is at most $k-2$. In general, for networks with the same number of $k$ the number of possible steps will be smaller for the networks with smaller clustering coefficients. As an example, consider the two extreme cases of a tree and a lattice network with $k=8$: whereas the tree has the maximum possible of steps, the lattice network can have at most $4$ steps. In all cases the last step corresponds to $\rho_c=0$ because for those values of $t$ a cooperator, regardless of the composition of its neighbourhood, is not able to turn a defecting neighbour into a cooperating one. Furthermore, it is also possible that, because of geometrical constraints, $\rho_c$ also vanishes for other steps. For the networks analyzed in this paper, we have confirmed that only the height of the steps depends on $C$. Furthermore, simulations show that only for the first two steps the final number of cooperators is non vanishing (see Fig.\[figsteps\]). For these reasons we have only analyzed the dependence of $rho_c$ in these first two steps, i.e. we have used only two values of $t$, $t_1$ and $t_2$, that satisfy $1<t_1<k/(k-1)$ and $k/(k-1)<t_2<k/(k-2)$.
![ Steady cooperator density $\rho_c$ as a function of the parameter $t$ for three different networks: $k=4$ (lattice), random lattice with $C=0.2$ starting from a lattice with $k=6$, and idem with $k=8$.[]{data-label="figsteps"}](steps.eps)
In Figs. \[k4\] to \[k8\] we plot the numerical results obtained from computational simulations with $1000$ to $5000$ agents. Each curve corresponds to the average fraction of cooperators in the steady state, as a function of the clustering of the networks. The highest clustering value corresponds to the ordered network (lattice or ring), and networks get increasingly disordered as $C$ is decreased.
![ Steady cooperator density $\rho_c$ as a function of the clustering coefficient $C$, for $k=4$ and $\rho_c(0)=0.5$. (l) and (r) in the caption refer to lattice and ring networks respectively.[]{data-label="k4"}](imik4.eps)
![ Steady cooperator density $\rho_c$ as a function of the clustering coefficient $C$, for $K=6$ and $\rho_c(0)=0.5$. (l) and (r) in the caption refer to lattice and ring networks respectively.[]{data-label="k6"}](imik6.eps)
We begin by analyzing what happens for evolutions whose initial state consists of the same number of cooperators and defectors. In other words, the initial probability that a given agent is a cooperator is $0.5$. In this case, the steady state is always composed by a finite fraction of cooperators. As can be seen in the figures, there are some features that are common to all the families of networks analyzed. The first is that, for each class of network, the behaviors of the curves is qualitatively the same for the two values of $t$ used. The only difference is that, as is to be expected, curves for $t_1$ are below curves for $t_2$. Another important feature is that the final fraction of cooperators for ordered networks is always larger than what is obtained in completely random networks. Even though this seems to confirm the impression that clustering is beneficial to cooperators, it must be noticed that many curves are not monotonic with $C$, as for example, all curves corresponding to random ring networks.
Another interesting feature to notice is that, for ring networks the addition of a very small amount of disorder causes an abrupt decrease in the steady fraction of cooperators. This happens because of the one-dimensional nature of the ring: rewiring very few links at each side of a cooperation cluster can be very effective in stopping its expansion. When more links are rewired the dimensionality of the system begins to increase and cooperators clusters find new directions to expand.
For all values of $C$ curves for random ring networks are always below those for random lattice networks, for the same values of $t$. This is probably related to the lower dimensionality of the substrate of the random ring network that may have an influence even for high values of the disorder. Notice that the curves only overlap for very small values of the clustering coefficient. This means that a large amount of disorder is needed for the network to ‘forget’ the starting substrate.
![Steady cooperator density $\rho_c$ as a function of the clustering coefficient $C$, for $K=8$ and $\rho_c(0)=0.5$. (l) and (r) in the caption refer to lattice and ring networks respectively.[]{data-label="k8"}](imik8.eps)
In Fig. \[k4\] only one point is shown for random lattice networks because both the square lattice and the completely random network with $k=4$ have a vanishing clustering coefficient. The large difference seen in Fig. \[k4\] between the steady state fraction of cooperators could be attributed to the much shorter minimal distances between nodes in random regular networks (which have a diameter $\approx \log N$ [@bollo]) or to the presence of short loops in the square lattice (see next section).
When the initial state has less collaborators, the situation is more complex to analyze because for some systems the population evolves to an equilibrium state where all the cooperators have been eliminated. If, however, we consider only those systems that have a steady state with a non vanishing fraction of cooperators, the picture is very similar to what is found for $\rho=0.5$. An example of this for $k=6$ is shown in Fig. \[k6c\] where the initial fraction of cooperators was $\rho_c=0.1$ (compare Figs. \[k6b\] and \[k6c\]).
When, instead, the fraction of realizations that converge is considered, the picture that emerges is rather different, as Figs. \[k8d\] and \[k6c\] show. In this case, ordered networks are less favourable for the preservation (and eventual expansion) of cooperation than completely random networks. As before, the behaviour between these two extremes is not monotonic. A feature of these curves that stands out is that, for the same values of $C$, they seem to depend very weakly on the type of substrate used to generate them.
![ Steady cooperator density $\rho_c$ as a function of the clustering coefficient $C$, for $K=6$ and $\rho_c(0)=0.1$. (l) and (r) in the caption refer to lattice and ring networks respectively. Only those realizations that showed to the survival of cooperators were considered. []{data-label="k6b"}](imik6b.eps)
![ Fraction of realizations that converge to a steady state with a positive number of cooperators, for networks with $k=8$. []{data-label="k8d"}](imik8b.eps)
The difference of the evolutionary dynamics of populations starting from many, or few, cooperators can be shown even more clearly using the same variable for both cases: the average fraction of steady state cooperators, with the average taken over the whole population. But it must be recalled that for populations with small numbers of initial cooperators the variable does not give atypical value of final cooperators because the steady state cooperators distribution has at least two modes clearly separated, one with zero cooperators and other with many cooperators. We have used this variable to show that for some stochastic dynamics the results are very similar to what has been described above for a deterministic dynamics. In the stochastic dynamics we have used, the agents choose the strategy of a neighbor with a probability proportional to the corresponding cumulative payoff, but only if it is larger than his/her own cumulative payoff [@oht]. Fig. \[figstoch\] shows some results for this dynamics. Curves for several different values of $t$ are shown because in this case, the dependence on $t$ is not as simple as in the deterministic case. In any case, several qualitative similarities with the deterministic case are apparent. For $\rho=0.5$ the ordered networks are more favourable to cooperation than completely disordered ones, at least for $t \leq 1.15$. For $\rho=0.1$ the situation is reversed, and now the most favorable networks in terms of cooperation are completely random ones. There are even some values of $t$ for which the dependence with $C$ is not monotonic.
![ Average value of the steady-state fraction of cooperators for a stochastic evolutionary dynamics, for several values of $t$ for random ring networks with $k=8$, and for $\rho_c(0)=0.5$ (panel A) and $\rho_c(0)=0.1$ (panel B).[]{data-label="figstoch"}](stoch.eps)
![ Fraction of realizations that converge to a steady state with a positive number of cooperators, for networks with $k=6$. []{data-label="k6c"}](imik6c.eps)
So far we have shown that the clustering coefficient of the networks has an important influence on the steady state. But whether or not this influence is beneficial depends strongly on the initial fraction of cooperators, both for deterministic and stochastic evolutionary dynamics. The possible causes for this are addressed in the next section.
Role of the initial fraction of cooperators
===========================================
To understand the conflicting ways in which network clustering can affect cooperation we study in some detail the deterministic dynamics, and hope that some conclusions apply also to the stochastic case. Furthermore, in terms of the range of possible clustering coefficients we limit ourselves to analyze what happens for networks at the two extremes: completely ordered (large $C$) and completely disordered (small $C$) networks. For this last class we concentrate on lattice networks with $k=6$ and $k=8$ which have clustering coefficients $C=2/5$ ($k=6$) and $C=3/7$ ($k=8$),
First, we analyze the fate of a cluster of 3 cooperators. In the case of the lattice networks with $k=6$ and $k=8$, there are two and three possible configurations, respectively (see Fig.\[k8t\]). However, all of them are unstable because, thanks to the large clustering, some neighbors of the cluster can be connected to 2 or 3 cooperators in the cluster, having thus a larger payoff than any of them. On the other hand, in a random network there is a finite probability ($1-3k^2/N+O(k/N)$) that all the neighbors of a 3-cluster are not neighbors of more than 1 cooperator, and thus the cluster is stable. Furthermore, if this cluster does not disappear it will grow to become a cluster of $k+1$ cooperators (a central cooperator surrounded by cooperators). This cluster, in turn, has a non vanishing probability of continuing its expansion. For example, if there is a link joining two of the new surrounding cooperators (which happens with probability $(k/N) k(k-1)/2)$, the cluster grows by turning into cooperators the $2(k-2)$ non-cooperating neighbors of the nodes that share the link (see Fig. \[figer\]A). But there is now a non vanishing probability that there is also a link joining the nodes of the cluster ’surface’ which would lead to an increase of its size of $2(k-2)$. And, in general, at any step of its growth it could keep growing with a probability roughly proportional to $(k/N) N_s 2(k-2)$, where $N_s$ is the size of the cluster surface. Considering that most of the nodes of the clusters lie in its surface, implies that once the cluster has reached a size of order $N/(2k(k-2))$ it will keep growing until it spans the whole lattice. Thus, if we consider the evolution of all possible 3-clusters, the distribution of final cluster sizes should be non-vanishing only for sizes $O(N)$ and for sizes smaller than $O(N/(2k(k-2)))$.
In the case of 4-clusters, it is easy to see that the situation is qualitatively the same for regular random networks. On the other hand, for lattice networks the picture is completely different: square 4-clusters expand until they occupy the whole lattice because every cooperator is connected to 2 or 3 others whereas non cooperating neighbours can only have at most 2 cooperating neighbours.
Taking these ideas into account, and assuming that cluster expansion or death is not influenced by the presence of cooperators outside the cluster, we can try to predict what happens when cooperators are placed at random in a network. In the case of a lattice network, the probability of an initial set of cooperators taking over the network is simply the probability that there is at least one square cluster of cooperators: $P(p)=1-(1-p^4)^N$. For a random regular network the probability is $P(p)=1-(1-f(p,k,N))^N$, where $f(p,k,N)$ is the probability that a given node is the center of a 3-cluster and that it expands during at least two steps:
$$\begin{aligned}
f(p,k,N) &=& (1-(1-k/N)^{4(k-2)(k-2)})(1-(1-k/N)^{\frac{k(k-1)}{2}}) \nonumber \\
&& (1-(1-p)^k-kp(1-p)^{k-1})\end{aligned}$$
where the first term in the product is the probability that a given node has at least two cooperating neighbors, the second is the probability that the 3-cluster expands in the first step, and the third is the probability that it continues expanding in the second step. We assume that after the second step the expansion goes on until all the lattice is occupied by cooperators. Fig. \[k8t\] shows that these functions overestimate the fraction of populations that are able to take over the whole network. This shows that, somewhat paradoxically, the presence of other cooperators can sometimes hinder the expansion of a cluster. For example, if a square has 2 defecting neighbors, connected to opposite sides of the square, and in turn connected to at least one cooperator outside of the cluster, the square disappears. Note that a 4-cluster in a random network is harder to destroy because a neighbour of the cluster is a neighbour only to one cooperator of the cluster and thus it needs two other cooperating neighbors to be able to destabilize the cluster. Evidently, 3-clusters are much easier to destabilize, as the partial failure of the estimate shows. Fig. \[figer\]B shows one way a 3-cluster can be destabilized by a close cooperator.
Interestingly, there is also a mechanism by which different clusters can collaborate in each other’s expansion, given that the average distance between nodes is small enough. Consider for instance a couple of stable stars of cooperators in a random network. If they are connected, i.e. if a cooperator of one star is connected to a cooperator in the other, these cooperators would be able to turn their non-cooperating neighbors into cooperators, thus increasing the size of the two clusters by $(2k-2)$. In a random network, the probability that two clusters of size $N_1$ and $N_2$ are connected is $1-(1-k/n)^{N_1 n_2}$.
![3-clusters in a lattice network with $k=8$. Black circles represent cooperators and white circles represent defectors.[]{data-label="figmoore"}](moore.eps){width="10cm"}
Taking all these features into account it is possible to give a better estimate for the fraction of systems that converge to a final state dominated by cooperators or with only a few ($O(1)$) stable cooperators. The probability that the cooperator population dies out is $(1-p P_s)^N$ where $P_s$ is the probability that a cooperator survives the first time step: $$\begin{aligned}
P_s(k,P,N) &=& \sum_{j=2}^k \binom{k}{j} p^j (1-p)^{k-j} \nonumber \\
&& \left( \sum_{i=0}^{j-2} \binom{k-1}{i} p^i (1-p)^{k-1-i}
\right)^{k-j}\end{aligned}$$
![Evolution of two different 3-clusters in a random network with $k=4$. Black circles represent cooperators and white circles represent defectors. A) Expansion of a 3-cluster. B) Disappearance of a 3-cluster.[]{data-label="figer"}](er.eps){width="10cm"}
which is simply the sum of the probabilities of having $j$ cooperator neighbours multiplied by the probability that none of the $k-j$ defecting neighbors has more than $j-2$ cooperating neighbors. The probability of the final state being dominated by cooperators can be approximated by: $$\begin{aligned}
P(p) &=& 1-(1-P_s)^{pN}- \nonumber \\
&& \sum_{i=1}^{pN} \binom{pN}{i} P_s^i (1-P_s)^{pN-i}(1-k/N)^{k
i(k i-1)/2}\end{aligned}$$
Each addend gives the probability of having $i$ stars and that they are not connected.
![ Fraction of systems that converge to a state dominated by cooperators (full symbols) or to a state with a few stable cooperators (empty symbols), as a function of the initial fraction of cooperators, for regular random networks (circles) and lattice networks (triangles), with $k=8$. The lines show the theoretical estimates, assuming independence (full lines) or dependence (dashed lines) among all clusters of cooperators. []{data-label="k8t"}](k8teo.eps)
It is interesting to see what happens for networks with $k=4$ because both lattice and random regular networks have vanishing clustering coefficients. Fig. \[k4t\] shows that the probability of taking over the whole population is rather similar for both networks. Interestingly, in this case there is also the possibility of having a final state with a small number of stable cooperators, for the lattice network. The reason is very similar to the case of random regular networks and is a consequence of having a vanishing cluster coefficient: a lineal cluster of $3$ cooperators cannot be destabilized because no neighbor can be a neighbor to more than $1$ cooperator of the cluster.
![ Fraction of systems that converge to a state dominated by cooperators (full symbols) or to a state with a few stable cooperators (empty symbols), as a function of the initial fraction of cooperators, for random regular networks (circles) and lattice networks (triangles), with $k=4$. The lines show the theoretical estimates assuming dependence among all clusters of cooperators. []{data-label="k4t"}](k4teo.eps)
Conclusions
===========
It has been sometimes suggested that one of the possible reasons for the success of cooperating strategies in spatially structured populations is the possibility of forming globular clusters. In this way, cooperators inside the cluster are ‘protected’ by the ones on the border. If the populations is placed on a graph, the ‘globularity’ of the possible clusters is proportional to the clustering coefficient. Therefore, cooperating strategies should be more successful in networks with large $C$ than in networks with small $C$. For the evolutionary dynamics studied here we confirm that this is indeed the case when the fraction of cooperators in the steady state is compared in random regular networks (low $C$) and lattice networks (large $C$) having the same degree distributions. However, by analyzing populations in graphs with intermediate values of $C$, we find that the equilibrium fraction of cooperators is not a monotonic function of $C$.
The results commented above were obtained using initial populations with many cooperators (half of the population, on average). But if the initial population has much less cooperators, the situation becomes more complex. On the one hand one finds that some evolutions lead to the elimination of all cooperators. On the other hand, when cooperators do not disappear, their final fraction, as a function of $C$ has a similar behaviour to that observed when there are many initial cooperators. The problem is that the number of such evolutions is much smaller for ordered networks than for disordered ones, the behaviour for intermediate values of $C$ also being non monotonic. The situation is then very different from that obtained from initial populations with more cooperators. The same difference appears when stochastic evolutionary dynamics are analyzed.
The non monotonicity of the curves, together with the dependence on the initial condition suggest that there might be several mechanisms that influence the success or failure of cooperation. In the last section we have shown that this is indeed the case, at least for completely ordered or completely disordered networks. In ordered networks the evolution is isotropic and deterministic: wherever it is placed, a square cluster of 4 cooperators is always able to expand. But in disordered networks the fate of the cluster depends on where in the network it is located: given a large enough network there are positions from where a cluster of 3 cooperators will be able to grow to a very large size. In other words, in disordered networks smaller clusters are able to expand than in the case of ordered networks, but only if they are placed in the right places. Additionally, we have shown that it is not uncommon that cooperators that are outside, but not very far, from a cluster of cooperators, can actually hinder its expansion and even lead to its disappearance.
[00]{}
Maynard Smith, J., 1982. [*Evolution and the Theory of Games*]{} (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).
Axelrod, R. and Hamilton, W. D., 1981. The evolution of cooperation. Science [**211**]{}, 1390-1396.
Nowak, M. A. and May, R. M., 1992. Evolutionary games and spatial chaos. Nature [**359**]{}, 826-829.
Novak, M. A. and May, R. M., 1993. The spatial dilemmas of evolution. Int. J. Bifurcation Chaos, [**3**]{}, 35-78.
Nowak, M. A., 2006. Five rules for the evolution of cooperation. Science [**314**]{}, 1560-1563.
Abramson, G. and Kuperman, M. N., 2001. Social games in a social network. Phys. Rev. E [**63**]{}, 030901R(1-4).
Kuperman, M. N. and Risau Gusman, S., 2008. The effect of the topology on the spatial ultimatum game. Eur. Phys. Jour. B [**62**]{}, 233-238.
Szabó, G. and G. Fáth. Evolutionary games on graphs. Phys. Rep. [**446**]{}, 97-216 (2007).
Lieberman, E., Hauert, C., Nowak, M. A., 2005. Evolutionary dynamics on graphs. Nature [**433**]{}, 312-316.
Ohtsuki, H., Hauert, C., Lieberman, E., Nowak, M. A., 2006. A simple rule for the evolution of cooperation on graphs and social networks. Nature [**441**]{}, 502-505.
Roca, C. P., Cuesta, J. A., Sánchez, A., 2009. Effect of spatial structure on the evolution of cooperation. Phys. Rev E [**80**]{}, 046106(1-16).
Doebeli, M. and Hauert, C., 2005. Models of cooperation based on the Prisoner’s Dilemma and the Snowdrift game. Ecol. Lett. [**8**]{}, 748-766.
Hauert, C. and Szabó, G., 2005. Game Theory and Physics. Am. J. Phys. [**73**]{}, 405-414 .
Rapoport, A. and Chammah, A. M., 1965. [*Prisoner’s Dilemma.*]{} (University of Michigan Press)
Flood, M. M., 1952. Some experimental games. Research memorandum RM-789. (RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA.); Flood. M. M., 1958. Some Experimental Games. Management Science [**5**]{}, 5-26..
Szabó, G. and Töke, C., 1998. Evolutionary prisoner’s dilemma game on a square lattice. Phys Rev E [**58**]{} 69-73.
Nowak, M. A. and Sigmund, K., 2004. Evolutionary Dynamics of Biological Games. Science [**303**]{}, 793-799.
Moyano, L. G. and Sánchez, A.,2009. Evolving learning rules and emergence of cooperation in spatial prisoner’s dilemma. J. Theor. Biol. [**259**]{}, 84-95.
Hauert, C. and Doebeli, M., 2004. Spatial structure often inhibits the evolution of cooperation in the snowdrift game. Nature [**428**]{}, 643-646.
Durán, O. and Mulet, R., 2005. Evolutionary prisoner’s dilemma in random graphs. Physica D [**208**]{}, 257-265.
Watts, D.J.; Strogatz, S.H., 1998. Collective dynamics of ’small-world’ networks. Nature [**393**]{} 440-442.
Wasserman, S. and Faust, K., (1994). [*Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications.*]{} (Cambridge University Press).
Bollobás, B. and de la Vega, W. F., 1982. The diameter of random regular graphs, Combinatorica [**2**]{}, 125-134.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The particular symmetry of the random-phase-approximation (RPA) matrix has been utilized in the past to reduce the RPA eigenvalue problem into a symmetric-matrix problem of half the dimension. The condition of positive definiteness of at least one of the matrices $A\pm B$ has been imposed (where $A$ and $B$ are the submatrices of the RPA matrix) so that, [*e.g.*]{}, its square root can be found by Cholesky decomposition. In this work, alternative methods are pointed out to reduce the RPA problem to a real (not symmetric, in general) problem of half the dimension, with the condition of positive definiteness relaxed. One of the methods relies on a generalized Cholesky decomposition, valid for non-singular real symmetric matrices. The algorithm is described and a corresponding routine in C is given.'
author:
- 'P. Papakonstantinou'
title: 'Reduction of the RPA eigenvalue problem and a generalized Cholesky decomposition for real-symmetric matrices'
---
Introduction {#Sintr}
============
The eigenvalue problem of random-phase-approximation (RPA) type, $$\left(
\begin{array}{rr}
A & B \\
-B & -A
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
X_{\lambda} \\ Y_{\lambda}
\end{array}
\right)
\equiv
{\bf R}
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
X_{\lambda} \\ Y_{\lambda}
% X \\ Y
\end{array}
\right)
= \varepsilon_{\lambda}
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
X_{\lambda} \\ Y_{\lambda}
% X \\ Y
\end{array}
\right) ,
\label{Erpa}$$ where $A$ and $B$ are real symmetric $n\times n$ matrices, is frequently encountered in quantum many-body physics. In nuclear physics, in particular, the RPA is the most widely used method to examine collective excitations of nuclei. The RPA is also used to compute the correlation energy of a system described at zeroth order by the Hartree-Fock approximation. Standard first-order RPA, relativistic RPA, renormalized RPA, as well as quasi-particle and second-order RPA, when formulated in configuration space, result in equations of the form (\[Erpa\]). The properties of the solutions, following from the symmetry of the matrix $\bf R$, are well known [@Tho1960; @Tho1961; @Row1970; @RiS1980].
The $(2n)\times (2n)$ RPA matrix $\bf R$ is not symmetric — one reason why for large sizes $n$ it becomes prohibiting to solve the RPA problem as-is. It has been possible, however, to exploit the particular structure of $\bf R$, determined by the symmetric matrices $A$ and $B$, in order to reduce the RPA problem not only to a symmetric eigenvalue problem, but at the same time a problem of half the dimension, $n\times n$ [@Chi1970; @UlR1971]. (The generalized RPA problem where $A$ is Hermitian and $B$ symmetric can also be reduced [@UlG1972], but that problem will not be dealt with here.) As long as one wishes to avoid complex matrices, that can be achieved under the condition that at least one of the matrices $A+B$, $A-B$ be positive definite. The Cholesky decomposition of the positive-definite matrix $A\pm B$ lies at the heart of the method presented in Ref. [@Chi1970], while in Ref. [@UlR1971] an orthogonal transformation is utilized under the same condition.
It can happen, however, that the positive-definiteness condition of $A\pm B$ is not met, meaning that the RPA matrix has imaginary eigenvalues or the stability matrix is not positive-definite. In modern relativistic RPA models of nuclear response the $A\pm B$ matrices are known to be indefinite, due to the inclusion of states from the Dirac sea [@Rin2001]. Thus the full $(2n)\times (2n)$ non-symmetric problem is currently solved when using relativistic RPA in configuration space. Other situations from nuclear physics include the trivial case of a dipole spurious state appearing at imaginary energy, as well as systems which are unstable against certain “excitations". An exotic nucleus with different enough proton- and neutron-Fermi energies can be found unstable against configurations of isospin $T=1$ and certain angular momentum and parity $J^{\pi}$. Also in the neighborgood of phase transitions the stability matrix can have negative eigenvalues when the residual interaction is attractive and large enough. In such cases the (in)definiteness of the matrices may not be known before solving the RPA problem. In this work alternative procedures are proposed for reducing the size of the RPA problem, still involving real matrices, where the condition of positive-definitness is relaxed. The result is a real, non-symmetric (in general) problem of half the original dimension. One procedure requires no matrix decomposition and is recommended for problems where the $A\pm B$ matrix is expected from the outset to not be positive-definite. Another method offers the possibility to detect and solve a symmetric problem if the matrix turns out to be positive-definite. The latter involves a more general Cholesky-like decomposition of a real symmetric matrix. The way to perform the decomposition in practice is outlined and a C routine is also provided. Compared with the usual Cholesky decomposition, the additional computational and storage effort is minimal. Other reduction methods can be devised based on different matrix decompositions, as will be demonstrated. Modern computers perform quite well in solving the standard first-order RPA in nuclei, without reduction. Still, the need to reduce the RPA problem and thus accelerate its solution becomes rather pressing when, [*e.g.*]{}, one solves the RPA equations iteratively (as in renormalized RPA) or one wants to evaluate the RPA correlation energy of a nucleus. In such cases many RPA problems corresponding to different $J^{\pi}T$ quantum numbers must be solved (perhaps more than once) before a solution is reached. Hence a fast technique is of great importance.
Reduction methods are of interest also when one needs to evaluate only the lowest positive eigenvalues of very large RPA matrices, using, [*e.g.*]{}, the Lanczos technique – see Ref. [@Tsi2001] for a related strategy.
Next it is briefly reviewed how the RPA problem can be reduced using the Cholesky decomposition. Then alternative methods and the modified Cholesky decomposition and its algorithm are presented, a corresponding routine in C is given and comments follow before concluding.
Reduction of the RPA problem using Cholesky decomposition {#Sprev}
=========================================================
The eigenvalue problem of eq. (\[Erpa\]) leads in a straightforward manner to the system of equations $$\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
(A-B)(X_{\lambda}-Y_{\lambda}) = \varepsilon_{\lambda} (X_{\lambda}+Y_{\lambda}) \\
(A+B)(X_{\lambda}+Y_{\lambda}) = \varepsilon_{\lambda} (X_{\lambda}-Y_{\lambda})
\end{array}
\right\}
\label{Erpasys1}$$ or $$\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
(A+B)(A-B)(X_{\lambda}-Y_{\lambda}) = \varepsilon_{\lambda}^2(X_{\lambda}-Y_{\lambda}) \\
(A-B)(A+B)(X_{\lambda}+Y_{\lambda}) = \varepsilon_{\lambda}^2(X_{\lambda}+Y_{\lambda})
\end{array}
\right\} .
\label{Erpasys}$$ The matrices $A\pm B$ are real and symmetric. Let us assume that $A+B$ is positive-definite. Then it can be factorized as $$A+B = LL^T
,$$ where $L$ a lower-triangular real matrix and $L^T$ its transpose. This is the square-root or Cholesky decomposition of the matrix. Then the second equation of the system (\[Erpasys\]), premultiplied with $L^T$, can be written as $$HR_{\lambda} = \varepsilon_{\lambda}^2R_{\lambda} ,
\label{Erpach}$$ where $$H \equiv L^T(A-B)L$$ a real symmetric matrix and $$R_{\lambda} \equiv
\varepsilon_{\lambda}^{-1/2}L^T(X_{\lambda}+Y_{\lambda})$$ its orthonormalized eigenvectors with eigenvalues $\varepsilon_{\lambda}^2$.
The original RPA problem has been reduced to a symmetric problem of half the dimension. For $\varepsilon_{\lambda}^2>0$ the eigenvalues of the original problem are real, $\varepsilon_{\lambda}=\pm\sqrt{\varepsilon_{\lambda}^2}$. Once the eigenvectors $R_{\lambda}$ have been evaluated, the vectors $X_{\lambda}$ and $Y_{\lambda}$ can be recovered. For real and positive eigenvalues (and real eigenvectors), $$\begin{aligned}
X_{\lambda} &=& \frac{1}{2} [\sqrt{\varepsilon_{\lambda}}(L^T)^{-1} + \frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon_{\lambda}}}L]R_{\lambda}, \\
Y_{\lambda} &=& \frac{1}{2} [\sqrt{\varepsilon_{\lambda}}(L^T)^{-1} - \frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon_{\lambda}}}L]R_{\lambda}. \end{aligned}$$ It is easily verified that the desired normalization condition as well as the orthogonality condition between different eigenvectors $$X_{\lambda}^T X_{\mu} - Y_{\lambda}^T Y_{\mu} = \delta_{\lambda\mu} %0 \quad (\lambda \neq \mu )
\label{Exyorth}$$ are satisfied.
If the matrix $A+B$ is not positive definite, but $A-B$ is, one can write $
A-B = LL^T
$ and proceed in an analogous way by rewriting the first equation of the system (\[Erpasys\]) in the form (\[Erpach\]) with $$H \equiv L^T(A+B)L \quad , \quad
R_{\lambda} \equiv
\varepsilon_{\lambda}^{-1/2}L^T(X_{\lambda}-Y_{\lambda})
.$$ From $R_{\lambda}$ the vectors $X_{\lambda}$ and $Y_{\lambda}$ can be recovered, $$X_{\lambda} = \frac{1}{2} [\frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon_{\lambda}}}L +\sqrt{\varepsilon_{\lambda}}(L^T)^{-1}]R_{\lambda}
,$$ $$Y_{\lambda} = \frac{1}{2} [\frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon_{\lambda}}}L -\sqrt{\varepsilon_{\lambda}}(L^T)^{-1}]R_{\lambda}
.$$ For more details see Ref. [@Chi1970].
Among the virtues of this method of solving the RPA problem are that the Cholesky decomposition is fast and efficient numerically [@PTV1997] and that one only has to deal with triangular and symmetric matrices, which simplifies the numerical realization of the solution.
Generalized methods {#Sour}
===================
Unfortunately, if neither $A+B$ nor $A-B$ is positive definite, the above method fails and one has to either use general routines to solve the full non-symmetric $(2n)\times (2n)$ RPA problem or use complex $n \times n$ matrices (see Ref. [@UlR1971]; alternatively, one can define a Cholesky decomposition $LL^T$ where imaginary values are allowed in $L$ [@Fad1959]).
One can still reduce the size of the problem using other decompositions, valid for generic real symmetric matrices [@Fad1959; @Fox1964; @GoV1996] or, in fact, no decomposition at all, as will be shown. For the moment, the discussion is kept general. Let us consider the second equation of the system (\[Erpasys\]). One can of course start with the first one and proceed in a completely analogous way. Suppose we can factorize the matrix $(A+B)$ as $$A+B = CDE ,$$ where $C$, $D$, $E$ are $n \times n$ matrices and $E$ has an inverse. (Any one of them may be the identity matrix $I$). The equation in question can be written as $$HR_{\lambda} = \varepsilon_{\lambda}^2R_{\lambda}
\label{EHRgen}$$ with $$H\equiv E(A-B)CD \quad , \quad R_{\lambda} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon_{\lambda}}} E(X_{\lambda}+Y_{\lambda})
.
\label{Hgen}$$ Henceforth we consider the solutions with real and positive $\varepsilon_{\lambda}$. Real eigenvalues allow us to assume real vectors $R_{\lambda}$. The real vectors $$\begin{aligned}
X_{\lambda} &=& \frac{1}{2}[{\sqrt{\varepsilon_{\lambda}}} E^{-1} + \frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon_{\lambda}}}CD]R_{\lambda}
, \label{EXgen} \\
Y_{\lambda} &=& \frac{1}{2}[{\sqrt{\varepsilon_{\lambda}}} E^{-1} - \frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon_{\lambda}}}CD]R_{\lambda}
\label{EYgen} \end{aligned}$$ form solutions of the RPA problem, eq. (\[Erpa\]), as can be easily verified. They obey the orthonormalization condition $$X_{\lambda}^TX_{\mu} - Y_{\lambda}^T Y_{\mu} = \pm \delta_{\lambda\mu}
\label{Exynewnorm}
,$$ which is equivalent to $$R_{\lambda}^T (E^{-1})^TCD R_{\mu}
= \pm \delta_{\lambda\mu}
.
\label{Rgen}$$ Note that $$(E^{-1})^TCD
=D^T C^T E^{-1} =(E^{-1})^T(A+B)E^{-1}.$$ Expressions (\[EXgen\]), (\[EYgen\]) can be obtained by writing $\{X_{\lambda} \, \mbox{or} \, Y_{\lambda}\} = \frac{1}{2}[(X_{\lambda}+Y_{\lambda}) \{+\,\mbox{or}\,-\} (X_{\lambda}-Y_{\lambda})]$, then writing $(X_{\lambda}-Y_{\lambda})=\varepsilon_{\lambda}^{-1}(A+B)(X_{\lambda}+Y_{\lambda})$ (see eq. (\[Erpasys1\])) and finally using $R_{\lambda}=\sqrt{\varepsilon_{\lambda}}E^{-1}(X_{\lambda}+Y_{\lambda})$ and the decomposition of $(A+B)$. Eq. (\[Rgen\]) is easily obtained if one substitutes $X$ and $Y$ in eq. (\[Exynewnorm\]) with expressions (\[EXgen\]) and (\[EYgen\]). Thus, the existence of the orthonormalizable real solutions $(X_{\lambda,\mu},Y_{\lambda,\mu})$ for the RPA matrix and of the inverse of $E$ guarantee the orthogonality condition eq. (\[Rgen\]) for the corresponding eigenvectors of $H$ (which has been verified by means of numerical examples for the special cases presented in the next two subsections).
The normalization condition does not hold automatically. Therefore, either the eigenvectors $R_{\lambda}$ have to be renormalized according to eq. (\[Rgen\]) (for $\lambda = \mu$) after solving the eigenvalue problem (\[EHRgen\]), or the $X_{\lambda}$ and $Y_{\lambda}$ vectors have to be renormalized according to eq. (\[Exynewnorm\]), after they are calculated from $R_{\lambda}$ and eqs. (\[EXgen\]), (\[EYgen\]). Regarding the r.h.s. of eq. (\[Exynewnorm\]), note that the norm of the RPA eigenvectors – as defined by the l.h.s. – need not be positive, unless the stability matrix is positive definite [@Tho1961]. If it is not, eigenvectors with positive eigenvalues may exist which are normalizable to $-1$, instead of $1$. Such a case can be recognized before normalization by evaluating the l.h.s. of expression (\[Exynewnorm\]) or (\[Rgen\]) and checking the sign of the result.
In Ref. [@UlR1971] an orthogonal transformation was utilized, $A\pm B = CDC^T$, where $C$ orthogonal and $D$ diagonal. (It was applied in a different way so as to obtain a symmetric problem – real or complex.) In the method described previously based on the usual Cholesky decomposition, one has $C=L$, $D=I$ and $E=L^T$ and the generic equations (\[Hgen\])–(\[Rgen\]) simplify into the ones presented earlier and in Ref. [@Chi1970]. Indeed, a procedure such as outlined above would make less sense to apply if the matrices $C$, $D$, $E$ did not have special properties which simplify the algebra and numerics involved.
No decomposition
----------------
One may chose simply to solve one of the $n \times n$ eigenvalue problems of eq. (\[Erpasys\]) without any decomposition. For example, one can solve the second one for $R_{\lambda}=\varepsilon_{\lambda}^{-1/2}(X_{\lambda}+Y_{\lambda})$ and apply the equations given above for $$D=E=I \quad , \quad C=A+B.$$ Some matrix operations are thus saved, but the resulting eigenvalue problem is not symmetric. The no-decomposition strategy should be preferable when the matrices are expected to not be positive-definite.
Generalized Cholesky decomposition
----------------------------------
A decomposition strategy like the one discussed next offers the additional possibility to detect and solve a real-symmetric problem, if the decomposed matrix turns out to be positive-definite. It can be shown that a non-singular real symmetric matrix $F$ with non-singular leading submatrices, with or without negative eigenvalues, can be factorized in the form $$F = L D L^T ,
\label{Echgen}$$ where $L$ is again a lower-triangular matrix and $D=\mathrm{diag}\{d_i\}$ is a diagonal matrix whose diagonal elements are equal to $1$ or $-1$. Indeed, the factorization (\[Echgen\]) follows from the “$LDL$" decomposition of linear algebra, let us write it as $$F=L'D'{L'}^T
, \label{Eldl}$$ where $L'$ is a unit-triangular matrix and $D'=\mathrm{diag}\{d_i'\}$ a general diagonal matrix [@Fox1964; @GoV1996]. If we write $D'$ as $$D'= [\mathrm{diag}\{\sqrt{|d'_i|}\}] \,
[\mathrm{diag}\{\mathrm{sgn} d'_i\}] \,
[\mathrm{diag}\{\sqrt{|d'_i|}\}]$$ and define $L$ and $D$ as $$L = L' \, [\mathrm{diag}\{\sqrt{|d'_i|}\}]
\,\,
,
\,\,
D =
\mathrm{diag}\{\mathrm{sgn}d'_i\}
,$$ eq. (\[Echgen\]) is obtained. The existence of the “$LDL$" decomposition (eq. (\[Eldl\])) for a non-singular real symmetric matrix $F$ with non-singular leading submatrices is known from linear algebra [@Fox1964; @GoV1996].
Setting $C=L$ and $E=L^T$ in eqs. (\[Hgen\])–(\[Rgen\]) we obtain the $n\times n$ real, non-symmetric (in general) eigenvalue problem of the form (\[EHRgen\]) with $$H\equiv L^T(A-B)LD \quad , \quad R_{\lambda} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon_{\lambda}}} L^T(X_{\lambda}+Y_{\lambda})
.
\label{Hnew}$$ At this point one may check whether $D=I$ (meaning that $F$ is positive-definite), in which case $H$ is symmetric and optimized routines can be used to solve its eigenvalue problem.
Applying eqs. (\[EXgen\]) (\[EYgen\]) we find that for real and positive eigenvalues the solutions of the RPA equations are given by the vectors $$\begin{aligned}
X_{\lambda} &=& \frac{1}{2}[{\sqrt{\varepsilon_{\lambda}}} (L^T)^{-1} + \frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon_{\lambda}}}LD]R_{\lambda}, \\
Y_{\lambda} &=& \frac{1}{2}[{\sqrt{\varepsilon_{\lambda}}} (L^T)^{-1} - \frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon_{\lambda}}}LD]R_{\lambda}
.\end{aligned}$$ The normalization condition (\[Rgen\]) is simplified since $(E^{-1})^TCD = D$.
The “generalized" Cholesky decomposition defined by eq. (\[Echgen\]) can be realized numerically almost as efficiently as the usual one. A simple code in C is given later on. The underlying algorithm (a revision of a similar one which appears in Ref. [@Two1996]) resembles closely the usual Cholesky algorithm and can be described as follows.
If we write out eq. (\[Echgen\]) in components ($F=[f_{ij}]$, $D=[d_{ij}]$ with $d_{ij}=d_{i}\delta_{ij}$, $L=[l_{ij}]$), we have $$f_{ij} = \sum_{k\leq i,j} d_k l_{ik} l_{jk} ,$$ from which we readily obtain, setting $i=j$ and $i<j$ respectively, $$l_{ii} = \sqrt{d_i (f_{ii} - \sum_{k < i } d_k l_{ik}^2) }
,$$ $$l_{ji} = \frac{d_i}{l_{ii}} (f_{ji} - \sum_{k < i } d_k l_{ik}l_{jk}) .
\label{Ealg}$$ We start the solution with $l_{11}=\sqrt{d_1f_{11}}=\sqrt{|f_{11}|}$; if $f_{11}<0$, we have $d_1=-1$, otherwise $d_1=1$. The off-diagonal elements $l_{j1}$ can now be evaluated. After finishing with the first column of $L$, we continue with $l_{22}$. Similarly, the sign of $d_2$ will be determined by the sign of $(f_{22} - d_1 l_{11}^2)$. All quantities needed to calculate $l_{j2}$ are now known. In short, we apply eqs. (\[Ealg\]) in the order $i=1,2,\ldots,n$, each time starting with the diagonal element $l_{ii}$ and proceeding with the off-diagonal elements in the same column.
A routine in C
==============
A simple routine example is given below in C language, based on the [choldc]{} routine of [@PTV1997], § 2.9 and the algorithm described previously. Given the real-symmetric $n \times n$ matrix $F$ ([f\[1...n\]\[1...n\]]{}), this routine constructs its decomposition $F=L D L^T$, where $D$ is a diagonal matrix with elements equal to 1 or $-1$ along the diagonal and $L$ a lower-triangular matrix. Only components $F_{ij}$ with $j\geq i$ need to be referenced, since $F$ is symmetric. This allows the elements of $L$ lying below the diagonal to be stored in the corresponding elements of [f]{}. Additional arrays [p\[1...n\]]{} and [d\[1...n\]]{} are used to store the diagonals of $L$ and $D$ respectively. One can also use the routine to test if the matrix $F$ is positive-definite, by looking for $-1$ elements in $D$. The return value can, [*e.g.*]{}, be an integer (instead of void) equal to the number of negative [d\[i\]]{} values. For matrices which are expected to have mostly positive eigenvalues, in which case most [d\[i\]]{}’s will be equal to $+1$, it should be advantageous to only store the [i]{}-values for which [d\[i\]]{}$=-1$, instead of the whole array , especially if the matrix dimension is large.
...
float f[N][N]; // N=n+1
float p[N];
int d[N];
...
void choldmod(int n)
{
int i,j,k;
float sum,aux;
for (i=1;i<=n;i++)
{
d[i]=1;
for (j=i;j<=n;j++)
{
sum=0.0;
for(k=1; k<i; k++)
sum += d[k]*f[i][k]*f[j][k];
aux = f[i][j]-sum;
if (i==j)
{
if (aux<=0.0) d[i]=-1;
p[i]=sqrt(d[i]*aux);
}
else
f[j][i]=d[i]*aux/p[i];
}
}
}
The inner loop, consisting of two multiplies (one of them with [int]{}) and a sum, is executed $(n^3-n)/6 \approx n^3/6$ times. There are also $n$ square roots and about $n^2/2$ divides. On an Intel Pentium 4 machine ([gcc]{} compilation) an arbitrary $1000 \times 1000$ symmetric matrix was factorized in about 2 seconds and a $10000 \times 10000$ matrix in about 40 minutes. The algorithm of the usual Cholesky decomposition contains $n(n^2-1)/6\approx n^3/6$ similar inner loops (with one multiply and one subtract each), $n$ square roots and about $n^2/2$ divides [@PTV1997]. A similar amount of effort is required for a usual $LDL$ decomposition, whereas the orthogonal transformation proceeding via a Householder reduction and a $QL$ decomposition requires more effort, namely about $2n^3/3 + 30n^2$ operations [@PTV1997]. As holds for the usual $LDL$ factorization, stability of the present algorithm is not guaranteed for indefinite matrices. Since, however, RPA matrices tend to have their largest elements (absolute values) along the diagonal, they should be mostly well behaved.
Comments
========
In most of the above it is assumed that there are no singularities. In actual applications it is quite improbable to obtain eigenvalues so close to zero that bad behaviour occurs. Even then, one can escape the pitfall by slightly scaling the residual interaction entering the RPA equation and repeating the calculation.
The modified eigenvalue problem defined by eqs. (\[EHRgen\]) and (\[Hnew\]) can be transformed into a complex symmetric problem. One has to multiply from the left both sides of eq. (\[EHRgen\]) with the square-root matrix of $D$, [*i.e.*]{}, with the diagonal matrix $\tilde{D}$ with diagonal elements $\tilde{d}_i = \sqrt{d_i}$ equal to 1 or i, so that $D=\tilde{D}^2$. The $i-$th element of the eigenvector of the new, symmetric (but complex, if $D$ contains negative elements) matrix $\tilde{D}L^T(A-B)L\tilde{D}$, is equal to the $i-$th element of the corresponding eigenvector of $H$, times the $i-$th diagonal element of $\tilde{D}$. That the RPA problem can be reduced in a complex symmetric problem was shown in a different way in Ref. [@UlR1971].
The modified Cholesky decomposition defined here is not available in packages like LAPACK, appropriate for very large matrices, contrary to the usual Cholesky and other decompositions. Therefore, for very large matrices one may have to chose another reduction procedure.
Conclusion {#Sconc}
==========
In conclusion, it has been demonstrated that there exist methods to reduce a real RPA eigenvalue problem to a real non-symmetric problem of half the dimension without demanding that one of the matrices $A+B$, $A-B$ be positive definite. Reduction can be achieved with or without matrix decomposition. We have worked out a method based on a generalized Cholesky decomposition, which is no more involved numerically than the one relying on the usual square-root decomposition of positive-definite real-symmetric matrices. The result is in general a real non-symmetric (or a complex-symmetric) eigenvalue problem of half the dimension. If one of the matrices turns out to be positive definite, a real-symmetric problem is obtained instead, without additional effort. Work supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, contract SFB634.
[10]{} url \#1[`#1`]{}urlprefix
, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} [**21**]{} (1960) 225.
, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} [**22**]{} (1961) 78.
, [*Nuclear Collective Motion*]{}, Methuen, 1970.
and [Shuck P.]{}, [*The Nuclear Many-Body Problem*]{}, Springer New York, 1980.
, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} [**A146**]{} (1970) 449.
and [Rowe D.J.]{}, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} [**A163**]{} (1971) 257.
and [Gupta K.]{}, [*J. Math. Phys.*]{} [**13**]{} (1972) 1163.
and [Li-gang Cao]{}, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} [**A694**]{} (2001) 249.
, [*J. Phys.*]{} [**B34**]{} (2001) L401.
and [Flannery B.]{}, [*Numerical Recipies in C*]{}, Cambridge University Press, 1997.
, [*Computational Methods of Linear Algebra*]{}, Dover New York, 1959.
, [*An Introduction to Numerical Linear Algebra*]{}, Oxford University Press, 1964.
and [Van Loan C.F.]{}, [*Matrix Computations*]{}, The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996.
, [*Introduction to the Mathematics of Inversion in Remote Sensing and Indirect Measurements*]{}, Dover, New York 1996, Ch. 3.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Offloading resource-intensive jobs to the cloud and nearby users is a promising approach to enhance mobile devices. This paper investigates a hybrid offloading system that takes both infrastructure-based networks and Ad-hoc networks into the scope. Specifically, we propose EDOS, an edge assisted offloading system that consists of two major components, an Edge Assistant (EA) and Offload Agent (OA). EA runs on the routers/towers to manage registered remote cloud servers and local service providers and OA operates on the users’ devices to discover the services in proximity. We present the system with a suite of protocols to collect the potential service providers and algorithms to allocate tasks according to user-specified constraints. To evaluate EDOS, we prototype it on commercial mobile devices and evaluate it with both experiments on a small-scale testbed and simulations. The results show that EDOS is effective and efficient for offloading jobs.'
author:
-
bibliography:
- 'routing.bib'
title: 'EDOS: Edge Assisted Offloading System for Mobile Devices'
---
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'If a robot can predict crowds in parts of its environment that are inaccessible to its sensors, then it can plan to avoid them. This paper proposes a fast, online algorithm that learns average crowd densities in different areas. It also describes how these densities can be incorporated into existing navigation architectures. In simulation across multiple challenging crowd scenarios, the robot reaches its target faster, travels less, and risks fewer collisions than if it were to plan with the traditional A\* algorithm.'
author:
- |
Anoop Aroor^1^ and Susan L. Epstein^1,2^\
The Graduate Center^1^ and Hunter College^2^ of The City University of New York\
New York, NY 10065\
[email protected], [email protected]
bibliography:
- 'references.bib'
title: 'Toward Crowd-Sensitive Path Planning'
---
Introduction
============
Robots increasingly serve in environments shared with people, as museum tour guides [@thrun1999minerva], telepresence robots [@Tsui:2011:EUC:1957656.1957664], and assistants in hospitals and offices [@veloso2015cobots]. When these environments are crowded, *autonomous navigation* (the ability to move about without human intervention) becomes challenging. Because the robot can detect people only in its vicinity, it is restricted to *local* rather than *global* crowd data. Moreover, because crowds move, path planners that assume a static world may generate infeasible or inefficient plans. In addition to travel distance and time, in the presence of crowds, other criteria become important, including safety, comfort, and social mores [@kruse2013human]. The thesis of our work is that a robot can meet the challenges of a crowded environment when it learns to predict global crowd behavior and to plan with that knowledge. We call this *crowd-sensitive planning*.
Ideally, a robot familiar with its environment should be able to predict crowded areas and simply avoid them. This would reduce travel time, travel distance, and the likelihood of collision. A robot that could detect crowds only within its sensor range might generate the plan shown in Figure 1 as a solid line. As a result, the robot would repeatedly correct this plan (*plan repair*) or make a new one (*replan*), and pause often until it had an opportunity to move. In contrast, a crowd-sensitive plan, shown as a dashed line in Figure 1, might entirely avoid areas likely to be crowded.
{width="45.00000%"}
A *crowd density map* is an observed, cumulative, global record of the crowd in an environment. A robot can use a crowd density map to predict where people are likely to appear. Our approach learns a crowd density map for a two-dimensional space as a robot moves in it from one *location* (coordinates (*x,y*) with respect to an allocentric origin) to another.
The contributions of this paper are threefold. First, it introduces a fast, online algorithm that learns a crowd density map from only local sensor information, with no assumptions about the size or behavior of the crowd. Second, it describes how crowd density maps can be incorporated into existing navigation architectures to generate crowd-sensitive plans. Finally, it demonstrates empirically, through extensive simulation, the benefits of crowd-sensitive planning. In particular, it shows statistically significant improvements in both efficiency and safety over a traditional A\* planner.
The next section provides background and describes related work. Subsequent sections list the assumptions behind our approach, describe how to learn a crowd density map, and explain how to generate crowd-sensitive plans to improve both navigation and safety. These are followed by the experimental design, results, and a discussion.
Background and Related Work
===========================
Early research in autonomous navigation for crowded environments simply detected local obstacles and then sought to avoid them; it did not predict their future motion. One such approach used a dynamic window [@fox1997dynamic]. Search for commands to control the robot was done in *velocity space*, the set of all velocities (vectors that indicate the speed and direction of motion) that can be sent to the robot as motion commands. Velocity space was pruned to reflect the physical constraints of the particular robot. Among the remaining velocities, one that maximized the objective function was chosen. Such approaches, that either replan or make local changes to a plan only after they detect local obstacles, can be severely hampered by crowds.
The robot’s *actuators* (which convert electrical energy into physical movement) and *sensors* (which convert measurements of the environment into electrical signals) are imperfect, noisy, and can deteriorate over time. As a result, the robot might not detect a person, or might move too much or too little. Moreover, people, particularly children, do not always maintain a safe distance from the robot [@Nomura:2015:WCA:2701973.2701977]. One way to address such uncertainty is to specify a large minimum distance to people that is considered safe. While this might reduce the risk of collision, it also increases navigation time because the robot must wait longer, move more slowly, or take longer paths to avoid people. In contrast, our approach creates plans that improve safety without sacrificing travel time or distance.
To improve collision avoidance, many methods have made local, short-term predictions about the future trajectories of moving obstacles with, for example, Gaussian processes [@trautman2010unfreezing] or neural networks [@alahi7780479]. Biomechanical turn indicators have been used to predict short-term trajectories and then plan around them [@unhelkar2015human]. Another planning approach was cooperative, where people and robots gave way for one another [@trautman2013robot]. A local path planner learned cost functions on data from human experts who controlled the robot [@kim2016socially]. Yet another approach used pedestrian trajectory datasets to learn a model that jointly predicted the trajectories of both a robot and nearby pedestrians, and then generated socially compliant paths [@kretzschmar2016socially]. Although these approaches improved collision avoidance and moved more safely near people, their robots could still generate global path plans through crowded areas, because they predict trajectories only when the robot senses pedestrians in its vicinity. Our work, in contrast, addresses the complementary problem of how to learn a global crowd behavior model in a given environment and use it to improve global path planning.
Many other approaches have made global, long-term predictions about the behavior of a crowd, and adapted their navigation behavior accordingly. One approach treated a single trajectory as a Markov decision process, and learned a distribution over trajectories [@Dey5354147]. With inverse reinforcement learning, it learned the reward function that best fit the trajectories, and used it to predict new ones. Another trajectory predictor created human ego graphs that could be queried efficiently for future trajectories [@Chung2010AMR]. A model based on Gaussian processes learned the global distribution of the crowd, and then used inverse reinforcement learning to make the robot’s behavior more human-like [@Henry5509772]. End-to-end pedestrian trajectory data from the simulator is used to calculate initial estimates of mean crowd densities in unobserved areas of the grid, and then local sensor data are used to update these densities. Such work, however, requires a dataset of complete pedestrian trajectories, which is unavailable to a robot that can sense only locally. Our work, in contrast, assumes only local sensor data. It does not require trajectory data or separate phases for learning and testing. Instead, it learns online as it completes its task.
{width="45.00000%"}
Approach
========
This work makes several assumptions, as follows. The robot has a two-dimensional map of the static features in its environment, and has laser range sensors mounted at a uniform level near the floor. The robot localizes itself from this information, that is, at any point the robot knows its *pose* (location and orientation) with respect to an allocentric coordinate system. The robot also detects only *local crowd data*, the location and direction of motion of each person within its sensor range [@People7139259].
The robot’s *task* is to begin from an initial pose and move through a crowded environment to visit a sequence of locations (*targets*). To do so, the robot executes a sequence of control cycles. Each control cycle is a four-phase sense-learn-decide-act loop: the robot senses its environment, learns from its sensed data, selects an action with a decision-making algorithm, and then executes it. Possible actions from which to choose are a discretized set of forward moves and rotations. The execution phase sends the chosen action to the actuators to move the robot.
Learning crowd density maps
---------------------------
To predict where people are likely to appear in the environment, the robot learns online, as it travels. Local crowd data from the sense phase is forwarded to a learning module that updates the values in the crowd density map. The robot can use this observed, cumulative, global record of the crowd to predict where crowds are likely to obstruct its passage.
Our work represents a crowd density map as an $r \times c$ grid superimposed on the two-dimensional footprint of the environment. Each cell has a *density*, the running average of the number of people the robot has observed within that cell over time. When the robot enters the sense-learn-decide-act loop at time $t$, it converts the range data from its sensors into local crowd data $L_t$, the locations of all people detected within sensory range. For $p$ people detected at time $t$
$$L_t = \{(x,y)_t^1,...(x,y)_t^p\}$$ For each grid cell in row $i$ and column $j$, the map maintains three values that summarize the robot’s experience: $k_{ij}$, the number of times the robot has collected information about the cell; $t_{ij}$, the number of people the robot has detected in the cell; and the *crowd density* $d_{ij} = t_{ij} / k_{ij}$.
Algorithm 1 is a fast update algorithm that performs online computation of the crowd density map. For each $L_t$, the first loop produces a temporary count $curr_{ij}$ of the number of people currently detected in the $ij$th cell. The second loop iterates over the crowd density map to update $t_{ij}, k_{ij}$ and $d_{ij}$. As it updates, it also ages the values of the previous observations $t_{ij}$ and $k_{ij}$ with *discount factor* $\alpha \in (0,1]$. It increments $k_{ij}$ by 1, increments $t_{ij}$ by $curr_{ij}$, and recomputes $d_{ij}$ based on the new values. Algorithm 1 has complexity $O(r \cdot c + P)$, linear in the number of grid cells and the maximum number of people $P$ permitted in the environment. An example of a learned crowd density map is shown in Figure 2, where darker cells have higher $d_{ij}$ values.
$curr_{ij} = 0, \forall (i,j) \in \{1,..r\} \times \{1,..c\}$
SemaFORR-based navigation
-------------------------
In this work, the robot’s decision algorithm is *SemaFORR*, a controller for autonomous navigation [@Epstein:2015:LSM:2965680.2965705]. SemaFORR is implemented in ROS, the state-of-the-art Robot Operating System [@quigley2009ros]. To do crowd-sensitive planning, we introduce a crowd density map into SemaFORR.
{width="45.00000%"}
[.32]{}
[.32]{}
[.32]{}
SemaFORR is a cognitively-based hybrid architecture that involves both reactive and deliberative reasoning. The deliberative reasoning component generates a plan that is a sequence of intermediate locations (*waypoints*) on the way to the target. As in Figure 3, SemaFORR’s input includes the actions available to the robot, its pose and current target, the current laser scan data, and the crowd density map. Because SemaFORR is based on the FORR cognitive architecture [@COGS:COGS275], it uses a combination of heuristic procedures called *Advisors* to choose an action. SemaFORR’s Advisors form a three-tier hierarchy.
*Tier-1* Advisors are reactive decision-making rules that assume perfect knowledge. As a result, they are fast and correct. Each Advisor can either choose an action to execute or eliminate actions from further consideration. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Victory</span> is a tier-1 Advisor; it chooses the action that gets the robot closest to the target when it is within sensory range and no obstacles block the robot’s path. If there is such an action, it is executed and the cycle ends. Otherwise, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">AvoidObstacles</span>, another tier-1 Advisor; uses the laser range scan data to eliminate actions that would cause a collision or bring it too close to static or dynamic obstacles. If only one action remains, it is returned. Finally, if the robot has a plan to reach the target, at least one unvisited waypoint is within sensory range, and no obstacles block the robot’s path to it, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Enforcer</span> selects the action that best approaches the waypoint closest to the target. If there is such an action, it is returned. Otherwise, SemaFORR proceeds to tier 2.
*Tier-2* Advisors are deliberative planners. If there is a current plan, tier 2 forwards the remaining actions to tier 3. Otherwise, in this implementation, there are two planners, only one of which is active in any given experiment: A\* and *CSA\** (Crowd-Sensitive A\*, described below). If there is no current plan, the planner creates one, SemaFORR stores it, and the cycle ends.
*Tier-3* Advisors make heuristic recommendations that may or may not be correct, but are based on a single rationale. Given the current plan, tier-3 Advisors treat the next waypoint as the target. For example, <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Greedy</span> prefers actions that move the robot closer to that waypoint, and <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Explorer</span> prefers actions that move the robot away from previously visited areas. Each tier-3 Advisor expresses its preferences as a numerical value for each of the actions that remained after tier 1. A voting mechanism aggregates the preferences of all tier-3 Advisors and returns the most preferred action. After the execution of a returned action, the decision cycle ends, and the sense-learn-decide-act loop resumes with updated input. Further details on SemaFORR are available in [@Epstein:2015:LSM:2965680.2965705].
{width="45.00000%"}
Avoiding crowded areas
----------------------
A\* is the traditional, optimal, search-based path planner for static maps [@astar4082128]. In this implementation, A\* reasons over a graph based on a discretized version of the world, the cells of a grid superimposed over its footprint. Each node in the graph represents a grid cell, and is connected to at most eight cells that adjoin it in the grid. (There will be fewer than eight if the cell lies on the border of the grid or a wall intervenes.) The weight of edge $e_{mn}$ that connects nodes $m$ and $n$ is the Euclidean distance between their centers.
To avoid crowded areas, CSA\* adapts A\* to plan with a crowd density map. Given a new target, CSA\* queries the learning module for the current crowd density map, and uses it to update the edge weights of the A\* graph. This effectively imposes a penalty on travel to crowded areas, so that the resultant CSA\* plan moves through less-crowded areas. At the beginning of a task, when the robot receives its first target, CSA\* generates a plan based only on travel distance, similar to the solid line in Figure 1. As the robot navigates through its environment, it updates the crowd density map, and CSA\* plans increasingly avoid crowded areas, similar to the dashed line in Figure 1.
Before planning, tier-2 retrieves the latest crowd density map. The crowd density variables $d_{ij}$ are normalized over the full grid to range between 0 (least crowded) and 1 (most crowded). The normalized crowd density variables $D_{ij}$ are then used to compute new edge weights for the graph, as follows:
$$e^{new}_{mn} = e^{old}_{mn} * (D_{ij} + 1) * (D_{kl} + 1)$$ where $(i,j)$ and $(k,l)$ are the grid-cell indices of nodes $m$ and $n$ respectively.
When crowd density values at both nodes incident on an edge are 0, the edge weight is unchanged. When they are both 1, the new edge weight is 4 times the old edge weight. Edge-weight increments are a strong influence away from crowded areas. For a sample task that moves the robot from S to E, Figure 4 compares a traditional A\* plan in (a) to a CSA\* plan informed by the crowd density map in (b). A\* ignores the likely delays from the crowd. The crowd-sensitive plan is longer but passes through less crowded areas.
Implementation
==============
Our system is implemented as three interacting ROS nodes, as shown in Figure 5.
**MengeROS.** To simulate crowding and the robot in a single environment, we use *MengeROS* [@mengeROS], a ROS extension of the open-source crowd simulator *Menge* [@curtis2016menge]. MengeROS requires a map of the environment, a robot, and crowd specifications.
**SemaFORR.** The SemaFORR controller node is initialized with a sequence of target points. It receives the simulated robot’s position and laser scan data from the MengeROS node, and returns to the MengeROS node the actuator commands chosen by SemaFORR. The MengeROS node then simulates that action on the robot.
**Crowd Learner.** The Crowd Learner is a standalone ROS node; it too receives the robot’s position and laser scan data as messages from MengeROS. The Crowd Learner uses Algorithm 1 to update the crowd density map, and forwards the revised crowd density map to the SemaFORR node. This modular implementation is important because it allows the learner node to be used with any other ROS-compatible simulator or any other ROS-compatible robot controller.
Experimental Design
===================
In these experiments, MengeROS simulates the footprint and sensor readings of Freight, an affordable standard platform for mobile service robots [@wise2016fetch]. Freight has a 2-D laser range scanner with a range of 25m and a 220$^\circ$ field of view, a 15Hz update rate, and an angular resolution of $\frac{1}{3}^\circ$. Each experiment sets a task for Freight, controlled by SemaFORR, in an environment that it shares with a crowd controlled by MengeROS.
MengeROS defines *crowd behavior* by the initial positions of its members, a state transition diagram for each person that specifies how to select her next target, and a uniform decision mechanism to select moves. These experiments use two crowd behaviors: random and zig-zag. Both begin with the robot in the position shown in Figure 4(c), and the crowd in the lower left corner. Under *random crowd behavior*, each person’s next destination is chosen randomly from among six prespecified locations (one in each corner of the map and two evenly spaced in the center), and each person follows an A\* plan to her own target. Such a crowd moves as if it were in a complex subway station with multiple destinations. Under *zig-zag crowd behavior*, the crowd moves within the pattern shown in Figure 4(c). Each person chooses one of three random points in the upper left corner, moves to it with an A\* plan, then chooses one of three random points in the lower left corner and moves to it under A\*. This process continues, so that the crowd loops though upper left, lower left, upper right, lower right, and back to the upper left corner again, as if it were parading in a figure eight with some slight internal variation. Such a crowd presents a less even challenge that intensifies along its route.
MengeROS also requires a uniform collision avoidance strategy that all its members use to avoid one another and the robot. These experiments use two collision avoidance strategies: ORCA [@vandenBerg2011] and PedVO [@curtis2014pedestrian]. Both strategies are based on velocity obstacles. The velocity obstacle (*VO*) of a person is the set of all velocity vectors that will result in collision. Collision-free motion requires that every agent have a velocity vector outside its VO. ORCA has each agent address this problem equally to produce an optimal solution. PedVO adapts ORCA to behave more similarly to people; it introduces such human behaviors as aggression, social priority, authority, and right of way.
We use 12 possible MengeROS *crowd scenarios*, each defined by its crowd size (here, 30, 60, or 90 people), collision avoidance strategy (PedVO or ORCA), and crowd behavior (random or zig-zag). An *experiment configuration* specifies a crowd scenario, one of two target sets for the robot (A or B, each a list of 15 randomly chosen locations), and whether the Crowd Learner node is on or off. When it is off, tier 2 uses the traditional A\* planner that minimizes distance; when it is on, tier 2 computes crowd-sensitive plans with CSA\*. Thus there are $12 \cdot 2 \cdot 2 = 48$ experiment configurations in all. For all experiments reported here with CSA\*, the discount factor $\alpha$ was set to 1.
Given an experiment configuration, an *experiment* executes decisions from SemaFORR on the simulated robot until the robot *reaches* (comes within $\epsilon$ of) each of its targets in the prespecified order. Each configuration was executed 5 times on an 8-core, 1.2 GHz workstation. Evaluation metrics are the total time the robot took to reach the targets, the total distance it travelled, the number of the robot’s *risky actions* (ones that placed it less than 0.5 meters from a person or a wall), and *clearance*, the average minimum distance the robot maintained from all obstacles. Clearance and risky actions recognize important concerns that arise when people crowd an environment.
\[my-label\]
---------------- -------- -------- ------------
time (sec.) 905.51 618.03 -31.7%\*\*
distance (m.) 843.81 624.38 -26.0%\*\*
clearance (m.) 1.82 2.02 11.50%\*
risky actions 366.06 169.50 -53.7%\*\*
---------------- -------- -------- ------------
: Impact of CSA\* vs A\* on performance, with improvements. \*\*\* denotes $p < .001$; \*\* denotes $p = .05$.
{width="24.00000%"} {width="24.00000%"} {width="24.00000%"} {width="24.00000%"}
Results
=======
Crowd-sensitive planning (Table 1) had a statistically significant effect on every metric, that is, with crowd-sensitive planning, time was faster ($t = 8.57, p < .001$), distance was shorter ($t = 7.99, p < .001$), clearance was larger ($t = 5.28, p < .001$), and risky actions were fewer ($t = 5.65, p < .001$). The effect of crowd-sensitive planning is particularly noteworthy because the space was relatively sparsely populated; even 90 people in a 48m $\times$ 36m space amount to only about 1.3 people in a 5m $\times$ 5m room. Similarly, the crowd size had a statistically significant effect on every metric. As one would expect, the presence of more people delays the robot ($R^2 = 0.24, p < .001$), and makes it travel further ($R^2 = 0.18, p < .001$) and come closer to people and to walls ($R^2 = 0.16, p < .001$), so that travel is generally less safe ($R^2 = 0.14, p < .001$).
The randomly-generated target lists also had an effect on the performance. Inspection revealed that target set A was an easier task than B, that is, without crowds, the optimal distance to visit A is simply less than the optimal distance to visit B. Thus travel to the A set was faster ($t = 2.12, p = .05$) and covered less distance ($t = 2.28, p = .05$). There were also significant effects from crowd flow. Under zig-zag the robot was faster ($t = 2.28, p = .05$), maintained greater clearance ($t = 6.27, p < .001$), and took fewer risky actions ($t = 3.94, p < .001$) than it did under the less predictable random crowd flow. The collision avoidance method, however, had no significant effects. This was because both ORCA and PedVO are local methods and therefore do not impact the overall crowd distribution in the environment.
A multi-factor ANOVA determines the effects of independent variables on a continuous dependent variable. The independent variables were crowd-sensitive planning (CSA\* or A\*), collision avoidance strategy (ORCA or PedVO), the robot’s target list (A or B), the crowd size (30, 60 or 90), and the crowd behavior (random or zig-zag). The dependent variable was each of the metrics in turn: total time to complete the target set, distance traveled, clearance, or number of risky actions. Analysis showed significant effects on time (F(6, 233) = 50.32, $p < .001$), distance (F(6, 233) = 35.96, $p < .001$), clearance (F(6, 233) = 31.27, $p < .001$) and risky actions (F(6, 233) = 20.08, $p < .001$).
An interaction term was also included in the ANOVA to detect any interaction between crowd size and CSA\*. The results, shown in Figure 6, indicate significant interaction effects between crowd size and CSA\* for time (F(6, 233) = 52.10, $p < .001$) and distance (F(6, 233) = 35.58, $p < .001$). This implies that as the environment becomes more crowded CSA\* will provide larger improvements in time and distance than A\*.
To confirm the magnitude of the changes in Table 1, we also measured effect size with Cohen’s $d$ statistic [@cohen1962statistical]. This statistic is typically used on social or biological data. It identifies a clear effect if $d$ exceeds the threshold 0.2 and a “large effect" if it exceeds 0.8. When we paired CSA\* and A\* experiments and compared them, CSA\* had an effect on 90% of them (threshold 0.2) and a large effect on 75%. CSA\* performed as much as $55\%$ faster than A\* (target set B, PedVO, crowd size 90), traveled $51\%$ less far (target set B, PedVO, crowd size 90), had a $50\%$ higher clearance (target set A, ORCA, crowd size 90) and took $78\%$ fewer risky actions (target set B, ORCA, crowd size 60). Moreover, only 9% of such comparisons showed any deterioration in performance.
Discussion
==========
Crowd-sensitive planning is current work. Experiments underway explore the breadth of its effect in other (larger, more complex) maps, with crowd flow behaviors other than random and zig-zag, and with crowds whose destinations change over time (and thereby make it more difficult to predict their presence). We expect further improvements as we learn not only about the number of people likely to be in a grid cell, but also about the directions in which they move.
In these experiments, a robot that used A\* repaired its plan when obstacles interfered with it. We will also explore comparisons to planners that replan and benefit from previous planning knowledge, such as D\* Lite and MPGAA\* [@Koenig:2002:DLI:777092.777167; @Hernandez:2015:RPF:2887007.2887168].
The granularity (i.e., cell dimension) of the crowd density map here was 3 meters, determined by inspection. A finer crowd density map would provide more detail but require more data to produce an accurate representation and increase the computation time, while a coarser grid would provide less specific guidance. Moving objects were assumed in most of the work cited here to be pedestrians. Our work, however, should be equally applicable to any moving obstacles, including other robots and people in wheelchairs.
Several challenges are yet to be addressed by this model of the crowd. We fixed $\alpha$ at 1 to indicated that crowd behavior persisted and the robot did not forget, but smaller values would allow the model to adapt to changing crowd behavior over time. Other considerations include doors that open and close, changes in the map, different shapes for robots and moving obstacles, and obstacles that vary their speed.
Thus far we have not considered how a nearby robot might cause people to move differently, although it known to have a significant effect on local trajectory prediction [@trautman2013robot]. CSA\* does not consider that people might make way for the robot; in that case a simple A\* plan might take less time than a CSA\* plan. Another important factor is the spatial and temporal variance in the behavior of people around robots. For example, in a shopping mall, an area where seniors congregate should be treated differently from an area that attracts children, and areas that attract people from different cultures should also be treated differently. We intend to refine CSA\* to learn how difficult it is to navigate in an area, rather than merely how crowded it is. Thus a crowded area where people give way to the robot would be treated differently from one where a similarly dense crowd is more obstructive.
Crowd density maps are more broadly applicable than these experiments suggest. A museum-guide robot could use them to travel to the most crowded places, rather than away from them. A telepresence robot at a conference could use them to plan a path that allows the most interaction with conference attendees. Crowd density maps could also be used to guide active learning, that is, to direct the robot to areas where it can further observe movement (low $k_{ij}$ or $t_{ij}$ cells) to confirm low densities.
In summary, this paper presents a fast method that learns a crowd density map online, without the need for pedestrian trajectory datasets. This representation of global crowd behavior supports an agent’s ability to generate crowd-sensitive plans. Our results demonstrate that crowd-sensitive planning reliably improves safety while it also reduces travel time and travel distance.
Acknowledgements
================
This work was supported in part by NSF \#1625843.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- 'Pavel Exner$^{a,b}$ and Takashi Ichinose$^{c}$'
title: |
A Product Formula Related to\
Quantum Zeno Dynamics
---
> [*a) Department of Theoretical Physics, Nuclear Physics Institute,\
> Academy of Sciences, 25068 Řež, Czech Republic\
> b) Doppler Institute, Czech Technical University, Břehov[á]{} 7,\
> 11519 Prague, Czech Republic\
> c) Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, Kanazawa\
> University, Kanazawa 920-1192, Japan\
> [email protected], [email protected]*]{}
>
> [We prove a product formula which involves the unitary group generated by a semibounded self-adjoint operator and an orthogonal projection $P$ on a separable Hilbert space ${{\mathcal H}}$, with the convergence in $L^2_\mathrm{loc}({\mathbb{R}};{{\mathcal H}})$. It gives a partial answer to the question about existence of the limit which describes quantum Zeno dynamics in the subspace . The convergence in ${{\mathcal H}}$ is demonstrated in the case of a finite-dimensional $P$. The main result is illustrated in the example where the projection corresponds to a domain in ${\mathbb{R}}^d$ and the unitary group is the free Schrödinger evolution.]{}
Introduction
============
The fact that the decay of an unstable system can be slowed down, or even fully stopped in the ideal case, by frequently repeated measurements checking whether the system is still undecayed was noticed first by Beskow and Nilsson [@BN]. It was only decade later, however, when Misra and Sudarshan [@MS] caught the imagination of the community by linking the effect to the well-known Zeno aporia about a flying arrow. While at first the subject was rather academical, in recent years the possibility of observing Zeno-type effects experimentally has become real and at present there are scores of physical papers discussing this topic.
On the mathematical side, the first discussion of the continuous observation appeared in [@Fr]. Two important questions, however, namely the existence of Zeno dynamics and the form of its effective Hamiltonian have been left open both in this paper and later in [@MS]. The second problem is particularly important when the subspace into which the state of the system is repeatedly reduced has dimension larger than one. A partial answer was given in [@Ex Sec. 2.4] where it was shown that the results of Chernoff [@Ch1; @Ch2] allow to determine the generator of the Zeno time evolution naturally through the appropriate quadratic form.
Our interest to the problem was rekindled by a recent paper by Facchi et al. [@FP] who studied the important special case when the presence of a particle in a domain of $\Omega
\subset{\mathbb{R}}^d$ is repeatedly ascertained. Using the method of stationary phase the authors showed that the Zeno dynamics describes in this case the free particle confined to $\Omega$, with the hard-wall (Dirichlet) condition at the boundary of the domain. The result cannot be regarded as fully rigorous, because detailed properties of the convergence are not worked out, but the idea is sound without any doubt.
In the present paper we combine the results of [@Ch1; @Ch2] with that of Kato [@Ka2] to address this question in a general setting. We show that if the natural effective Hamiltonian mentioned above is densely defined — which is a nontrivial assumption — then the Zeno dynamics exists and the said operator is its generator in a topology which includes an averaging over the time variable – cf. Theorem \[main\] for exact statement (a part of the present result given in Corollary \[cor2\] was announced in [@EI]). Our conclusion cannot be thus regarded as fully satisfactory from the mathematical point of view, because the natural topology to be used here is given by the norm of the Hilbert space, and in this respect an important part of the problem remains open. We demonstrate, however, the strong convergence in ${{\mathcal H}}$ for the particular case when the projections involved are finite-dimensional – cf. Theorem \[fin\]. On the other hand, from the physical point of view the result given in Theorem \[main\] is quite plausible taking into account that any real measurement is burdened with errors – see Remark \[phys-conv\] below.
We will formulate the theorems together with their corollaries in the next section. Theorem \[main\] will be then proven in Sections \[s-proof\] and \[s-proof-of-L1\], Theorem \[fin\] in Section \[finite\]. As an example we discuss in the concluding section reduction of a free dynamics to a domain in ${\mathbb{R}}^d$ by permanent observation. We will establish that the Zeno generator mentioned above is in this case the Dirichlet Laplacian, obtaining thus in a different way the result of the paper [@FP].
The main result {#s-main}
===============
Throughout the paper $H$ will be a nonnegative self-adjoint operator in a [*separable*]{} Hilbert space ${{\mathcal H}}$, and $P$ will be an orthogonal projection. The nonnegativity assumption is made for convenience; our main result extends easily to any self-adjoint operator $H$ bounded from below as well as one bounded from above, i.e. to each semi-bounded self-adjoint operator in ${{\mathcal H}}$.
Consider the quadratic form $u \mapsto \|H^{1/2}Pu\|^2$ with form domain $D[H^{1/2}P]$. Note that $H^{1/2}P$ involved here is a closed operator and $HP$ has the same property. Let $H_P :=
(H^{1/2}P)^*(H^{1/2}P)$ be the self-adjoint operator associated with this quadratic form. In general, $H_P$ may not be densely defined in which case it is a self-adjoint operator in a closed subspace of ${{\mathcal H}}$. More specifically, it is obviously defined and acts nontrivially in a closed subspace ${\mathrm{Ran}\,}P$ of the closure of the form domain $D[H^{1/2}P]$, while in the orthogonal complement $({\mathrm{Ran}\,}P)^\perp$ it acts as zero.
The quadratic form $u \mapsto \|H^{1/2}Pu\|^2$ defined on $D[H^{1/2}P]$ is a closed extension of the form $u \mapsto \langle
Pu,HPu \rangle$ defined on $D[HP]$, but the former is not in general the closure of the latter. Indeed, if $H$ is unbounded, $D[H]$ is a proper subspace of $D[H^{1/2}]$. Take $u_0 \in D
[H^{1/2}]\backslash D[H]$ such that the vector $H^{1/2}u_0$ is nonzero, and set $P$ to be the orthogonal projection onto the one-dimensional subspace spanned by $u_0$. Taking into account that $D[HP] = \{u \in {\cal H};\,\, Pu \in D[H]\}$ which $u_0
=Pu_0$ does not belong to, we find $HPu = 0$ for $u \in D[HP]$, while $H^{1/2}Pu_0 = H^{1/2}u_0 \not= 0$ by assumption.
To describe our results, we denote by $L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty); {\cal H}) =
L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty)) \otimes {\cal H}$ the Fréchet space of the ${\cal H}$-valued strongly measurable functions $v(\cdot)$ on $[0,\infty)$ such that $\|v(\cdot)\|$ is locally square integrable there, with the topology induced by the semi-norms $v\mapsto \bigl(\int_0^{T_{\ell}} \|v(t)\|^2 dt\bigr)^{1/2}$ for a countable set $\{T_{\ell}\}_{\ell =1}^{\infty}$ of increasing positive numbers accumulating at infinity, $\lim_{\ell \rightarrow
\infty} T_{\ell} = \infty$. In a similar way one defines the Fréchet space $L^2_\mathrm{loc}({\mathbb{R}}; {\cal H}) =
L^2_\mathrm{loc}({\mathbb{R}}) \otimes {\cal H}$.
Our main result can be stated as follows:
\[main\] Let $H$ be a nonnegative self-adjoint operator on a separable Hilbert space ${{\mathcal H}}$ and $P$ an orthogonal projection. Let $t
\mapsto P(t)$ be a strongly continuous function whose values are orthogonal projections in ${\cal H}$, defined in some neighborhood of zero, with $P(0) =: P$. Moreover, suppose that $D[H^{1/2}P(t)]
\supset D[H^{1/2}P]$ and $\lim_{t \rightarrow 0} \|H^{1/2}P(t)v\|
= \|H^{1/2}Pv\|$ holds for $v \in D[H^{1/2}P]$. If the operator $H_P$ specified above is densely defined in the whole Hilbert space ${{\mathcal H}}$, then for every $f \in {\cal H}$ and $\varepsilon=\pm
1$ it holds that $$\begin{aligned}
&&[P(1/n)\exp(-i\varepsilon tH/n) P(1/n)]^n f
\longrightarrow
\exp(-i\varepsilon tH_P)\,Pf\,, \label{product-s} \\
&&[P(1/n)\,\exp(-i\varepsilon tH/n) ]^n f
\longrightarrow
\exp(-i\varepsilon tH_P)\,Pf\,, \label{product-ns}\\
&&[\,\exp(-i\varepsilon tH/n)\,P(1/n)]^n f
\longrightarrow
\exp(-i\varepsilon tH_P)\,Pf\,, \label{product-ns2}
\end{aligned}$$ in the topology of $L_\mathrm{loc}^2({\mathbb{R}}; {\cal H})$ as $\:n\rightarrow \infty$.
Note that $H_P$ differs in general from the operator $PHP$, which may not be self-adjoint in ${{\mathcal H}}$, nor even closed, because $PH$ is not necessarily closed, though $HP$ is. $H_P$ is a self-adjoint extension of $PHP$. The requirement of the theorem that $H_P$ is densely defined in ${{\mathcal H}}$ means nothing else but that the domain $D[H^{1/2}P]$ of the quadratic form in question is dense in ${{\mathcal H}}$.
Note also that for $\varepsilon =1$, the theorem concerns a nonnegative self-adjoint operator $\varepsilon H = H$, while for $\varepsilon =-1$, we get product formulae for the non-positive self-adjoint operator $\varepsilon H = -H$. Moreover, the result is preserved when $H$ is replaced with a shifted operator $H+cI$, i.e. for any semi-bounded self-adjoint operator in a separable Hilbert space.
An important particular case, most often met in the applications, concerns the situation when the projection-valued function is constant.
\[cor1\] Let $H$ be a self-adjoint operator bounded from below in a separable Hilbert space ${{\mathcal H}}$ and $P$ an orthogonal projection. If the operator $H_P$ specified above is densely defined, then for every $f \in {\cal H}$ and $\varepsilon = \pm 1$ we have in the topology of $L_\mathrm{loc}^2({\mathbb{R}}; {\cal H})$ the limiting relation $$[P\exp(-i\varepsilon tH/n) P]^n f \longrightarrow
\exp(-i\varepsilon tH_P)\,Pf \label{c:product-s}$$ for $\:n\rightarrow \infty$ as well as its nonsymmetric counterparts obtained by setting $P(1/n)=P$ in (\[product-ns\]) and (\[product-ns2\]).
>From the viewpoint of quantum Zeno effect described in the introduction the optimal result would be a strong convergence on $\mathcal{H}$ for a fixed value of the time variable, moreover uniformly on each compact interval in $t$. Our Theorem \[main\] implies the following weaker result on pointwise convergence.
\[cor2\] Under the same hypotheses as in Theorem \[main\], there exist a set $M \subset {\mathbb{R}}$ of Lebesgue measure zero and a strictly increasing sequence $\{n'\}$ of positive integers along which we have $$\begin{aligned}
&& [P(1/n')\exp(-i\varepsilon tH/n') P(1/n')]^{n'} f
\longrightarrow
\exp(-i\varepsilon tH_P)\,Pf\,, \label{ae:product-s} \\
&& [P(1/n')\,\exp(-i\varepsilon tH/n') ]^{n'} f
\longrightarrow
\exp(-i\varepsilon tH_P)\,Pf\,, \label{ae:product-ns}\\
&& [\,\exp(-i\varepsilon tH/n')\,P(1/n')]^{n'} f
\longrightarrow
\exp(-i\varepsilon tH_P)\,Pf\,, \label{ae:product-ns2}
\end{aligned}$$ for every $f \in \mathcal{H}$, strongly in ${\cal H}$ for all $t
\in {\mathbb{R}}\setminus M$.
As we have indicated above, one need not resort to subsequences in the particular case when the projections involved are finite-dimensional.
\[fin\] In addition to the hypotheses of Theorem \[main\], assume that the orthogonal projection $P$ as well as $P(t)$ is of finite dimension. Then\
\[.2em\] (i) the formulae (\[product-s\])–(\[product-ns2\]) hold in the norm of ${\cal H}$ as $n\rightarrow \infty$, uniformly on each compact interval of the variable $t$ in ${\mathbb{R}}\setminus \{0\}$,\
\[.1em\] (ii) it also holds for $\varepsilon = \pm 1$ that as $n\rightarrow
\infty$, $$\begin{aligned}
&& [P(t/n)\exp(-i\varepsilon tH/n) P(t/n)]^{n}
\longrightarrow
\exp(-i\varepsilon tH_P)\,P\,, \label{} \\
&& [P(t/n)\,\exp(-i\varepsilon tH/n)]^{n}
\longrightarrow
\exp(-i\varepsilon tH_P)\,P\,, \label{}\\
&& [\,\exp(-i\varepsilon tH/n)\,P(t/n)]^{n}
\longrightarrow
\exp(-i\varepsilon tH_P)\,P\,, \label{}
\end{aligned}$$ strongly on ${\cal H}$, uniformly on each compact interval in the variable $t\in{\mathbb{R}}$.
Before proving Theorems \[main\] and \[fin\] and Corollary \[cor2\] let us comment briefly on several other aspects of the result.
\[phys-conv\] [While the necessity to pick a subsequence makes the pointwise convergence result weaker than desired, let us notice that from the physical point of view the convergence in $L_\mathrm{loc}^2({\mathbb{R}}; {\cal H})$ can be regarded as satisfactory. The point is that any actual measurement, in particular that of time, is burdened with errors. Suppose thus we perform the Zeno experiment on numerous copies of the system. The time value in the results will be characterized by a probability distribution $\phi:\:{\mathbb{R}}_+ \to{\mathbb{R}}_+$, which is typically a bounded, compactly supported function – in a precisely posed experiment it is sharply peaked, of course. Corollary \[cor1\] then gives $$\int \phi(t)\, \left\|\,[P\exp(-i\varepsilon tH/n) P]^n f -
\exp(-i\varepsilon tH_P)\,P f \right\|^2\,dt \to 0 \label{physZeno}$$ as $n\to\infty$, in other words, the Zeno dynamics limit is valid after averaging over experimental errors, however small they are.]{}
[While the proof of strong convergence in ${\cal H}$ in Theorem \[main\] and Corollaries \[cor1\] and \[cor2\] remains elusive without the finite-dimension assumption, such a claim can be easily established in the orthogonal complement of the subspace $P{{\mathcal H}}$. Indeed, taking $f\in Q{\cal H}$, where $Q:=I-P$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
(P(1/n)e^{-i\varepsilon tH/n} P(1/n))^n f
&\!=\!& (P(1/n)e^{-i\varepsilon tH/n} P(1/n))^n P(1/n)Qf\,,\\
(e^{-i\varepsilon tH/n} P(1/n))^n f
&\!=\!& (e^{-i\varepsilon tH/n} P(1/n))^n P(1/n)Qf\,,\end{aligned}$$ which converge to zero, uniformly on each compact $t$-interval in ${\mathbb{R}}$, as $n\rightarrow \infty$, because $P(\tau)
\stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}{\rightarrow} P$ as $\tau \rightarrow 0$. This gives the result for (\[ae:product-s\]) and (\[ae:product-ns2\]), while for (\[ae:product-ns\]) one has to employ in addition the relation (\[diff:ns-s\]) below. ]{}
[The fact that the product formulae require $H_P$ to be densely defined is nontrivial. Recall the example of [@Ex Rem. 2.4.9] in which $H$ is the multiplication operator, $(H\psi)(x)=x\psi(x)$ on $L^2({\mathbb{R}}_+)$, and $P$ is the one-dimensional projection onto the subspace spanned by the vector $\psi_0:\: \psi_0(x)= [(\pi/2)(1\!+\!x^2)]^{-1/2}$. In this case obviously $H_P$ is the zero operator on the domain $D[H_P]=
\{\psi_0\}^\perp$. On the other hand, $P\, e^{-itH}P$ acts on ${\mathrm{Ran}\,}P$ as multiplication by the function $$v(t):= e^{-t} -{i\over\pi} \left\lbrack e^{-t}\,
\overline\mathrm{Ei}(t) - e^{t}\,\mathrm{Ei}(-t) \right\rbrack =
1+{2i\over\pi}\, t\ln t + \mathcal{O}(t),$$ where $E_{i}(-t)$ and $\overline{E}_i(t)$ are exponential integrals [@AS]; due to the rapid oscillations of the imaginary part as $t \downarrow 0$ a pointwise limit of $v(t/n)^n$ for $n\to\infty$ does not exist. Notice also that different limits may be obtained in this example along suitably chosen subsequences $\{n'\}.$ ]{}
[In their recent study of Trotter-type formulae involving projections Matolcsi and Shvidkoy [@MaS] presented two examples in which expressions of the type $[\exp(-iH/n) P]^n$ do not converge strongly. This result does not answer the question, however, whether the product expressions considered here converge in the strong topology of $\mathcal{H}$ or not, because our assumptions are not satisfied there. In the first example of [@MaS] the analogue of the operator $H_P$ is not densely defined, in the second one $H$ is not semi-bounded. ]{}
Proof of Theorem \[main\] {#s-proof}
=========================
We present the argument for $\varepsilon =1$, the case $\varepsilon =-1$ can be treated similarly. We first prove (\[product-s\]) in (a), and next (\[product-ns\]), (\[product-ns2\]) in (b).
\(a) Let us begin with the symmetric product case and prove the formula (\[product-s\]) with $\varepsilon =1$. We will check the convergence in (\[product-s\]) on an arbitrary compact $t$-interval in the closed right half-line $[0,\infty)$. The proof for $t$-intervals in the closed left half-line $(-\infty, 0]$ is analogous, and in addition, it can be included in the case $\varepsilon = -1$ with the convergence in (\[product-s\]) on compact $t$-intervals of the closed right half-line $[0,\infty)$.
Put $Q(t) := I-P(t)$ and $Q:= Q(0) = I- P(0) = I-P$, where $I$ is the identity operator on ${\cal H}$. Since $H$ is nonnegative by assumption, there exists a spectral measure $E(d\lambda)$ on the nonnegative real line such that $H = \int _{0-}^{\infty} \lambda\,
E(d\lambda)$. For $\zeta \in {\mathbb{C}}$ with $\hbox{\rm
Re}\,\zeta \geq 0$ and $\tau > 0$, we put $$\label{red-evol}
F(\zeta, \tau) = P(\tau)\,e^{-\zeta\tau H}P(\tau)\,,$$ which is a contraction, and $$\label{red-evol-der}
S(\zeta,\tau) = \tau^{-1}[I - F(\zeta,\tau)] =
\tau^{-1}[I- P(\tau)\,e^{-\zeta\tau H}P(\tau)],$$ which exists as a bounded operator on ${\cal H}$ with $\hbox{\rm
Re}\, \langle f,S(\zeta,\tau)f\rangle \geq 0$ for every $f \in
{\cal H}$. For definiteness we use here and in the following the physicist convention about the inner product supposing that it is antilinear in the first argument. For a non-zero $\zeta \in
{\mathbb{C}}$ with $\hbox{\rm Re}\, \zeta \geq 0$, we put also $$\label{Htau}
H(\zeta) := \zeta^{-1}[I- e^{-\zeta H}]\,.$$ Each element $v(\cdot)$ in $L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty); {\cal
H})$ is an equivalence class such that any two representatives of it are equal a.e. on $[0, \infty)$. However, at some places we will not avoid an abuse of notation using for a particular representative of such an element the same symbol $v(\cdot)$. At the same time, in the following the convergence of a family of vectors $v(\cdot,\tau)$ to $v(\cdot)$ in the topology of the space $L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty); {\cal H}) =
L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty))\otimes {\cal H}$ as $\tau$ tends to zero will be often written as $v(t,\tau) \longrightarrow v(t)$; this will be the case when writing $v(\cdot,\tau) \longrightarrow
v(\cdot)$ would require to introduce a separate symbol for this $v(t,\tau)$ the meaning of which is clear from the context.
The key ingredient of the proof is the following lemma.
\[L1\] $\:(I + S(it ,\tau))^{-1}$ converges to $(I + itH_P)^{-1}P$ as $\tau \to 0$ strongly in $L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty);\, {\cal
H})$, in other words, for all $f \in {\cal H}$ and every finite $T>0$ we have $$\label{inv-gen}
\int_0^T \|(I + S(it ,\tau))^{-1}f - (I + itH_P)^{-1}Pf\|^2\, dt
\rightarrow 0\,, \quad \tau \to 0\,.$$
We postpone the proof of Lemma \[L1\] to the next section. For the moment we will accept its claim and use it to show that it implies the symmetric case (\[product-s\]) of the product formula in Theorem \[main\].
To this end, let $\{m_n\}$ be a strictly increasing sequence of positive integers, i.e. a subsequence of the sequence of all positive integers. We have only to show that there exists a subsequence $\{n'\}$ in any such sequence $\{m_n\}$ along which (\[product-s\]) holds. Then by a standard argument we can conclude that (\[product-s\]) actually holds along the sequence of all positive integers $n$. For if this were not the case, there would exist a subsequence $\{n'\}$ of strictly increasing positive integers along which (\[product-s\]) does not converge. However, we see that there is a subsequence $\{n''\}$ of $\{n'\}$ along which the convergence takes place to the same limit, which is a contradiction.
Fix $\{m_n\}$ and $f \in {\cal H}$. Lemma \[L1\] holds, in particular, along the sequence $\{\tau_n\}$ with $\tau_n :=
1/m_n$, and since $L^2$ convergence implies pointwise convergence a.e. along a subsequence, there exist a subset $M_f$ of Lebesgue measure zero of the variable $t$ in $[0,\infty)$ and a subsequence $\{\tau_{f,n}\}$ of $\{\tau_n\}$, both dependent on $f$, such that $$(I+ S(it,\tau_{f,n}))^{-1}f \longrightarrow
(I+ itH_P)^{-1}Pf$$ holds strongly in ${\cal H}$ for $t \in [0,\infty) \setminus M_f$. Since ${\cal H}$ is separable by assumption, we can choose a countable dense subset ${\cal D} = \{f_{\ell}\}_{\ell
=1}^{\infty}$ in ${\cal H}$. Then we infer that for $f_1 \in {\cal
D}$ there exist a set $M_1 := M_{f_1}$ of Lebesgue measure zero and a subsequence $\{\tau_{1,n}\}$ of $\{\tau_n\}$ along which $(I+ S(it,\tau_{1,n}))^{-1}f$ converges to $(I+ itH_P)^{-1}Pf$ for every $t \notin M_1$. Next, for $f_2 \in {\cal D}$ there exist a set $M_2 := M_{f_2}$ of Lebesgue measure zero and a subsequence $\{\tau_{2,n}\}$ of $\{\tau_{1,n}\}$ along which $(I+
S(it,\tau_{2,n}))^{-1}f$ converges to $(I+ itH_P)^{-1}Pf$ for every $t \notin M_2$. Proceeding in this way, we associate in the $\ell$-th step with $f_{\ell} \in {\cal D}$ a set $M_{\ell} :=
M_{f_{\ell}}$ of Lebesgue measure zero and a subsequence $\{\tau_{\ell,n}\}$ of $\{\tau_{\ell -1,n}\}$ along which $(I+
S(it,\tau_{\ell,n}))^{-1}f$ converges to $(I+ itH_P)^{-1}Pf$ for every $t \notin M_{\ell}$.
Now we put $\tau'_n := \tau_{n,n}$ and $n' := 1/\tau'_n$, so that $\{n'\}$ is a subsequence of the strictly increasing sequence $\{m_n\}$ of positive integers from which we have started. Then it follows that for every $t \in [0,\infty) \setminus \cup_{\ell
=1}^{\infty} M_{\ell}\,$, the sequence $\{(I+
S(it,\tau'_{n}))^{-1}f\}$ converges to $(I+ itH_P)^{-1}Pf$ strongly in ${\cal H}$ as $\tau'_n \rightarrow 0$ for every $f \in
{\cal D}$, and therefore also in ${\cal H}$, because both $(I+
S(it,\tau_{\ell,n}))^{-1}$ and $(I+ itH_P)^{-1}P$ are bounded operators on ${\cal H}$ with the norms not exceeding one. We denote $M := \cup_{\ell =1}^{\infty} M_{\ell}$, which is, of course, again a set of Lebesgue measure zero. In this way we have found a subsequence $\{\tau'_n\}$ of $\{\tau_n = 1/m_n\}$ and an exceptional subset $M$ of $[0,\infty)$ such that $$\label{resolconv}
(I+ S(it,\tau'_{n}))^{-1}f = (I+ S(it,1/n'))^{-1}f
\longrightarrow (I+ itH_P)^{-1}Pf$$ strongly in ${\cal H}$ as $\tau'_n \rightarrow 0$ or $n'
\rightarrow \infty$ for every $f \in {\cal H}$ and for each fixed $t \notin M$; it is important that $M$ is independent of $f$.
\[L2\] For the sequence $\{n'\}$ specified above and every $f \in {{\mathcal H}}$ we have $$\label{prodconv}
[P(1/n')\exp(-itH/n') P(1/n')]^{n'}f
\longrightarrow e^{-itH_P}Pf$$ as $\:n' \to\infty$ strongly in ${{\mathcal H}}$ provided $\:t\notin M$.
Notice that this claim is in fact the “symmetric” part of Corollary \[cor2\].
[*Proof of Lemma \[L2\]:*]{} We use arguments analogous to those employed in derivation of Chernoff’s theorem – see [@Ch2 Theorem 1.1], [@Ch1] and [@Ka1 Thm IX.3.6]. We divide the proof into two steps referring to $f$ belonging to $P{{\mathcal H}}$ and to its orthogonal complement.
Suppose first that $f \in P{\cal H}$. For $t \notin M$ and $\tau$ fixed, the operator $S(it, \tau)$ generates a strongly continuous semigroup $\{\,e^{-\theta S(it, \tau)}:\: \theta \geq 0\,\} $ on ${{\mathcal H}}$, and the resolvent convergence (\[resolconv\]) implies the convergence of the corresponding semigroups [@Ka1 Thm IX.2.16], so we have $$e^{-\theta S(it, 1/n')}f \stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}{\longrightarrow}
e^{-i\theta t H_P}f$$ in ${{\mathcal H}}$ as $\:n'\to\infty$ for $\:t \notin M$, uniformly on each compact interval of the variable $\theta \geq 0$. In particular, choosing $\theta = 1$ we get for each $t \in [0,\infty)\setminus
M$ $$\label{L3.3-semigrconv}
e^{-S(it, 1/n')}f \stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}{\longrightarrow}
e^{-it H_P}f\,, \quad n'\rightarrow \infty\,.$$ The same equivalence implies for any $\lambda \geq 0$ and $t \in
[0,\infty)\setminus M$ that $$(I+ \lambda S(it, 1/n'))^{-1}f
\stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}{\longrightarrow}
(I+i\lambda tH_P)^{-1}Pf\,,$$ in particular, using the diagonal trick we obtain $$\label{L3.3-resolvconv}
\Big(I+ \frac{1}{\sqrt{n'}} S(it, 1/n')\Big)^{-1}f \stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}
{\longrightarrow}Pf \quad \mathrm{as}\;\; n'\rightarrow \infty,$$ for every $t \in [0,\infty)\setminus M$. Next we use [@Ch1 Lemma 2] which gives for any $g \in {\cal H}$ the inequality $$\left\|F(it, 1/n')^{n'} g - e^{-n'(I-F(it,1/n'))}g\right\|
\leq \sqrt{n'}\left\|(I-F(it, 1/n'))g\right\|\,.$$ Choosing $g = \left(I+ \frac{1}{\sqrt{n'}} S(it,
1/n')\right)^{-1}\!f\:$ we infer that $$\begin{aligned}
&&\left\|\left[ F(it, 1/n')^{n'} - e^{-S(it,1/n')}\right]
\left(1+ \frac{1}{\sqrt{n'}} S(it, 1/n')\right)^{-1}f
\right\| \\
&& \quad \leq
\left\|\left(I+ \frac{1}{\sqrt{n'}} S(it, 1/n')\right)^{-1}f
- f\right\|\,,\end{aligned}$$ where the right-hand side tends to zero as $n' \rightarrow \infty$ by (\[L3.3-resolvconv\]). Using (\[L3.3-resolvconv\]) once again we get $$\label{L3.3-semigrconv2}
\left\|F(it, 1/n')^{n'} f - e^{-S(it,1/n')}f \right\|
\longrightarrow 0\,.$$ The sought relation (\[prodconv\]) immediately follows from (\[L3.3-semigrconv\]) and (\[L3.3-semigrconv2\]), since by (\[red-evol\]) we have $F(it,1/n')^{n'} = [P(1/n')\exp(-itH/n')
P(1/n')]^{n'}$.
The case $f \in Q{{\mathcal H}}$ is easier being independent of the arguments preceding Lemma \[L2\]. We have, along the sequence of [*all*]{} positive integers $n$, $$[P(1/n)\exp(-itH/n) P(1/n)]^n f \rightarrow 0$$ strongly in ${{\mathcal H}}$ and for each $t\in[0, \infty)$, since $P(1/n)f =
P(1/n)Qf$ converges by assumption to $PQf =0$ as $n\to\infty$, while $\exp(-itH_P)Pf = 0$.
This yields the sought result because $\{[P(1/n')\exp(-itH/n')
P(1/n')]^{n'}\}$ is a bounded sequence for any $t\ge 0$ and by Lebesgue dominated-convergence theorem it tends to the expected limit in $L_\mathrm{loc}^2([0,\infty); {\cal H})$. Using the standard “subsequence” trick mentioned above we have thus shown that Lemma \[L1\] implies the symmetric product formula (\[product-s\]) of Theorem \[main\].
\(b) Let us turn to the non-symmetric product-formula cases, i.e. to prove that (\[product-s\]) implies (\[product-ns\]) and (\[product-ns2\]).
[*Proof of (\[product-ns\]):*]{} We employ the standard notation, $[U,S] = US - SU$, for the commutator of bounded operators $U$ and $S$. First we observe the following fact.
\[L3\] It holds that $\,[\,e^{-it\tau H}\!, P(\tau)\,]
\stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}{\longrightarrow} 0$ as $\:\tau\to 0$, uniformly on each compact $t$-interval in ${\mathbb{R}}$.
[*Proof:*]{} By (\[Htau\]) with $\zeta = it\tau$ we have $$[\,e^{-it\tau H}\!, P(\tau )\,]
= i\Bigl(P(\tau)t\tau H(it\tau)
- t\tau H(it\tau)P(\tau) \Bigr),$$ and hence for any $v\in {{\mathcal H}}$ we can estimate $$\bigl\|[\,e^{-it\tau H}\!, P(\tau)\,]v \bigr\|
\leq \|t\tau H(it\tau)v \| + \|t\tau H(it\tau)P(\tau)v \|\,.$$ We rewrite (\[Htau\]) with $\zeta = it\tau$ as $$\label{decomp-H}
iH(it\tau) = \frac{I- \cos t\tau H}{t\tau} + i\,
\frac{\sin t\tau H}{t\tau}
=: B(t\tau) + iA(t\tau)\,,$$ where $B(t\tau)$ and $A(t\tau)$ are obviously bounded self-adjoint operators on ${\cal H}$, and $B(t\tau)$ is in addition nonnegative. The definition makes sense if $t\ne0$ but we need not exclude this case because what we really need is the operator $t\tau H(it\tau)$. For any $w\in {{\mathcal H}}$ we get $$\begin{aligned}
\|t\tau H(it\tau)w\|^2
&\!=\!& \|\,[t\tau B(t\tau) + it\tau A(t\tau)]w\|^2\\
&\!=\!& \|\,[(I-\cos t\tau H) + i\sin t\tau H]w\|^2\\
&\!=\!& \langle w, [(I-\cos t\tau H)^2 + \sin^2(t\tau H) ]w \rangle \\
&\!=\!& 4 \|\sin(t\tau H/2) w\|^2 \to 0\,,
\end{aligned}$$ uniformly on compact $t$-intervals in ${\mathbb{R}}$. In this way we have proved the claim, noting that $P(\tau)
\stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}{\longrightarrow} P$ holds uniformly on each compact $t$-interval in ${\mathbb{R}}$ as $\tau \to 0$.
Now we employ the following identity, $$\begin{aligned}
&&\bigl(P(1/n)\,e^{-itH/n}\bigr)^n v -
\bigl(P(1/n)\,e^{-itH/n}P(1/n)\bigr)^n v \label{diff:ns-s}\\
&&= -\bigl(P(1/n)e^{-itH/n}
P(1/n)\bigr)^{n-1}[\,e^{-itH/n}, P(1/n)\,]
v\,, \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ the right-hand side of which converges by Lemma \[L3\] to zero for all $t \not= 0$ and any $v\in{{\mathcal H}}$, because $\bigl(P(1/n)e^{-itH/n}P(1/n)\bigr)^{n-1}$ is a contraction on ${{\mathcal H}}$, and hence also in $L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty);\, {\cal
H})$. This yields the formula (\[product-ns\]).
[*Proof of (\[product-ns2\]):*]{} In view of the already proven formula (\[product-s\]) we have for every $f \in{{\mathcal H}}$ and $T>0$ the following chain of relations $$\begin{aligned}
T\|Pf\|^2
&\geq& \limsup \int_0^T \|(e^{-itH/n}P(1/n))^n f\|^2\, dt \\
&=& \limsup
\Big[\int_0^T \|P(1/n)(e^{-itH/n}P(1/n))^n f\|^2 \, dt\\
&&\qquad\quad
+ \int_0^T \|Q(1/n)(e^{-itH/n}P(1/n))^n f\|^2 \, dt\Big]\\
&\geq& \limsup
\int_0^T \|(P(1/n)e^{-itH/n}P(1/n))^n f\|^2 \, dt \\
&=& \int_0^T \|e^{-itH_P}P f\|^2 \, dt =T\|Pf\|^2,\end{aligned}$$ with the $\limsup$ taken along $n\rightarrow \infty$, because $I =
P(1/n) + Q(1/n)$ and $P(\tau)
\stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}{\longrightarrow}P$ as $\tau \rightarrow
0$. It follows that $ \int_0^T \|Q(1/n)(e^{-itH/n}P(1/n))^n f\|^2
\, dt \longrightarrow 0$ as $n \rightarrow \infty$. Thus for any $v(\cdot) \in L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty); {\cal H})$ and every $T>0$ we have, again by (\[product-s\]), $$\begin{aligned}
&&\int_0^T \langle v(t), (e^{-itH/n}P(1/n))^n f \rangle \, dt\\
&=&\int_0^T \langle P(1/n)v(t),
(P(1/n)e^{-itH/n}P(1/n))^n f \rangle \, dt \\
&&\qquad\quad
+ \int_0^T \langle Q(1/n)v(t),
Q(1/n)(e^{-itH/n}P(1/n))^n f \rangle \, dt\\
&&\longrightarrow
\int_0^T \langle v(t), e^{-itH_P}Pf \rangle \, dt\end{aligned}$$ as $n\rightarrow \infty$. It means that $\{(e^{-itH/n}P(1/n))^n
f\}$ converges to $e^{-itH_P}Pf$ weakly in $L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty); {\cal H})$ together with all the seminorms, and therefore the convergence is strong in $L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty); {\cal H})$. This yields the formula (\[product-ns2\]).
It remains to prove Lemma \[L1\] on which the above arguments were based.
Proof of Lemma \[L1\] {#s-proof-of-L1}
=====================
To demonstrate (\[inv-gen\]), we shall use the Vitali theorem – see, e.g., [@HP] – for holomorphic functions and employ arguments analogous to those used in Kato’s paper [@Ka2] for the self-adjoint Trotter product formula with the form sum of a pair of nonnegative self-adjoint operators. We do it in three steps.
*I.* In the first step we will show the following lemma.
\[L41\] For a fixed $\zeta = t>0$, $$\label{realconv}
(I+ S(t,\tau))^{-1} \stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}{\longrightarrow}
(I + tH_P)^{-1}P \quad \mathrm{as} \quad \tau \to 0\,.$$
[*Proof:*]{} The argument will be analogous to that in [@Ka2], and indeed, validity of the result in the particular case when our projection-valued function is constant is remarked in [@Ka2 Eq. (5.2), p. 194].
For $\zeta = t\tau >0$ we have from (\[Htau\]) $H(t\tau) = (t\tau)^{-1}[I- e^{-t\tau H}]$, which is a bounded, nonnegative and self-adjoint operator on ${\cal H}$. It allows us to rewrite $$\begin{aligned}
S(t,\tau) &\!=\!& \tau^{-1}[I- P(\tau)(I-t\tau
H(t\tau))P(\tau)] \\
&\!=\!& \tau^{-1}Q(\tau) + t P(\tau)H(t\tau)P(\tau)\,,\end{aligned}$$ which is in this case also a bounded and nonnegative self-adjoint operator. To prove (\[realconv\]) take any $f \in {\cal H}$ and put $\hat{u}(t,\tau) := (I+ S(t,\tau))^{-1}f$, so that $$\label{fdecomp}
f =(I + S(t,\tau))\hat{u}(t,\tau) = [I + \tau^{-1}Q(\tau)
+ tP(\tau)H(t\tau)P(\tau)]\hat{u}(t,\tau)\,.$$ Then we have $$\label{ufinprod}
\langle \hat{u}(t,\tau),f \rangle = \|\hat{u}(t,\tau)\|^2
+ \tau^{-1}\|Q(\tau)\hat{u}(t,\tau)\|^2
+ t\|H(t\tau)^{1/2}P(\tau)\hat{u}(t,\tau)\|^2.$$ Thus the families $\{\hat{u}(t,\tau)\},\,
\{\tau^{-1/2}Q(\tau)\hat{u}(t,\tau)\}$ and $\{t^{1/2}H(t\tau)^{1/2} P(\tau) \hat{u}(t,\tau)\}$ are all bounded by $\|f\|$ for all $t > 0$, uniformly as $\tau\to 0$, and therefore they are weakly compact in ${\cal H}$. It follows that for each fixed $t > 0$ there exists a sequence $\{\tau_n (t)\}$ with $\tau_n(t) \to 0$ as $n\to \infty$, in general dependent on $t$, along which these vectors converge weakly in ${\cal H}$, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{weakconv}
&& \hat{u}(t,\tau) \stackrel{\scriptsize{w}}{\longrightarrow}
\hat{u}(t)\,, \quad
\tau^{-1/2}Q(\tau)\hat{u}(t,\tau)
\stackrel{\scriptsize{w}}{\longrightarrow} g_0(t)\,, \nonumber \\
&& t^{1/2}H(t\tau)^{1/2}P(\tau)\hat{u}(t,\tau)
\stackrel{\scriptsize{w}}{\longrightarrow} h(t)\,,\end{aligned}$$ for some vectors $\hat{u}(t), \, g_0(t)$ and $h(t)$ in ${\cal H}$. Note that the sequence $\{\tau_n(t)\}_{n=1}^{\infty}$ can be chosen the same for all three families.
>From this result we see first that $Q(\tau)\hat{u}(t,\tau)
\stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}{\longrightarrow} 0$ uniformly in $t> 0$ as $\tau\rightarrow 0$, so that we have $Q\hat{u}(t)=0$ or $\hat{u}(t)=P\hat{u}(t) \in P{\cal H}$. For every $v \in
D[H^{1/2}]$ we have, with the limit taken along $\{\tau_n(t)\}$, $$\begin{aligned}
\langle v, h(t)\rangle
&\!=\!& \lim\, \langle v, t^{1/2}H(t\tau)^{1/2}P(\tau)\hat{u}
(t,\tau) \rangle\\
&\!=\!& t^{1/2} \,\lim\, \langle H(t\tau)^{1/2}v,P(\tau)\hat{u}
(t,\tau) \rangle
= t^{1/2} \langle H^{1/2}v, P\hat{u}(t)\rangle\,,\end{aligned}$$ because $H(t\tau)^{1/2}v
\stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}{\longrightarrow} H^{1/2}v$ as $\tau\rightarrow 0$. Hence $\hat{u}(t)=P\hat{u}(t)$ belongs to $D[H^{1/2}]$ and $h(t) =t^{1/2} H^{1/2}P\hat{u}(t)$ because $D[H^{1/2}]$ is dense by assumption. Furthermore, multiplying (\[fdecomp\]) by $\tau^{1/2}$ and taking the weak limit along the sequence $\{\tau_n(t)\}$ we get $g_0(t) = 0$. Similarly, multiplying (\[fdecomp\]) by $P(\tau)$ we have for every $v \in D[H^{1/2}P]$ $$\langle v, P(\tau)f \rangle
= \langle v, P(\tau) \hat{u}(t,\tau) \rangle
+ \langle t^{1/2}H(t\tau)^{1/2}P(\tau)v,
t^{1/2}H(t\tau)^{1/2}P(\tau)\hat{u}(t,\tau) \rangle.$$ Then taking the limit along the sequence $\{\tau_n(t)\}$ we get $$\langle v, Pf \rangle
= \langle v, P\hat{u}(t) \rangle
+ \langle t^{1/2}H^{1/2}Pv, h(t) \rangle,$$ because by spectral theorem $$\begin{aligned}
\|H(t\tau)^{1/2}(P(\tau)\!-\! P)v\|
&\!=\!& \|H(t\tau)^{1/2}(I+H)^{-1/2}(I+H)^{1/2}(P(\tau)\!-\!P)v\|\\
&\!\leq\!& \|(I+H)^{1/2}(P(\tau)\!-\! P)v\|\,,\end{aligned}$$ which tends to zero since $P(\tau) \stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}
{\rightarrow} P$ as $\tau \to 0$, $\:D[H^{1/2}P(\tau)] \supset
D[H^{1/2}P]$ and $\|H^{1/2}P(\tau)v\| \to \|H^{1/2}Pv\|$ for $v
\in D[H^{1/2}P]$ by assumption[^1]. Hence $H^{1/2}P\hat{u}(t)\in D[H^{1/2}P]$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\label{fu-id}
Pf &=& P\hat{u}(t) + t^{1/2}(H^{1/2}P)^* h(t)
= \hat{u}(t) + t(H^{1/2}P)^* (H^{1/2}P) \hat{u}(t) \nonumber\\
&=& \hat{u}(t) + tH_P \hat{u}(t)\,,\end{aligned}$$ because $D[H^{1/2}P]$ is supposed to be dense. Applying once again the standard argument mentioned after Lemma \[L1\] to all the three families we conclude that the weak convergence in (\[weakconv\]) takes place independently of a sequence $\{\tau_n(t)\}$ chosen.
On the other hand, we infer from (\[ufinprod\]) that $$\begin{aligned}
\langle \hat{u}(t),f \rangle
&\geq& \liminf \|\hat{u}(t,\tau)\|^2
+ \liminf \tau^{-1}\|Q(\tau)\hat{u}(t,\tau)\|^2 \\
&&\qquad\quad
+ \liminf \|t^{1/2}H(t\tau)^{1/2}P(\tau)\hat{u}(t,\tau)\|^2 \\
&\geq& \|\hat{u}(t)\|^2 + \|g_0(t)\|^2 + \|h(t)\|^2 \\
&=& \|\hat{u}(t)\|^2 + \|t^{1/2}H^{1/2}P\hat{u}(t)\|^2 \\
&=& \|\hat{u}(t)\|^2 + t\|H_P^{1/2}\hat{u}(t)\|^2\end{aligned}$$ with $\liminf$ taken along $\tau \rightarrow 0$. Since by (\[fu-id\]) the left-hand side of the above inequality is equal to $$\langle \hat{u}(t),f \rangle = \langle \hat{u}(t),Pf \rangle
= \|\hat{u}(t)\|^2 + t\langle \hat{u}(t), H_P\hat{u}(t) \rangle
= \|\hat{u}(t)\|^2 + t\|H_P^{1/2}\hat{u}(t)\|^2,$$ we see that the norms of these vectors converge to the norms of their limit vectors. It allows us to conclude that the ${{\mathcal H}}$-valued families in question, $\{\hat{u}(t,\tau)\},\,
\{\tau^{-1/2}Q(\tau)\hat{u}(t,\tau)\}\,$ and $\{t^{1/2}H(t\tau)^{1/2} P(\tau) \hat{u}(t,\tau)\}$ converge to $\hat{u}(t)$, $0$ and $t^{1/2}H^{1/2}P\hat{u}(t)$ strongly in ${\cal H} $, respectively, as $\tau\rightarrow 0$. In particular, we have shown that $Pf = (I+tH_P)\hat{u}(t)$ and $\hat{u}(t,\tau)
\stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}{\longrightarrow} \hat{u}(t) = (I+
tH_P)^{-1}Pf$, or (\[realconv\]). This proves Lemma \[L41\].
*II.* Next, for a fixed $\tau >0$, the function $\zeta\mapsto F(\zeta,\tau)$ is holomorphic in the open right half-plane $\hbox{\rm Re}\, \zeta>0$ and uniformly bounded in norm by one. This makes it possible to mimick the argument of Feldman [@Fe], which is reproduced in Chernoff’s book [@Ch2 p. 90], see also [@Fr], to conclude by means of the Vitali theorem (see, e.g., [@HP Thm 3.14.1]) that for $\hbox{\rm Re}\, \zeta>0$ $$(I+ S(\zeta, \tau))^{-1}
\stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}{\longrightarrow} (I+ \zeta H_P)^{-1}P
\quad \mathrm{as} \quad \tau \rightarrow 0$$ holds uniformly on compact subsets of $\hbox{\rm Re}\, \zeta >0$.
At the boundary $\hbox{\rm Re}\, \zeta =0$, or $\zeta = it$ with $t$ real, $(I+ S(\zeta, \tau))^{-1}$ still converges as $\tau \to
0$ but in a weaker sense only. Using the argument of [@Fe] based on the Poisson kernel, we can check that for each pair of $f,\, g \in {\cal H}$ and all $\phi \in L^1({{\mathbb{R}}})$ the following relation is valid, $$\label{bound_lim}
s-\lim _{\tau\rightarrow 0}\int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}} \phi(t)
\langle g,(I+S(it,\tau))^{-1} f \rangle\, dt
= \int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}} \phi(t)
\langle g,(I+itH_P)^{-1}P f \rangle\, dt\,.$$ This says that for each pair of $f,\, g \in {\cal H}$ the family $\{ \langle g,(I+S(it,\tau))^{-1} f \rangle \}$ of functions of $t$ in $L^{\infty}({{\mathbb{R}}})$ converges to $\langle g,(I+itH_P)^{-1}P
f \rangle $ as $\tau \rightarrow 0$ weakly$^*$, or equivalently, in the weak topology defined by the dual pairing between $L^{\infty}({{\mathbb{R}}})$ and $L^{1}({{\mathbb{R}}})$ – see, e.g., [@Ko].
*III.* Now we shall show the family of the bounded operators $\{(I+S(it,\tau))^{-1}\}$ is weakly convergent in $L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty);\, {\cal H})$, and in fact, strongly convergent there too. To do so, we will employ an argument analogous to that used in the proof of Lemma \[L41\] on the Hilbert space ${\cal H}$, however, this time on the Fréchet space $L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty); {\cal H})$.
Using the decomposition (\[decomp-H\]) with $t \not= 0$, we find (cf. [@Ich]) $$\begin{aligned}
S(it,\tau)
&\!=\!& \tau^{-1} [I- P(\tau)(I-it\tau H(it\tau))P(\tau)] \\
&\!=\!& \tau^{-1}Q(\tau) + tP(\tau)(B(t\tau) + iA(t\tau))P(\tau)\,.
\end{aligned}$$ To prove (\[inv-gen\]), take any $f \in {{\mathcal H}}$ and put $
u(t,\tau) := (I+S(it,\tau))^{-1}f.
$ Note that this $u(t,\tau)$ represents an element in $L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty); {\cal H})$ as well as its unique representative in $(0,\infty)$, because $u(t,\tau)$ is strongly continuous at this interval as a function of $t$. Then $$\begin{aligned}
f &\!=\!& (I + S(it,\tau))u(t,\tau) \label{f} \\
&\!=\!& [I+ \tau^{-1}Q(\tau) + tP(\tau)(B(t\tau) +
iA(t\tau))P(\tau)]u(t,\tau)\,, \nonumber
\end{aligned}$$ so we have $$\begin{aligned}
\langle u(t,\tau), f \rangle
&\!=\!& \langle u(t,\tau),(I+S(it,\tau))u(t,\tau) \rangle
\nonumber \\
&\!=\!& \|u(t,\tau)\|^2
+ \tau^{-1}\|Q(\tau) u(t,\tau)\|^2
+ t\|B(t\tau)^{1/2}P(\tau) u(t,\tau)\|^2 \nonumber \\
&& + it\langle P(\tau)u(t,\tau),A(t\tau)P(\tau) u(t,\tau)
\rangle\,.
\label{uf}\end{aligned}$$ Observing the real part of (\[uf\]) we see that for $\tau$ small enough, each of the ${\cal H}$-valued families $\,\{u(t,\tau)\}$, $\,\{\tau^{-1/2}Q(\tau) u(t,\tau)\}$ and $\,\{t^{1/2}B(t\tau)^{1/2}P(\tau) u(t,\tau)\}$ is bounded by $\|f\|$ for all $t > 0$. Moreover, they are strongly continuous in $t$ for fixed $\tau >0$, and locally bounded as ${\cal H}$-valued functions of $t$ in $L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty); {\cal H}) $, uniformly as $\tau \rightarrow 0$.
Hence we infer first of all that $Q(\tau) u(t,\tau)
\stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}{\longrightarrow} 0$, uniformly in $t
\in(0,\infty)$, as $\tau \to 0$. Next, since $L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty); {\cal H})$ is reflexive [@GV Chap. 1, Sec. 3.1, pp. 57-62], any bounded set in it is weakly compact [@Ko Sec. 23.5, pp. 302-304]. Consequently, there is a sequence $\{\tau_n\}_{n=1}^{\infty}$ with $\tau_n \to
0$ as $n\to \infty$ along which the above families are weakly convergent in $L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty); {\cal H})$: $$\begin{aligned}
&& u(t,\tau) \stackrel{\scriptsize{w}}{\longrightarrow} u(t)\,,
\quad \quad
\tau^{-1/2} Q(\tau) u(t,\tau)
\stackrel{\scriptsize{w}}{\longrightarrow} f_0(t)\,, \nonumber \\
&& t^{1/2}B(t, \tau)^{1/2}P(\tau) u(t,\tau)
\stackrel{\scriptsize{w}}{\longrightarrow} z(t)\,,
\label{weaklim}
\end{aligned}$$ with some vectors $u(\cdot),\, f_0(\cdot)$ and $z(\cdot) \, \in
L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty); {\cal H})$. Note that as before the sequence $\{\tau_n\}_{n=1}^{\infty}$ can be chosen the same for all three families.
\[L5\] These above mentioned vectors have the following properties, $$ u(t) = Pu(t) \in P{\cal H}\,\; \hbox{\rm for a.e.}\; t\,, \quad
z(\cdot) =0\,, \quad f_0(\cdot) = 0\,.$$
[*Proof:*]{} For $B(t\tau)$ and $A(t\tau)$ in (\[decomp-H\]), the spectral theorem gives $$\begin{aligned}
\|(B(t\tau)^{1/2}v\|^2 &\!=\!&\int_{0-}^{\infty}
\left|\frac{1-\cos t\tau\lambda}{t\tau\lambda}\right| \|
E(d\lambda) H^{1/2}v\|^2
\rightarrow 0\,, \;\; v \in D[H^{1/2}]\,; \nonumber \\
\|(B(t\tau)v\|^2 &\!=\!&\int_{0-}^{\infty}
\left|\frac{1-\cos t\tau\lambda}{t\tau\lambda}\right|^2 \|
E(d\lambda) Hv\|^2
\rightarrow 0\,, \;\; v \in D[H]\, \label{spectral}
\end{aligned}$$ as $\tau \to 0$ by the Lebesgue dominated-convergence theorem.
Since $Q(\tau) u(t,\tau) \stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}
{\longrightarrow} 0$ uniformly in $t \in(0,\infty)$ and $Q(\tau)
\stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}{\longrightarrow} Q$ as $\tau \to 0$, we have $Qu(t)=0$, or in other words $u(t)=Pu(t) \in P{\cal H}$ for a.e. $t$. Moreover, by (\[spectral\]) we infer that $$\begin{aligned}
\int_0^{\infty} \langle \phi (t) v,z(t) \rangle \, dt
&\!=\!& \lim \int_0^{\infty}
\langle \phi (t) v, t^{1/2}B(t\tau)^{1/2}P(\tau) u(t,\tau)
\rangle \, dt\\
&\!=\!& \lim \int_0^{\infty} \bar{\phi} (t)
\langle t^{1/2}B(t\tau)^{1/2}v,P(\tau) u(t,\tau) \rangle \, dt\\
&\!=\!& \int_0^{\infty} \bar{\phi} (t) \langle 0,Pu(t) \rangle \, dt = 0
\end{aligned}$$ holds for every $\phi \in C_0^{\infty}([0,\infty))$ and $v \in
D[H^{1/2}]$, hence $z(t)=0$ a.e. because $D[H^{1/2}]$ is dense in ${{\mathcal H}}$, so that $z(\cdot)$ is the zero element of $L_\mathrm{loc}^2([0,\infty); {\cal H})$. Finally, the relation $f_0(\cdot)=0$ follows from (\[f\]) which implies $\tau^{1/2}Q(\tau)f = \tau^{1/2}(1+\tau^{-1})Q(\tau)u(t,\tau)$, yielding the result; this concludes the proof.
Our next aim is to show that the weak limits in (\[weaklim\]) do not depend upon a sequence chosen. The $u(\cdot,\tau_n) =
(I+S(it,\tau_n))^{-1}f$ converge to $u = u(\cdot)$ weakly in $L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty); {\cal H})$ as $n\to \infty$. It obviously implies that for all $\phi \in
C_0^{\infty}([0,\infty))$ and for every $g \in {\cal H}$ we have $$\int_0^{\infty} \phi(t) \langle g,(I+ S(it,\tau))^{-1}f \rangle
\, dt\; {\longrightarrow} \int_0^{\infty}\phi(t) \langle g, u(t) \rangle
\, dt\,,$$ again along the sequence $\{\tau_{n}\}$. It follows from (\[bound\_lim\]) that $$\label{repr-of-u(t)}
u(t) = (I+itH_P)^{-1}Pf, \quad \hbox{\rm for}\,\,
\hbox{\rm a.e.}\,\, t \,\, \hbox{\rm in}\,\, [0,\infty),$$ because the set of all such $\bar{\phi}(\cdot) g$ is total in $L^2_\mathrm{loc}([0,\infty); {\cal H})$. This shows that for every $f \in {\cal H}$, $(I+S(it,\tau_n))^{-1}f$ converges to $(I+itH_P)^{-1}Pf$ weakly in $L_\mathrm{loc}^2([0,\infty); {\cal
H})$ as $n\rightarrow \infty$. Together with the fact that $z(\cdot)=0,\, f_0(\cdot)=0$ in view of Lemma \[L5\], this yields the desired property, namely that the weak limits of (\[weaklim\]) are independent of the particular subsequence $\{\tau_n\}$ chosen. The standard argument sketched below Lemma \[L1\] shows that (\[weaklim\]) holds as $\tau
\rightarrow 0$ without any restriction on subsequences. Finally, we are going to check the strong convergence $u(\cdot,\tau) \stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}{\longrightarrow}
u(\cdot)$ in $L_\mathrm{loc}^2([0,\infty); {\cal H})$ as $\tau\rightarrow 0$. In fact, we will prove two other limiting relations at the same time.
\[L61\] In the topology of $L_\mathrm{loc}^2([0,\infty); {\cal H})$, the family $\{u(\cdot,\tau)\}$ converges to the vector $u = u(\cdot)$ as $\tau\rightarrow 0$, and moreover, $$\begin{aligned}
&& \tau^{-1/2}Q(\tau) u(t,\tau)
{\:\longrightarrow\:} f_0(t) = 0\,, \\
&& t^{1/2}B(t, \tau)^{1/2}P(\tau) u(t,\tau)
{\:\longrightarrow\:} z(t) = 0\,.
\end{aligned}$$
[*Proof:*]{} In the above reasoning we have already checked the weak convergence in (\[weaklim\]) as $\tau\rightarrow 0$. Integrating the real part of (\[uf\]) in $t$ over the interval $[0,T]$ for any fixed $T>0$ and taking $\liminf$ as $\tau\rightarrow 0$, we get by Lemma \[L5\] $$\begin{aligned}
\hbox{\rm Re} \int_0^T \langle u(t), f \rangle \, dt
&\geq& \liminf \int_0^T \|u(t,\tau)\|^2 \, dt \\
&&\qquad
+ \liminf \int_0^T \tau^{-1}\|Q(\tau) u(t,\tau)\|^2 \, dt\\
&&\qquad\quad
+ \liminf \int_0^T \|t^{1/2}B(t\tau)^{1/2}P(\tau) u(t,\tau)
\|^2 \, dt \\
&\geq& \int_0^T \|u(t)\|^2 \, dt + \int_0^T \|f_0(t)\|^2 \, dt
+ \int_0^T \|z(t)\|^2 \, dt \\
&\geq& \int_0^T \|u(t)\|^2 \, dt\,.\end{aligned}$$ On the other hand, the left-hand side of the above inequality is by (\[repr-of-u(t)\]) equal to $$\hbox{\rm Re} \int_0^T \langle u(t), f \rangle \, dt
= \hbox{\rm Re} \int_0^T \langle u(t), (I+ itH_P)u(t) \rangle \, dt
= \int_0^T \|u(t)\|^2\, dt.$$ Hence we conclude that all the Fréchet-space semi-norms of the vectors $u(t,\tau)$, $\tau^{-1/2}Q(\tau) u(t,\tau)$ and $t^{1/2}B(t,\tau)^{1/2}P(\tau)u(t,\tau)$ converge to the semi-norms of the weak-limit vectors $u(t),\, 0$ and $0$, respectively, as $\tau\rightarrow 0$. Thus the convergence is strong with respect to each semi-norm, and since their family induces the topology in $L_\mathrm{loc}^2([0,\infty); {\cal H})$ the lemma is proved.
This completes the proof of Lemma \[L1\], and by that the verification of our main result, Theorem \[main\].
The finite-dimensional case {#finite}
===========================
In this section, we will prove Theorem \[fin\] in which we assume that $P$ and $P(t)$ are finite-dimensional orthogonal projections. Since the closed operator $H^{1/2}P$ is supposed to be densely defined, the domain $D[H^{1/2}P]$ of $H^{1/2}P$ becomes the whole space ${\cal H}$, for the restriction $H^{1/2}P|_{P{\cal
H}}$ of the operator $H^{1/2}P$ to the finite-dimensional subspace $P{\cal H}$ is densely defined, so its domain must coincide with $P{\cal H}$, and it acts as zero on $Q{{\mathcal H}}$. The same is valid for $H^{1/2}P(t)$ when $P(t)$ is of a finite dimension. As a result, $H^{1/2}P$ and $H_P = (H^{1/2}P)^* (H^{1/2}P)$ as well as $H^{1/2}P(t)$ are bounded operators on ${\cal H}$ by the closed-graph theorem. By the assumptions common with Theorem \[main\], for each fixed $f \in D[H^{1/2}P] = {\cal H}$ the family $\{H^{1/2}P(t)f\}$ converges to $H^{1/2}Pf$ as $t
\rightarrow 0$, and hence is uniformly bounded with respect to $t$ near to zero, say, for $-1 \leq t \leq 1$. Then by the uniform boundedness principle we can conclude that $\sup_{|t| \leq 1}
\|H^{1/2}P(t)\| < \infty$.
To prove the assertions (i) and (ii) of Theorem \[fin\] simultaneously, take a fixed $a \in {\mathbb{R}}$ and consider instead of $F(\zeta,\tau),\, S(\zeta,\tau)$ defined by (\[red-evol\]) and (\[red-evol-der\]), respectively, the following operators $$F_a(\zeta,\tau) := P(a\tau)\exp(-\zeta\tau H)P(a\tau),
\quad S_a(\zeta,\tau) := \tau^{-1}[I-F_a(\zeta,\tau)].$$ In fact, we shall employ $F_a(it,\tau),\, S_a(it,\tau)$ instead of $F(it,\tau),\, S(it,\tau)$ in the proof of Lemma \[L2\] and Lemma \[L1\]. Similarly $u(t,\tau)$ used above will be replaced by $u_a(t,\tau) = (I+S_a(it,\tau))^{-1}f$ corresponding to a given $f\in{{\mathcal H}}$.
\[L7\] For any $t, t' \geq 0$ and $0< \tau \leq 1$ we have $$\|u_a(t,\tau) - u_a(t',\tau) \| \leq C(a)|t-t'|\, \|f\|$$ with a positive $C(a)$ independent of $t, t'$, which is uniformly bounded as a function of $a$ on each compact interval of $\,{\mathbb{R}}$.
*Proof:* By the resolvent equation we have $$\begin{aligned}
\lefteqn{u_a(t,\tau) - u_a(t',\tau)} \\
&&= (I+S_a(it,\tau))^{-1}f - (I+S_a(it',\tau))^{-1}f\\
&&= (I+S_a(it,\tau))^{-1}
P(a\tau) \tau^{-1}[e^{-it\tau H} - e^{-it'\tau H}]P(a\tau)
(I+S_a(it',\tau))^{-1}f\\
&&= (I+S_a(it,\tau))^{-1}
P(a\tau)\, \frac{1}{\tau}\, \int_{t'}^t \frac{d}{ds}
\,e^{-is\tau H} ds\;
P(a\tau)(I+S_a(it',\tau))^{-1}f\\
&&= -i (I+S_a(it,\tau))^{-1}
P(a\tau) \int_{t'}^t H e^{-is\tau H} ds\;
P(a\tau)(I+S_a(it',\tau))^{-1}f\\
&&= -i (I+S_a(it,\tau))^{-1}
(H^{1/2}P(a\tau))^* \\ && \phantom{AA}
\times \int_{t'}^t e^{-is\tau H} ds
\; (H^{1/2}P(a\tau))(I+S_a(it',\tau))^{-1}f\,.\end{aligned}$$ At the beginning of this section we have argued that the operators $H^{1/2}P(a\tau)$ are uniformly bounded on ${\cal H}$ for $0 <
\tau \leq 1$. It follows that $$\|u_a(t,\tau) - u_a(t',\tau)\| \leq C(a) |t-t'|\, \|f\|$$ with $C(a) := \sup_{|a\tau| \leq 1} \|H^{1/2}P(a\tau)\|^2$. By the argument preceding the lemma the function $C(\cdot)$ is uniformly bounded on each compact $a$-interval in ${\mathbb{R}}$; this yields the claim.
*Proof of Theorem \[fin\]:* It follows from the lemma that the vector family $\{u_a(t,\tau)\}$, continuous in ${\cal
H}$, is uniformly bounded and equicontinuous. Hence we may infer by the Ascoli–Arzelà theorem that the sequence $\{\tau_n\}$ used in part III of the proof of Lemma \[L1\] can chosen to have an additional property, namely that the sequence $\{u_a(t,\tau_n)\}$ converges strongly to $u(t)$ also pointwise, uniformly on $[0,\infty)$. Then the limit $u(t)$ becomes strongly continuous in $t \geq 0$, and coincides with $(I+itH_P)^{-1}f$ for all $t \geq
0$. Thus we have instead of Lemma \[L1\] the following claim: $$\label{5-resovconv0}
(I+S_a(it,\tau))^{-1} \longrightarrow (I+itH_P)^{-1}P$$ as $\tau \rightarrow 0$, strongly on ${\cal H}$ and uniformly on each compact interval of the variable $t$ in $[0,\infty)$.
Next we will modify the reasoning of Sec. \[s-proof\] based on [@Ch2 Theorem 1.1] with the aim to show the symmetric product case, $$\label{f-dimTrotter}
[P(at/n)\exp(-itH/n)P(at/n)]^n \stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}
{\longrightarrow}\exp(-itH_P)P, \quad n \rightarrow \infty.$$ Let $f \in{{\mathcal H}}$. The resolvent convergence (\[5-resovconv0\]) with $t=1$ implies the convergence of the corresponding semigroups, so we have $$\label{5-semigroupconv1}
e^{-\theta S_a(i, \tau)}f \stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}{\longrightarrow}
e^{-i\theta H_P}f$$ in ${{\mathcal H}}$ as $\tau\to 0$, uniformly on each compact interval of the variable $\theta \geq 0$. Using this equivalence once more we get for any $\lambda \geq 0$ the relation $$(I+ \lambda S_a(i, \tau))^{-1}f
\stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}{\longrightarrow}
(I+i\lambda H_P)^{-1}Pf\,, \quad \tau \rightarrow 0.$$ In particular, taking $\tau = \theta/n$ and using the diagonal trick, we infer that $$\label{5-resolvconv2}
(I+ \frac{\theta}{\sqrt{n}} S_a(i, \theta/n))^{-1}f \stackrel{\scriptsize{s}}
{\longrightarrow}Pf\,, \quad n \rightarrow \infty\,,$$ holds uniformly on each compact $\theta$-interval in $[0,\infty)$. Then the mentioned lemma from [@Ch1] yields $$\left\|F_a(i, \theta/n)^{n} g - e^{-n(I-F_a(i,\theta/n))}g\right\|
\leq \sqrt{n}\left\|(I-F_a(i, \theta/n))g\right\|\,.$$ Choosing again $g = \left(I+ \frac{\theta}{\sqrt{n}} S_a(i,
\theta/n)\right)^{-1}\!f\:$ we find that $$\begin{aligned}
&&\left\|\left[ F_a(i, \theta/n)^{n} - e^{-\theta S_a(i,\theta/n)}\right]
\left(1+ \frac{\theta}{\sqrt{n}} S_a(i, \theta/n)\right)^{-1}f
\right\| \\
&& \quad \leq
\left\|\left(I+ \frac{\theta}{\sqrt{n}} S_a(i, \theta/n)\right)^{-1}f
- f\right\|\,,\end{aligned}$$ where the right-hand side tends to zero as $n \rightarrow \infty$ by (\[5-resolvconv2\]). Using the last named convergence once more we get $$\label{5-semigrconv2}
\left\|F_a(i, \theta/n)^{n} f - e^{-\theta S_a(i,\theta/n)}f \right\|
\longrightarrow 0\,$$ uniformly on each compact $\theta$-interval in $[0,\infty)$. Choosing now $\theta = t$ we see that the validity of (\[f-dimTrotter\]) on $P{\cal H}$ follows immediately from (\[5-semigroupconv1\]) and (\[5-semigrconv2\]). Consequently, on the subspace $P{{\mathcal H}}$ the assertion (i) is obtained by taking $a=1/t$ for any $t$ belonging to a compact interval in ${\mathbb{R}}\setminus \{0\}$ and (ii) by choosing simply $a=1$.
The case $f \in Q{\cal H}$ can be treated as in the proof of Lemma \[L2\]; together this yields the relation (\[f-dimTrotter\]) on ${\cal H}$, i.e. the symmetric product case. The non-symmetric product cases can also be checked with the help of Lemma \[L3\] – cf. part (b) of the proof of Theorem \[main\] in Section 3. This concludes the proof of Theorem \[fin\].
An example {#s-example}
==========
As we have said, our investigation was motivated by the result by Facchi et al. [@FP] mentioned in the introduction. Let us thus look how the result looks in this case. To see this, consider an open domain $\Omega\subset{\mathbb{R}}^d$ with a smooth boundary, and denote by $P$ the orthogonal projection on $L^2({\mathbb{R}}^d)$ defined as the multiplication operator by the indicator function $\chi_\Omega$ of the set $\Omega$. Consider further the free quantum Hamiltonian $H
:= -\Delta$, i.e. the Laplacian in ${\mathbb{R}}^d$ which is a nonnegative self-adjoint operator in $L^2({\mathbb{R}}^d)$, and the Dirichlet Laplacian $-\Delta_\Omega$ in $L^2(\Omega)$ defined in the usual way [@RS Sec. XIII.15] as the Friedrichs extension of the appropriate quadratic form.
We consider the Zeno dynamics in the subspace $L^2(\Omega)$ corresponding to a permanent reduction of the wavefunction to the region $\Omega$, which may be identified with the volume of a detector. In the sense of the $L_\mathrm{loc}^2({\mathbb{R}}; L^2({{\mathbb{R}}}^d))$ topology, which is physically plausible as explained in Remark \[phys-conv\], we then claim that the generator of the dynamics in $L^2(\Omega)$ is just the appropriate Dirichlet Laplacian, $$(Pe^{-it(-\Delta/n)}P)^n
\to e^{-it(-\Delta_\Omega)}P$$ as $n\to\infty$, or in other words:
The self-adjoint operator $$-\Delta_P = ((-\Delta)^{1/2}P)^*((-\Delta)^{1/2}P)$$ is densely defined in $L^2({\mathbb{R}}^d)$ and its restriction to the subspace $L^2(\Omega)$ is nothing but the Dirichlet Laplacian $-\Delta_\Omega$ of the region $\Omega$, with the domain $D[-\Delta_\Omega] = W_0^1(\Omega) \cap W^2(\Omega)$.
[*Proof:*]{} Let $u \in D[-\Delta_P]$, so that $u$ and $-\Delta_Pu$ belong to $L^2({\mathbb{R}}^d)$. We have $$\langle -\Delta_P u, \varphi\rangle
= \langle u, -\Delta \varphi \rangle
= \langle -\Delta u, \varphi\rangle,$$ for any $\varphi \in C_0^{\infty}(\Omega)$ because $\varphi$ has a compact support in $\Omega$. Thus $-\Delta_Pu = -\Delta u$ holds in $\Omega$ in the sense of distributions, which means that $\Delta u|_\Omega \in L^2(\Omega)$. On the other hand, since $(-\Delta)^{1/2}P u \in L^2({\mathbb{R}}^d)$, we have $\chi_{\Omega} u \in
W^1({\mathbb{R}}^d)$. Since we have $$\nabla(\chi_\Omega u) = \nabla((\chi_\Omega)^2 u)
= (\nabla \chi_\Omega) \chi_\Omega u(x)
+ \chi_\Omega \nabla (\chi_\Omega u),$$ in order to belong to $L^2({\mathbb{R}}^d)$ the function $\nabla(\chi_\Omega
{u})$ must not contain the $\delta$-type singular term, which requires $u(\cdot) = 0$ on the boundary of $\Omega$. This combined with the fact that $u|_{\Omega}, \, \Delta u|_{\Omega}
\in L^2(\Omega)$ – see, e.g., [@LM Thm 5.4] – implies that $u|_{\Omega}$ belongs to $W^2(\Omega)$ and $W_0^1(\Omega)$.
Thus we have shown that $u|_\Omega \in D[-\Delta_\Omega]$ and $(-\Delta_Pu)|_{\Omega} = -\Delta_\Omega (u|_{\Omega})$ or $-\Delta_\Omega\supset -\Delta_P|_{L^2(\Omega)}$, but both operators are self-adjoint, so they coincide.
In this sense therefore our result given in Theorem \[main\] provides one possible abstract version of the result by Facchi et al. [@FP].
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
---------------
P.E. and T.I. are respectively grateful for the hospitality extended to them at Kanazawa University and at the Nuclear Physics Institute, AS CR, where parts of this work were done. The research has been partially supported by ASCR and Czech Ministry of Education under the contracts K1010104 and ME482, and by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B) No. 13440044 and No. 16340038, Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.
[99]{} M.S. Abramowitz and I.A. Stegun, eds.: [*Handbook of Mathematical Functions*]{}, Dover, New York 1965. J. Beskow and J. Nilsson: The concept of wave function and the irreducible representations of the Poincaré group, II. Unstable systems and the exponential decay law, [*Arkiv Fys.*]{} [**34**]{} (1967), 561-569. P. R. Chernoff: Note on product formulas for operator semigroups, [*J. Funct. Anal.*]{} [**2**]{} (1968), 238–242. P. R. Chernoff: [*Product Formulas, Nonlinear Semigroups, and Addition of Unbounded Operators*]{}, Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. [**140**]{}; Providence, R.I. 1974. P. Exner: [*Open Quantum Systems and Feynman Integrals*]{}, D. Reidel Publ. Co., Dordrecht 1985 P. Exner and T. Ichinose: Product formula for quantum Zeno dynamics, to appear in *Proceedings of the XIV International Congress of Mathematical Physics (M$\,\cap\,\Phi$), Lisbon, July 28–Aug 2, 2003.* P. Facchi, S. Pascazio, A. Scardicchio, and L.S. Schulman: Zeno dynamics yields ordinary constraints, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**A 65**]{} (2002), 012108. J. Feldman: On the Schrödinger and heat equations for nonnegative potentials, [*Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.*]{} [**108**]{} (1963), 251–264. C. Friedman: Semigroup product formulas, compressions, and continual observations in quantum mechanics, [*Indiana Math. J.*]{} [**21**]{} (1971/72), 1001–1011. O.M. Gel’fand and N.Y. Vilenkin: [*Generalized Functions, IV. Applications of Harmonic Analysis*]{}, Academic Press, New York 1965. E. Hille and R. S. Phillips: [*Functional Analysis and Semi-groups*]{}, Amer. Math. Soc. Colloquium Publ. No. 31, rev. ed., Providence, R. I. 1957. T. Ichinose: A product formula and its application to the Schrödinger equation, [*Publ. RIMS Kyoto Univ.*]{} [**16**]{} (1980), 585–600. T. Kato: [*Perturbation Theory for Linear Operators*]{}, Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York 1966. T. Kato: Trotter’s product formula for an arbitrary pair of self-adjoint contraction semigroups, in [*Topics in Functional Analysis*]{} (I. Gohberg and M. Kac, eds.), Academic Press, New York 1978; pp.185–195. G. Köthe: [*Topological Vector Spaces I*]{}, Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York 1969. J. L. Lions and E. Magenes: [*Non-Homogeneous Boundary Value Problems and Applications I*]{}, Springer,$\:$Berlin-Heidelberg-New York 1972. M. Matolcsi and R. Shvidkoy: Trotter’s product formula for projections, [*Arch. der Math.*]{} [**81**]{} (2003), 309–317. B. Misra and E.C.G. Sudarshan: The Zeno’s paradox in quantum theory, [*J. Math. Phys.*]{} [**18**]{} (1977), 756–763. M. Reed and B. Simon: [*Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics, IV. Analysis of Operators,*]{} Academic Press, New York 1978.
[^1]: This part of the proof shows that the hypotheses of Theorem \[main\] can be slightly weakened, because we need in fact only that $s-\lim_{\tau\rightarrow 0}\,H(t\tau)^{1/2}P(\tau) v = H^{1/2}P v
$ holds for any $v \in D[H^{1/2}P]$.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract:
- |
**Existence of a topological foliation transverse to the dynamics of a homeomorphism.** Let $F$ be a homeomorphism of an oriented surface $M$ that is isotopic to the identity. Le Calvez proved that if $F$ admits a lift $\tilde F$ without fixed points to the universal covering of $M$, then there exists a topological foliation of $M$ transverse to the dynamics. We generalize this result to the case where $\tilde F$ has fixed points. We obtain a singular topological foliation whose singularities are fixed points of $F$.
**Mathematics Subject Classification (2010) :** 37E30 **Keywords :** Surface homeomorphism, topological foliation transverse to the dynamics, equivariant version of Brouwer’s plane translation theorem
- |
Le Calvez a montré que si $F$ est un homéomorphisme isotope à l’identité d’une surface $M$ admettant un relèvement $\tilde F$ au revêtement universel n’ayant pas de points fixes, alors il existe un feuilletage topologique de $M$ transverse à la dynamique. Nous montrons que ce résultat se généralise au cas où $\tilde F$ admet des points fixes. Nous obtenons alors un feuilletage topologique singulier transverse à la dynamique dont les singularités sont un ensemble fermé de points fixes de $F$.
**Mots-clés :** Homéomorphisme de surface, feuilletage topologique transverse à la dynamique, version équivariante feuilletée du théorème de translation plane de Brouwer
author:
- 'Olivier <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Jaulent</span>[^1]'
bibliography:
- 'Enlacement.bib'
title: 'Existence d’un feuilletage positivement transverse à un homéomorphisme de surface'
---
Dans cet article, nous considérons une surface connexe $M$ et le groupe ${\operatorname{Homeo}}_*(M)$ des homéomorphismes de $M$ isotopes à l’identité. Nous appelons surface une variété topologique de dimension deux sans bord, orientable, séparée et dénombrable à l’infini. Le résultat principal est le suivant :
\[Th:princ\] Soient $F \in {\operatorname{Homeo}}_*(M)$ et $I = (F_t)_{t \in [0,1]}$ une isotopie entre l’identité et $F$. Alors, il existe un ensemble fermé $X$ de points fixes de $F$ et un relèvement $\widehat F$ de la restriction $F_{|M \setminus X}$ au revêtement universel $\widehat\pi_X : \widehat N_X \rightarrow M \setminus X$ de $M \setminus X$ vérifiant :
1. $\widehat F$ commute avec les automorphismes du revêtement universel et est sans point fixe ;
2. tout chemin de $\widehat N_X$ joignant un point $\widehat x \in \widehat N_X$ à son image $\widehat F(\widehat x)$ se projette sur $M$ en un chemin homotope à extrémités fixées au chemin $I(x)$ décrit par le projeté $x = \widehat\pi_X(\widehat x)$ le long de l’isotopie $I$ ;
3. pour tout sous-ensemble fermé $Y \subset X$, il existe un relèvement $\widehat F_Y$ de la restriction $F_{|M \setminus Y}$ au revêtement universel $\widehat\pi_Y : \widehat N_Y \rightarrow M \setminus Y$ de $M \setminus Y$ vérifiant :
1. $\widehat F_Y$ commute avec les automorphismes du revêtement universel de $M \setminus Y$ et fixe les antécédents par $\widehat \pi_Y$ des points de $X \setminus Y$ ;
2. tout chemin de $\widehat N_X$ joignant un point $\widehat x \in \widehat N_X$ à son image $\widehat F(\widehat x)$ se projette sur $M$ en un chemin dont tout relèvement à $\widehat N_Y$ issu d’un point $\widehat y$ a pour extrémité $\widehat F_Y(\widehat y)$.
Justifions la présence des différentes conditions qui apparaissent dans cet énoncé. On notera ${\operatorname{Fix}}(I)$ l’ensemble des points fixes le long d’une isotopie $I$. Une idée pour obtenir le relèvement $\widehat F$ est de construire une isotopie $I = (F_t)_{t \in [0,1]}$ entre l’identité et $F$ et de considérer $X = {\operatorname{Fix}}(I)$. En effet, l’isotopie restreinte $\bigl((F_t)_{|M\setminus X}\bigr)_{t \in [0,1]}$ se relève au revêtement universel de $M \setminus X$ en une isotopie $(\widehat F_t)_{t \in [0,1]}$ issue de l’identité de temps un le relèvement $\widehat F = \widehat F_1$ de $F_{|M \setminus X}$. Il est facile de vérifier que $\widehat F$ commute avec les automorphismes de revêtement et vérifie les assertions 2 et 3 du théorème \[Th:princ\].
Il reste à vérifier la principale propriété : on souhaite que $\widehat F$ soit sans point fixe. La proposition \[PropTh:XyNonEnlace\] assure que c’est le cas si l’isotopie $I$ est maximale pour la relation d’ordre suivante. Si $I$ et $J$ sont deux isotopies entre l’identité et $F$, on dit que l’on a $I \leq J$ si ${\operatorname{Fix}}(I)$ est contenu dans ${\operatorname{Fix}}(J)$ et si $I$ et $J$ sont homotopes relativement à ${\operatorname{Fix}}(I)$. Malheureusement nous ne savons pas répondre à la question suivante.
Existe-t-il une isotopie maximale pour la relation d’ordre $\leq$ ?
Nous avons donc laissé de côté les isotopies définies sur $M$ au profit de la notion plus faible suivante. On dit qu’un sous-ensemble fermé $X \subset M$ est *non enlacé* s’il existe un relèvement $\widehat F$ de la restriction $F_{|M\setminus X}$ au revêtement universel $\widehat\pi_X : \widehat N_X \to M \setminus X$ de $M \setminus X$ qui commute avec les automorphismes de revêtement. Nous donnerons dans le paragraphe \[ssec:defenlac\] plus de détails sur cette définition. Nous introduirons ensuite une relation d’ordre ${\preccurlyeq}$ (définition \[Def:RO3\]) sur les ensembles non enlacés qui permettra d’obtenir la seconde assertion de notre énoncé. Nous montrerons qu’il existe des ensembles non enlacés maximaux pour cette relation d’ordre (proposition [\[Prop:existmax\]’]{}) et que les relèvements associés sont sans point fixe (proposition [\[Prop:MaximaFaible\]’]{}) ce qui complète la première assertion.
Justifions maintenant la présence de la troisième. Dans certaines situations où $X$ sépare $M$, il peut apparaître des composantes connexes de $M \setminus X$ homéomorphes à l’anneau $({\mathbb{R}}/{\mathbb{Z}})\times {\mathbb{R}}$. Lorsque cela se produit, il n’y a pas unicité d’un relèvement $\widehat F$ qui commute avec les automorphismes de revêtement. Or en général l’un de ces relèvements présente des propriétés supplémentaires et la troisième assertion du théorème permet de le caractériser. Notre preuve consiste à rechercher un ensemble non enlacé $X$ maximal pour ${\preccurlyeq}$ et il semble raisonnable d’imposer qu’il soit plus grand (pour ${\preccurlyeq}$) que ses sous-ensembles fermés, ce qui correspond à la troisième assertion. Il se trouve que cette condition suffit pour assurer l’unicité du relèvement. En effet, certaines parties fermées $Y \subset X$ ne sépareront pas $M$. On obtiendra alors l’unicité d’un relèvement $\widehat F_Y$ de $F_{|M\setminus Y}$ puis l’unicité d’un relèvement $\widehat F$ de $F_{|M \setminus X}$ plus grand que $\widehat F_Y$ pour ${\preccurlyeq}$. Nous donnons un exemple explicite dans la partie \[sec:pres\].
Un théorème d’Epstein (voir paragraphe \[ssec:defenlac\] et [@Epstein66]) permet de reformuler le théorème \[Th:princ\] en terme d’isotopie sur $M \setminus X$. Il affirme en effet que l’existence de $\widehat F$ entraîne celle d’une isotopie sur $M \setminus X$ entre l’identité de $M \setminus X$ et la restriction $F_{|M\setminus X}$ dont le relèvement au revêtement universel $\widehat N_X$ de $M \setminus X$ issu de l’identité admet $\widehat F$ pour temps un.
L’un des principaux intérêts du théorème \[Th:princ\] est que l’on peut en déduire l’existence d’un feuilletage positivement transverse à un homéomorphisme de surface (corollaire \[Cor:princ\]). Nous allons maintenant expliquer comment. La preuve repose sur la version équivariante feuilletée suivante du théorème de Brouwer, un résultat difficile démontré par Le Calvez.
\[Th:Brouwer\] Soit $\widehat G$ un groupe discret d’homéomorphismes préservant l’orientation, agissant librement et proprement sur le plan ${\mathbb{R}}^2$. Soit $\widehat F$ un homéomorphisme de ${\mathbb{R}}^2$ préservant l’orientation et sans point fixe qui commute avec tous les éléments de $\widehat G$. Alors il existe un feuilletage topologique $\widehat{{\mathcal}F}$ de ${\mathbb{R}}^2$ par des droites de Brouwer de $\widehat F$ tel que $\widehat{{\mathcal}F}$ soit invariant par tout élément de $\widehat G$.
Une *droite topologique orientée* est un plongement topologique propre $\phi$ de la droite réelle orientée ${\mathbb{R}}$ ; elle sépare ${\mathbb{R}}^2$ en deux composantes connexes. On dit qu’un tel plongement $\phi$ est une *droite de Brouwer* de $\widehat F$ si $\widehat F(\phi)$ est contenu dans la composante connexe de droite et $\widehat F^{-1}(\phi)$ dans celle de gauche.
On déduit de ce résultat que sous les hypothèses du théorème \[Th:princ\] il existe un feuilletage topologique $\widehat{{\mathcal}F}$ de $\widehat N_X$ par des droites de Brouwer de $\widehat F$, tel que $\widehat{{\mathcal}F}$ soit invariant par les automorphismes du revêtement $\widehat\pi_X : \widehat N_X \rightarrow N_X$. Le feuilletage $\widehat{{\mathcal}F}$ passe donc au quotient en un feuilletage topologique ${\mathcal}F$ de $M$. Ce feuilletage est dit *positivement transverse* à $\widehat F$. Expliquons ce que cela signifie avant d’énoncer le corollaire.
Soit $M$ une surface et ${\mathcal}F$ un feuilletage orienté sur $M$. On dit qu’un chemin $\gamma : [0,1] \rightarrow\nobreak M$ est *négativement transverse au feuilletage ${\mathcal}F$* si pour tout $t_0 \in ]0,1[$, il existe un intervalle ouvert $I_0 \subset ]0,1[$ contenant $t_0$, un voisinage $V$ de $\gamma(t_0)$ dans $M$ et un homéomorphisme $\varphi : V \rightarrow ]-1,1[^2$ qui envoie $\gamma(t_0)$ sur le point $(0,0)$, l’ensemble $V \cap \gamma\bigl(I_0\bigr)$ sur l’arc horizontal $]-1,1[ \times \{0\}$ orienté vers la droite et le feuilletage ${\mathcal}F$ sur les droites verticales orientées vers le haut.
Si $X \subset {\operatorname{Fix}}(F)$ est un ensemble fermé de points fixes, un feuilletage sur $M \setminus X$ peut être vu comme un feuilletage topologique singulier sur $M$ dont les singularités sont les points de $X$. On dira qu’un chemin $\gamma : [0,1] \to M \setminus X$ est transverse au feuilletage singulier sur $M$ s’il est transverse au feuilletage sur $M \setminus X$.
\[Def:postrans\] Soit $F$ un homéomorphisme d’une surface $M$, admettant un relèvement $\widetilde F$ au revêtement universel $\widetilde M$ de $M$ qui commute avec les automorphismes de revêtement. Soit ${\mathcal}F$ un feuilletage singulier sur $M$ dont les singularités sont des points fixes de $F$. Le feuilletage ${\mathcal}F$ est dit *positivement transverse à $\widetilde F$* si pour tout point $z \in M \setminus X$, il existe un chemin $\gamma_z$ de $z$ à $F(z)$ dans $M \setminus X$, négativement transverse au feuilletage ${\mathcal}F$ et *associé à $\widetilde F$*, c’est-à-dire se relevant à $\widetilde M$ en un chemin joignant son origine $\widetilde z$ à $\widetilde F(\widetilde z)$ (voir définition \[Def:Associe\]).
\[Cor:princ\] Soient $F \in {\operatorname{Homeo}}_*(M)$ et $\widetilde F$ un relèvement à $\widetilde M$ qui commute avec les automorphismes de revêtement. Alors, il existe un sous-ensemble fermé $X \subset {\operatorname{Fix}}(F)$ et un feuilletage topologique ${\mathcal}F$ de $M$, dont $X$ est l’ensemble des singularités, qui soit positivement transverse à $\widetilde F$.
On considère le sous-ensemble fermé $X \subset {\operatorname{Fix}}(F)$ et le relèvement $\widehat F$ de $F_{|M\setminus X}$ donnés par le théorème \[Th:princ\]. On vient de voir que le théorème \[Th:Brouwer\] assure alors l’existence d’un feuilletage topologique $\widehat{{\mathcal}F}$ de $\widehat N_X$ par des droites de Brouwer de $\widehat F$ qui passe au quotient en un feuilletage topologique singulier ${\mathcal}F$ de $M$, de singularités $X$.
Il reste à prouver que ${\mathcal}F$ est transverse à $\widetilde F$ ce qui, d’après la deuxième assertion du théorème \[Th:princ\], revient à prouver que $\widehat{{\mathcal}F}$ est transverse à $\widehat F$. Résumons la preuve donnée dans [@LC05] page 4 : considérons un point $\widehat z_0 \in \widehat N_X$ et notons $\widehat W$ l’ensemble des points $z \in \widehat N_X$ extrémité d’un arc issu de $\widehat z_0$ et positivement transverse à $\widehat F$. On remarque alors que la partie $\widehat W$, ouverte et située à droite des feuilles qui constituent sa frontière, est le demi-plan topologique ouvert situé à droite de la droite de Brouwer passant par $\widehat z_0$. Par définition d’une droite de Brouwer, $\widehat W$ contient donc $\widehat F(\widehat z_0)$.
Expliquons l’intérêt de ce résultat. Dans [@LCDuke06], Le Calvez démontre l’existence de points périodiques de périodes arbitrairement grandes pour tout homéomorphisme hamiltonien non trivial d’une surface compacte orientée de genre $g \geq 1$. Dans sa preuve, il est amené à envisager deux cas selon que l’ensemble des points fixes peut jouer le rôle de $X$ dans le théorème \[Th:princ\] ou non. Or les arguments utilisés dans le premier cas s’appliquent mot pour mot en remplaçant l’ensemble des points fixes par un sous-ensemble $X$ donné par le théorème \[Th:princ\]. L’étude du second cas n’est donc plus nécessaire.
On peut espérer que le théorème \[Th:princ\] et son corollaire \[Cor:princ\] seront d’une grande utilité dans l’étude des homéomorphismes de surface.
Dans une première partie, nous allons rappeler des définitions et résultats classiques puis introduire des notions d’enlacement et de chemins adaptés, moins classiques et plus techniques, qui faciliteront les démonstrations des parties suivantes. Nous démontrerons ensuite le théorème \[Th:princ\] dans la partie \[sec:pres\] en nous appuyant sur les deux résultats suivants :
1. l’existence d’un relèvement maximal dans $({\mathcal}R,{\preccurlyeq})$, ensemble des relèvements qui commutent avec les automorphismes de revêtement (voir les définitions \[Def:QuiCommute\] et \[Def:RO3\]). Il s’agit de la proposition \[Prop:existmax\], un des principaux résultats de l’article, qui sera prouvée dans la partie \[sec:induc\]. La démonstration de ce résultat qui repose sur le lemme de Zorn concentre l’essentiel des difficultés de l’article.
2. la possibilité de modifier une isotopie admettant un point fixe contractile en une isotopie fixant ce point (proposition \[PropTh:XyNonEnlace\]). Ce résultat plus simple et classique sera démontré dans la partie \[sec:contrac\]. Nous avons choisi d’en donner une preuve détaillée dans la mesure où nous n’en connaissons pas de démonstration complète dans la littérature.
Une partie de ce travail a été faite au Laboratoire d’Analyse Géométrie et Applications, à l’université Paris 13. Je remercie très chaleureusement Patrice Le Calvez ; les nombreuses discussions que nous avons eues m’ont guidé pour introduire les outils utilisés et ses précieuses remarques ont largement contribué à clarifier les preuves. Je remercie particulièrement François Béguin qui m’a suggéré d’ajouter la troisième condition du théorème principal en vue des applications, le rapporteur dont les nombreux commentaires ont permis de préciser le texte ainsi que Marc Bonino, Sylvain Crovisier et Frédéric Le Roux.
Généralités
===========
Notations
---------
#### Chemin, lacet.
Soit $E$ un espace topologique. On désigne par *chemin* toute classe d’application continue $\gamma : [0,1] \rightarrow E$ modulo un reparamétrage préservant l’orientation ; le point $\gamma(0)$ est l’origine et le point $\gamma(1)$ l’extrémité. Nous noterons $\gamma^-$ le chemin obtenu en changeant l’orientation de $\gamma$. La *concaténation* $\alpha.\beta$ de deux chemins $\alpha$ et $\beta$ vérifiant $\alpha(1) = \beta(0)$ est le chemin $\gamma$ représenté par le paramétrage suivant : $$\gamma(t) =
\begin{cases}
\alpha(2t) &\text{si $0 \leq t \leq \frac12$ ;} \\
\beta(2t-1) &\text{si $\frac12 \leq t \leq 1$.}
\end{cases}$$
Un *lacet* est un chemin dont l’extrémité $z$ est égale à l’origine ; on dit alors qu’il est *basé en $z$*. En notant ${\mathbb T}= {\mathbb{R}}/{\mathbb{Z}}$, on peut représenter un lacet par une application continue $\gamma : {\mathbb T}\rightarrow E$. On dit que deux lacets $\alpha$ et $\beta$ sont *librement homotopes* s’il existe une application continue $\phi : [0,1] \times {\mathbb T}\rightarrow E$ vérifiant pour tout $t \in {\mathbb T}$, $\phi(0,t) = \alpha(t)$ et $\phi(1,t) = \beta(t)$. L’application $\phi$ est appelée *homotopie libre* entre $\alpha$ et $\beta$. Pour tout $t_0 \in {\mathbb T}$, en posant $z = \phi(0,t_0)$, on note $\phi(z) : s \mapsto \phi(s,t_0)$ la *trajectoire* de $z$ le long de l’homotopie libre.
Deux chemins $\alpha$ et $\beta$ vérifiant $\alpha(0) = \beta(0)$ et $\alpha(1) = \beta(1)$ sont *homotopes*[^2] s’il existe une application continue $\phi : [0,1]^2 \rightarrow E$ vérifiant pour tout $(s,t) \in [0,1]^2$ : $$\begin{aligned}
\phi(0,t) &= \alpha(t),
&\phi(1,t) &= \beta(t), \\
\phi(s,0) &= \alpha(0) = \beta(0)
&\text{et}\qquad\phi(s,1) &= \alpha(1) = \beta(1).\end{aligned}$$ On parlera de même d’*homotopie* entre lacets de même point base lorsque ce point reste fixe le long de l’homotopie. Un lacet basé en un point $z \in E$ est dit *contractile* s’il est homotope au lacet trivial basé en $z$.
#### Relèvement d’une isotopie, homotopie entre isotopies.
Soit $M$ une surface connexe. Une *isotopie* $I$ est un chemin $t \mapsto F_t$ de $[0,1]$ dans ${\operatorname{Homeo}}(M)$ muni de la topologie compacte ouverte pour les homéomorphismes. Pour tout point $z \in M$, on note $I(z) : t \mapsto F_t(z)$ la *trajectoire* de $z$ le long de l’isotopie. Il s’agit d’un lacet si et seulement si $z$ est un point fixe de $F_1$.
Soit $\widetilde\pi : \widetilde M \rightarrow M$ le revêtement universel de $M$. Une isotopie $I=(F_t)_{t \in [0,1]}$ telle que $F_0$ soit l’homéomorphisme identité ${\operatorname{id}}_M$ se relève à $\widetilde M$ en une isotopie $\widetilde I = (\widetilde F_t)_{t \in [0,1]}$ vérifiant $\widetilde F_0 = {\operatorname{id}}_{\widetilde M}$. L’homéomorphisme $\widetilde F_1$ est appelé relèvement de $F_1$ *associé* à $I$ ; nous le noterons $\widetilde F_I$.
Considérons maintenant un sous-ensemble $N \subset M$. On dit que $I$ et $I'$ sont *homotopes relativement à $N$* si l’on peut choisir l’homotopie $\phi : [0,1]^2 \rightarrow {\operatorname{Homeo}}(M)$ de sorte que la restriction $\phi(s,t)_{|N}$ soit indépendante de $s \in [0,1]$.
Nous utiliserons également la notion de *composée de deux isotopies* : si $I = (F_t)_{t \in [0,1]}$ et $J = (G_t)_{t \in [0,1]}$ sont deux isotopies, on note $J \circ I$ l’isotopie définie par $J \circ I = (G_t\circ F_t)_{t \in [0,1]}$.
#### Point fixe contractile, point fixe d’une isotopie.
Dans la suite de l’article, on se donne une surface connexe $M$ et un homéomorphisme $F$ de $M$ isotope à l’identité. Si $E$ est un ensemble, on note $\overline E$ son adhérence, $\partial E$ sa frontière et $\mathring E$ son intérieur. La lettre $X$ désignera toujours un sous-ensemble fermé de l’ensemble ${\operatorname{Fix}}(F)$ des points fixes de $F$. Nous noterons $N_X = M \setminus X$ son complémentaire et $\widehat\pi_X : \widehat N_X \rightarrow N_X$ son revêtement universel. Soient $I = (F_t)_{t \in [0,1]}$ une isotopie entre l’identité et $F$ et $z$ un point fixe de $F$.
On dit que $z$ est un *point fixe de $I$* s’il vérifie, pour tout $t \in [0,1]$, $F_t(z) = z$. Nous noterons ${\operatorname{Fix}}(I)$ l’ensemble des points fixes d’une isotopie $I$.
On dit que $z$ est un *point contractile de $I$* s’il vérifie l’une des deux propriétés suivantes :
1. le point $z$ est un point fixe de $I$ ;
2. le point $z$ appartient à ${\operatorname{Fix}}(F) \setminus {\operatorname{Fix}}(I)$ et le lacet $I(z)$ est contractile dans $M \setminus {\operatorname{Fix}}(I)$.
Nous noterons ${\operatorname{Cont}}(I)$ l’ensemble des points contractiles d’une isotopie $I$.
Considérons $X = {\operatorname{Fix}}(I)$ et $\widehat F$ le relèvement de $F_{|N_X}$ à $\widehat N_X$ associé à la restriction de $I$ à $N_X$. Un point $z \in N_X$ est contractile si et seulement si tout relevé $\widehat z$ de $z$ à $\widehat N_X$ est un point fixe de $\widehat F$.
Isotopie restreinte, relèvement {#ssec:defrestr}
-------------------------------
On appelle *isotopie restreinte* tout couple $(X,I)$ formé :
- d’un sous-ensemble fermé $X \subset {\operatorname{Fix}}(F)$ ;
- d’une isotopie définie sur $N_X$ entre l’identité ${\operatorname{id}}_{N_X}$ et la restriction $F_{|N_X}$ de $F$ à $N_X$.
On note ${\mathcal}I$ l’ensemble des isotopies restreintes.
\[Def:QuiCommute\] On note ${\mathcal}R$ l’ensemble des couples $(X,\widehat F)$ formés :
- d’un sous-ensemble fermé $X \subset {\operatorname{Fix}}(F)$ ;
- d’un relèvement $\widehat F$ de $F_{|N_X}$ au revêtement universel $\widehat\pi_X : \widehat N_X \rightarrow N_X$ qui commute avec les automorphismes de ce revêtement.
\[Rem:UniCommu\] Soit $N$ une surface connexe non homéomorphe à l’anneau ${\mathbb A}= {\mathbb{R}}/{\mathbb{Z}}\times{\mathbb{R}}$ ou au tore ${\mathbb T}= {\mathbb{R}}/{\mathbb{Z}}\times {\mathbb{R}}/{\mathbb{Z}}$. Alors le groupe des automorphismes du revêtement universel de $N$ est de centre trivial ([@Epstein66], Lemma 4.3). Si $F$ est un homéomorphisme de $N$, il admet donc au plus un relèvement $\widehat F$ au revêtement universel qui commute avec les automorphismes de revêtement.
Soit $(X,I) \in {\mathcal}I$ une isotopie restreinte. Relevons $I$ à $\widehat N_X$ en une isotopie $\widehat I$ issue de l’identité ${\operatorname{id}}_{\widehat N_X}$. Le temps un de $\widehat I$ est le relèvement $\widehat F_{I}$ associé à $I$ de la restriction $F_{|N_X}$. Or l’identité ${\operatorname{id}}_{\widehat N_X}$ commute avec les éléments du groupe $\widehat G$ des automorphismes du revêtement $\widehat\pi_X : \widehat N_X \rightarrow N_X$. Puisque $\widehat G$ est discret, la propriété de commutation est conservée le long de l’isotopie $\widehat I$ et $\widehat F_I$ commute avec les éléments de $\widehat G$.
\[Def:RelAsso\] Soit $(X,I) \in {\mathcal}I$ une isotopie restreinte. Le relèvement $(X,\widehat F_{I}) \in {\mathcal}R$ est appelé *relèvement associé à l’isotopie restreinte $(X,I)$*.
Disposer d’un relèvement $\widehat F$ de $F$ qui commute avec les automorphismes de revêtement assure que les notions suivantes ne dépendent pas du relèvement $\widehat\alpha$ ou $\widehat\phi$ choisi.
\[Def:Associe\] Soit $(X,\widehat F) \in {\mathcal}R$.
1. Un chemin $\alpha \subset N_X$ est dit *associé à $\widehat F$* s’il se relève à $\widehat N_X$ en un chemin $\widehat\alpha$ dont l’extrémité est image par $\widehat F$ de son origine.
2. Soit $\phi : [0,1] \times {\mathbb T}\rightarrow N_X$ une homotopie libre entre un lacet $\Gamma \subset N_X$ et son image $F(\Gamma)$. Choisissons un relevé $\widehat\Gamma$ de $\Gamma$ à $\widehat N_X$. L’homotopie libre $\phi$ est dite *associée à $\widehat F$* si elle se relève en $\widehat\phi : [0,1]^2 \to \widehat N_X$ vérifiant : $$\forall t \in [0,1] \qquad
\widehat\phi(0,t) = \widehat\Gamma(t)
{\qquad\text{et}\qquad}
\widehat\phi(1,t) = \widehat F \circ \widehat\Gamma(t).$$
\[Rem:Associe\] Soit $\phi : [0,1] \times {\mathbb T}\to N_X$ une homotopie libre entre un lacet $\Gamma \subset N_X$ et son image $F(\Gamma)$. S’il existe $z_0 = \phi(0,t_0) \in \Gamma$ tel que $\phi(z_0) : s \mapsto \phi(s,t_0)$ soit un chemin associé à $\widehat F$, autrement dit $\widehat\phi(1,t_0) = \widehat F(\widehat\Gamma(t_0)) = \widehat F(\widehat\phi(0,t_0))$, alors $\phi$ est associée à $\widehat F$.
Chemin adapté à un ensemble de points fixes {#ssec:Adapt}
-------------------------------------------
Nous allons maintenant caractériser les chemins associés à un relèvement $(X, \widehat F) \in {\mathcal}R$. Nous parlerons de chemins adaptés à l’ensemble $X$.
\[Def:Adapte\] Soient $F \in {\operatorname{Homeo}}_*(M)$ et $X \subset {\operatorname{Fix}}(F)$ un sous-ensemble fermé. Un chemin $\alpha$ d’origine un point $z$ de $N_X$ et d’extrémité $F(z)$ est dit *adapté à $X$* si pour tout lacet $\gamma \subset N_X$ basé en $z$, le lacet $\alpha.F(\gamma).\alpha^{-}$ est homotope, dans $N_X$, au lacet $\gamma$.
\[Rem:AdapteHomo\] Si $\alpha \subset N_X$ est un chemin adapté à $X$ d’origine $z \in N_X$, alors tout lacet $\gamma$ basé en $z$ est librement homotope à son image $F(\gamma)$. En effet, les lacets $\gamma$ et $\alpha.F(\gamma).\alpha^{-}$ sont alors homotopes et il est clair que ce dernier lacet est librement homotope à $F(\gamma)$.
\[Prop:PlusPrecis\] Considérons $F \in {\operatorname{Homeo}}_*(M)$ et un ensemble fermé $X \subset {\operatorname{Fix}}(F)$.
1. Supposons que l’on dispose d’un relèvement $(X,\widehat F) \in {\mathcal}R$. Tout chemin de $N_X$ associé à $\widehat F$ est adapté à $X$.
2. Inversement, supposons que l’on dispose d’un chemin $\alpha$ adapté à $X$ et qu’on le relève en un chemin $\widehat\alpha \subset \widehat N_X$. Si $N_X$ est connexe[^3], le relèvement $\widehat F$ de $F_{|N_X}$ qui envoie l’origine de $\widehat\alpha$ sur son extrémité commute avec les automorphismes du revêtement universel $\widehat\pi_X : \widehat N_X \rightarrow N_X$. Le chemin $\alpha$ est alors associé à $\widehat F$ et $(X, \widehat F)$ appartient à ${\mathcal}R$.
<!-- -->
1. On suppose qu’il existe $(X, \widehat F) \in {\mathcal}R$. Soit $\alpha$ un chemin de $N_X$ associé à $\widehat F$ ; choisissons un relèvement $\widehat \alpha \in \widehat N_X$ de $\alpha$ et notons $\widehat z$ son origine. Son extrémité est donc $\widehat F(\widehat z)$. Considérons un lacet $\gamma \subset N_X$ basé en $z$ et relevons-le en un chemin $\widehat \gamma \subset \widehat N_X$ d’origine $\widehat z$. Il existe un unique automorphisme de revêtement $\widehat T$ tel que l’extrémité de $\widehat\gamma$ soit $\widehat T(\widehat z)$. Le chemin $\widehat F(\widehat\gamma)$ a pour origine $\widehat F(\widehat z)$ et pour extrémité $\widehat F \circ \widehat T(\widehat z)$ qui n’est autre que $\widehat T \circ \widehat F(\widehat z)$, extrémité du chemin $\widehat T(\widehat\alpha)$. On peut donc concaténer les chemins $\widehat\alpha$, $\widehat F(\widehat\gamma)$ et $\bigl( \widehat T(\widehat\alpha)\bigr)^{-}$. On obtient un chemin de mêmes extrémités $\widehat z$ et $\widehat T(\widehat z)$ que $\widehat\gamma$ ; il est donc homotope à $\widehat\gamma$ car $\widehat N_X$ est simplement connexe. On en déduit que les lacets $\alpha.F(\gamma).\alpha^{-}$ et $\gamma$ sont homotopes (à point base fixé) dans $N_X$ et donc que $\alpha$ est adapté à $X$.
2. Inversement, soit $\widehat\alpha \subset \widehat N_X$ le relèvement d’un chemin $\alpha$ adapté à $X$ dans $N_X$ supposé connexe. On construit $\widehat F$ comme le relèvement de $F$ envoyant l’origine $\widehat z$ de $\widehat\alpha$ sur son extrémité. Considérons un automorphisme de revêtement $\widehat T$ et montrons l’égalité $\widehat T \circ \widehat F = \widehat F \circ \widehat T$. Choisissons un chemin $\widehat\gamma \subset \widehat N_X$ de $\widehat z$ à $\widehat T(\widehat z)$. Il se projette sur un lacet $\gamma \subset N_X$ qui est, par hypothèse, homotope au lacet $\alpha.F(\gamma).\alpha^{-}$. Cela signifie que les relèvements issus de $\widehat z$ des chemins $\alpha.F(\gamma)$ et $\gamma.\alpha$ ont même extrémité. Or le lacet $\alpha$ se relève à partir du point $\widehat z$ en le chemin $\widehat\alpha$ d’extrémité $\widehat F(\widehat z)$. À partir de ce point, $F(\gamma)$ se relève en $\widehat F(\widehat\gamma)$ d’extrémité $\widehat F \circ \widehat T(\widehat z)$. Par ailleurs, $\gamma$ se relève à partir de $\widehat z$ en $\widehat\gamma$ d’extrémité $\widehat T(\widehat z)$. Le relèvement de $\alpha$ issu de ce point est $\widehat T(\widehat\alpha)$ d’extrémité $\widehat T \circ \widehat F(\widehat z)$. On en déduit $\widehat T \circ \widehat F(\widehat z) = \widehat F \circ \widehat T(\widehat z)$ donc $\widehat T \circ \widehat F = \widehat F \circ \widehat T$.
\[Rem:AutoExist\] Soient $F \in {\operatorname{Homeo}}_*(M)$ et $X \subset {\operatorname{Fix}}(F)$ un ensemble fermé. La proposition précédente montre l’équivalence des propriétés suivantes :
1. il existe un relèvement $(X,\widehat F_X) \in {\mathcal}R$
2. pour tout $z \in N_X$, il existe un chemin $\alpha_z$ adapté à $X$ d’origine $z$ ;
3. il existe un chemin adapté à $X$ dans chaque composante connexe de $N_X$ ;
Lorsque les composantes connexes d’une surface $N$ ne sont pas homéomorphes au tore ou à l’anneau, le groupe des automorphismes de revêtement est de centre trivial. On peut alors faire la remarque suivante.
\[Rem:UniChAdapt\] Soit $N$ une surface de revêtement universel $\widehat\pi : \widehat N \rightarrow N$, dont le groupe $\widehat G$ des automorphismes de revêtement est de centre trivial et soit $F$ un homéomorphisme de $N$. Alors deux chemins $\alpha$ et $\beta$ de même origine $z \in N_X$ et adaptés à $X$ sont homotopes à extrémités fixées dans $N_X$.
En effet, d’après la proposition qui précède, chacun de ces deux chemins est associé à un relèvement de $F_{|N_X}$ qui commute avec les automorphismes du revêtement universel $\widehat\pi_X : \widehat N_X \rightarrow N_X$. Or, d’après la remarque \[Rem:UniCommu\], un tel relèvement $\widehat F$ est unique. Ainsi, $\alpha$ et $\beta$ se relèvent à $\widehat N_X$ en deux chemins d’origine un relevé $\widehat z$ de $z$ et de même extrémité $\widehat F(\widehat z)$. En d’autres termes, les chemins $\alpha$ et $\beta$ sont homotopes à extrémités fixées dans $N_X$.
Ensemble non enlacé {#ssec:defenlac}
-------------------
Afin de mieux comprendre les notions introduites ci-dessus, nous allons maintenant définir l’enlacement à partir de trois propriétés dont nous allons montrer qu’elles sont équivalentes à l’aide du théorème d’Epstein [@Epstein66]. Cette définition et cette équivalence permettent de mieux comprendre les notions utilisées dans l’article, mais elles ne seront pas utilisées sous cette forme dans la suite. Nous avons préféré travailler avec une relation d’ordre qui sera introduite dans le paragraphe suivant.
\[PropDef:123\] Soient $F \in {\operatorname{Homeo}}_*(M)$ et $X \subset {\operatorname{Fix}}(F)$ un ensemble fermé. On dit que $X$ est *non enlacé* s’il vérifie l’une des propriétés équivalentes suivantes :
1. il existe une isotopie restreinte $(X,I) \in {\mathcal}I$ ;
2. il existe un relèvement $(X,\widehat F) \in {\mathcal}R$ ;
3. tout lacet $\Gamma \subset N_X$ est librement homotope dans $N_X$ à son image $F(\Gamma)$.
Nous ne démontrons pas que la propriété ${\textrm{(P3)}}$ entraîne la propriété ${\textrm{(P1)}}$. Ce résultat provient d’un théorème difficile dû à D.B.A. Epstein. En effet, $F$ préserve les composantes de $\partial (M \setminus X)$. D’après un théorème de Whitehead ([@Spanier89], Corollary 24 page 405), la propriété ${\textrm{(P3)}}$ entraîne que l’identité et $F$ sont homotopes par une homotopie de paires sur $(M\setminus X,\partial(M\setminus X))$. D’après un théorème d’Epstein ([@Epstein66], Theorem 6.3), il existe donc une isotopie entre l’identité et $F$.
Démontrons les deux autres implications. Si $X$ vérifie la propriété ${\textrm{(P1)}}$, alors il existe une isotopie restreinte $(X,I) \in {\mathcal}I$. On a vu que l’on pouvait lui associer un relèvement $(X,\widehat F) \in {\mathcal}R$ (voir ce qui précède la définition \[Def:RelAsso\]). Ainsi, $X$ vérifie la propriété ${\textrm{(P2)}}$.
Supposons maintenant que $X$ vérifie la propriété ${\textrm{(P2)}}$ et montrons qu’il vérifie alors la propriété ${\textrm{(P3)}}$. Considérons un lacet $\Gamma \subset N_X$ basé en $z$. Soit $\alpha$ un chemin associé à $\widehat F$ issu de $z$ ; il est donc adapté à $X$ d’après la proposition \[Prop:PlusPrecis\]. Le lacet $\Gamma$ est donc homotope à $\alpha.F(\Gamma).\alpha^{-}$ qui est lui-même librement homotope à $F(\Gamma)$. L’ensemble $X$ vérifie donc la propriété 3.
\[Rem:UniCommu2\] Soit $X$ un ensemble non enlacé. D’après la remarque \[Rem:UniCommu\], lorsque $M \setminus X$ n’est pas homéomorphe à l’anneau ou au tore, le relèvement $(X, \widehat F)$ donné par la propriété ${\textrm{(P2)}}$ est unique. C’est donc aussi le relèvement associé à l’isotopie restreinte $(X,I)$ donné par la propriété ${\textrm{(P1)}}$.
En revanche, dans le cas de l’anneau ou du tore, il n’y a pas unicité du relèvement $(X, \widehat F) \in {\mathcal}R$. Cependant, étant donné un relèvement $(X, \widehat F) \in {\mathcal}R$, on peut toujours trouver une isotopie restreinte $(X,I) \in {\mathcal}I$ tel que $(X, \widehat F)$ soit associé à $(X,I)$. En effet, le temps un d’une isotopie restreinte $(X,I)$ donnée par ${\textrm{(P1)}}$ diffère de $(X, \widehat F)$ d’un automorphisme de revêtement. Ce dernier est associé à une isotopie entre l’identité et elle-même réalisant la rotation correspondante de l’anneau ou du tore. En composant l’inverse de cette isotopie avec $(X,I)$, on obtient l’isotopie restreinte cherchée.
\[Qu:NEF\] Comme on l’a évoqué dans l’introduction, on peut définir une notion de non enlacement *a priori* plus forte que la précédente de la façon suivante. On dit que $X$ est *fortement non enlacé* s’il existe une isotopie $I$ entre l’identité ${\operatorname{id}}_M$ et $F$ vérifiant $X \subset {\operatorname{Fix}}(I)$. Nous ne savons pas si cette notion est équivalente à la précédente et ne l’utiliserons pas dans cet article.
\[Rem:NEF\] Dans le cas particulier où $X$ est totalement discontinu, et notamment si $X$ est fini, il est facile de répondre à la question précédente. En effet, si $X$ est non enlacé, on peut trouver une isotopie restreinte $(X, I) \in {\mathcal}I$. Cette isotopie se prolonge en une isotopie sur $M$ fixant les points de $X$ et $X$ est donc fortement non enlacé.
Présentation de la preuve {#sec:pres}
=========================
Relation d’ordre sur les relèvements
------------------------------------
Notre objectif est la démonstration du théorème \[Th:princ\]. Dans cette optique, nous recherchons un relèvement $(X,\widehat F_X) \in {\mathcal}R$ avec $\widehat F_X$ sans point fixe. Pour cela, nous allons utiliser une relation d’ordre choisie de façon à ce que les relèvements maximaux conviennent (proposition \[Prop:MaximaFaible\]). Introduisons la relation ; nous montrerons ensuite (proposition \[Prop:RO\]) qu’il s’agit bien d’une relation d’ordre.
\[Def:RO3\] On définit la relation suivante sur l’ensemble ${\mathcal}R$ ; on note $\bigl(X,\widehat F_X\bigr) {\preccurlyeq}\bigl(Y,\widehat F_Y\bigr)$ si :
1. on a $X \subset Y \subset \Bigl(X \cup \widehat\pi_X\bigl({\operatorname{Fix}}(\widehat F_X)\bigr)\Bigr)$ ;
2. tout chemin de $N_Y$ associé à $\widehat F_Y$ est également associé à $\widehat F_X$.
L’ensemble $\widehat\pi_X({\operatorname{Fix}}(\widehat F_X))$ est fermé.
Si $\widehat F_X$ est sans point fixe, alors $(X, \widehat F_X)$ est maximal. En effet, l’assertion (1) entraîne alors $X=Y$.
\[Rem:R01\] La relation $(X,\widehat F_X) {\preccurlyeq}(Y,\widehat F_Y)$ entraîne l’inclusion $\widehat\pi_Y\bigl({\operatorname{Fix}}(\widehat F_Y)\bigr) \subset \widehat\pi_X\bigl({\operatorname{Fix}}(\widehat F_X)\bigr)$. En effet si $z$ appartient à $\widehat\pi_Y\bigl({\operatorname{Fix}}(\widehat F_Y)\bigr)$, alors le lacet trivial basé en $z$ est associé à $\widehat F_Y$ donc à $\widehat F_X$.
\[Rem:R02\] Si $(X,\widehat F_X) {\preccurlyeq}(Y,\widehat F_Y)$ et $X=Y$, alors $(X,\widehat F_X) = (Y,\widehat F_Y)$. En effet, par hypothèse, tout chemin de $N_X = N_Y$ associé à $\widehat F_Y$ est aussi associé à $\widehat F_X$ ce qui entraîne l’égalité $\widehat F_X = \widehat F_Y$.
\[Rem:R03\] On peut remplacer dans la définition la deuxième propriété par la propriété *a priori* plus faible :
> « il existe dans chaque composante connexe de $N_Y$ un chemin associé à $\widehat F_Y$ et à $\widehat F_X$ ».
En effet, supposons l’existence d’un chemin $\alpha$ associé à $\widehat F_Y$ et à $\widehat F_X$ dans une composante connexe $U$ de $N_X$. Montrons qu’alors tout chemin de $U$ associé à $\widehat F_Y$ est aussi associé à $\widehat F_X$. Soit $\alpha' \subset U$ associé à $\widehat F_Y$. Relevons les chemins $\alpha$ et $\alpha'$ en $\widehat\alpha \subset \widehat N_Y$ et $\widehat\alpha' \subset \widehat N_Y$. Choisissons un chemin $\widehat\gamma$ joignant l’origine de $\widehat\alpha$ à celle de $\widehat\alpha'$. Le chemin $\widehat F_Y(\widehat\gamma)$ joint l’extrémité de $\widehat\alpha$ à celle de $\widehat\alpha'$. Comme les composantes connexes de $\widehat N_Y$ sont simplement connexes, on peut donc construire une famille continue $(\widehat\alpha_t)_{t \in [0,1]}$ de chemins telle que $\widehat\alpha_0 = \widehat\alpha$, $\widehat\alpha_1 = \widehat\alpha'$ et pour tout $t \in [0,1]$, $\widehat\alpha_t$ ait pour origine $\widehat\gamma(t)$ et pour extrémité $\widehat F_Y\bigl(\widehat\gamma(t)\bigr)$. Par projection, on obtient alors une famille continue $(\alpha_t)_{t \in [0,1]}$ de chemins. Comme par hypothèse $\alpha_0 = \alpha$ est associé à $\widehat F_X$, tous les chemins $\alpha_t$ sont associés à $\widehat F_X$. En particulier, le chemin $\alpha_1 = \alpha'$ est associé à $\widehat F_X$.
\[Prop:RO\] La relation ${\preccurlyeq}$ est une relation d’ordre sur ${\mathcal}R$.
Il est clair que la relation ${\preccurlyeq}$ est réflexive. Montrons qu’elle est antisymétrique. Supposons $(X,\widehat F_X) {\preccurlyeq}(Y,\widehat F_Y)$ et $(Y,\widehat F_Y) {\preccurlyeq}(X,\widehat F_X)$. On en déduit $X = Y$ puis $(X,\widehat F_X) = (Y,\widehat F_Y)$ d’après la remarque \[Rem:R02\].
Enfin, montrons que ${\preccurlyeq}$ est transitive. Supposons $(X,\widehat F_X) {\preccurlyeq}(Y,\widehat F_Y)$ et $(Y,\widehat F_Y) {\preccurlyeq}(Z,\widehat F_Z)$. On a donc : $$\begin{gathered}
X \subset Y \subset \Bigl(X \cup \widehat\pi_X\bigl({\operatorname{Fix}}(\widehat F_X)\bigr)\Bigr)
{\quad\text{et}\quad}
Y \subset Z \subset \Bigl(Y \cup \widehat\pi_Y\bigl({\operatorname{Fix}}(\widehat F_Y)\bigr)\Bigr)\\
\text{puis}\qquad
X \subset Z
\subset \Bigl(Y \cup \widehat\pi_Y\bigl({\operatorname{Fix}}(\widehat F_Y)\bigr)\Bigr)
\subset \Bigl(X \cup \widehat\pi_X\bigl({\operatorname{Fix}}(\widehat F_X)\bigr)\Bigr),
\end{gathered}$$ en utilisant la remarque \[Rem:R01\] pour obtenir la dernière inclusion. La propriété $2$ est immédiatement vérifiée.
Avant de poursuivre, revenons sur la remarque \[Rem:UniCommu2\]. Lorsque certaines composantes connexes de $N_X$ sont homéomorphes à l’anneau ou au tore, il n’y a pas unicité, s’il existe, du relèvement $(X,\widehat F_X) \in {\mathcal}R$. Nous avons expliqué dans l’introduction que cela justifiait la présence de la troisième condition dans les conclusions du théorème \[Th:princ\]. Un exemple d’une telle situation est donné par l’homéomorphisme $F : {\mathbb{C}}\to {\mathbb{C}}$ défini par : $$F(z) = e^{8i\arctan(|z|)} z.$$ L’ensemble $X = {\operatorname{Fix}}(F)$ est la réunion du cercle unité et du point $0$. On cherche un relèvement $(X,\widehat F_X) \in {\mathcal}R$ : choisissons celui qui est associé à la restriction à $N_X$ de l’isotopie $I$ définie par : $$\phi : {\begin{tabular}{c@{~}c@{~}c}
$[0,1] \times {\mathbb{C}}$&$\to$&${\mathbb{C}}$\\
$(t,z)$&$\mapsto$&$e^{8it\arctan(|z|)} z$\\
\end{tabular}}.$$ Ce relèvement, simple à construire, vérifie les deux premières conditions du théorème \[Th:princ\] mais pas la troisième.
Pour le voir, considérons par exemple le sous-ensemble $Y = \{0,1\}$ de $X$. Pour satisfaire la troisième condition, il faudrait d’abord trouver un relèvement $(Y,\widehat F_Y) \in {\mathcal}R$. D’après la remarque \[Rem:UniCommu2\], $N_Y$ n’étant homéomorphe ni à l’anneau ni au tore, un tel relèvement est unique. C’est donc nécessairement celui qui est associé à la restriction à $N_Y$ de l’isotopie $J$ définie par : $$\psi : {\begin{tabular}{c@{~}c@{~}c}
$[0,1] \times {\mathbb{C}}$&$\to$&${\mathbb{C}}$\\
$(t,z)$&$\mapsto$&$e^{it(8\arctan(|z|)-2\pi)} z$\\
\end{tabular}}.$$ Mais les chemins $t \mapsto \phi(t,\sqrt3) = e^{\frac{8it\pi}3} \sqrt3$ et $t \mapsto \psi(t,\sqrt3) = e^{\frac{2it\pi}3} \sqrt3$ ne sont pas homotopes à extrémités fixées dans $N_Y$. Le relèvement $(X, \widehat F_X)$ ne vérifie donc pas la fin de la troisième condition.
Cependant, l’isotopie $J$ est mieux choisie que la précédente car elle vérifie ${\operatorname{Fix}}(J) = X$, ce qui montre d’ailleurs que $X$ est fortement non enlacé. À la restriction de $J$ à $N_X$ est associé un relèvement $(X, \widehat F'_X)$. C’est celui que l’on obtient à partir de la notion de non enlacement fort et le seul à vérifier la troisième condition du théorème \[Th:princ\]. On peut caractériser ce relèvement : c’est le seul qui appartient à l’ensemble ${\mathcal}R'$ suivant.
On note ${\mathcal}R'$ l’ensemble des couples $(X,\widehat F_X) \in {\mathcal}R$ tels que pour tout sous-ensemble fermé $Y \subset X$, il existe $(Y,\widehat F_Y) \in {\mathcal}R$ vérifiant $(Y,\widehat F_Y) {\preccurlyeq}(X,\widehat F_X)$. La relation ${\preccurlyeq}$ définit un ordre sur ${\mathcal}R'$.
Avant de poursuivre, et pour clarifier les idées, vérifions que l’unicité du relèvement, qui a motivé l’introduction de ${\mathcal}R'$, est bien une propriété vérifiée dans ${\mathcal}R'$.
\[Prop:UniRR\] Soit $X \subset {\operatorname{Fix}}(F)$ un sous-ensemble fermé non enlacé. On exclut les cas particuliers suivants :
- $M$ est l’anneau ou le tore et $X$ est l’ensemble vide ;
- $M$ est le disque et $X$ un singleton ;
- $M$ est la sphère et $X$ est de cardinal $2$.
Alors il existe au plus un relèvement $(X, \widehat F_X) \in {\mathcal}R'$.
La démonstration de ce résultat repose sur le lemme suivant :
\[Le:T1\] Soit $X \subset M$ une partie fermée et $\Gamma \subset N_X$ un lacet. Alors $\Gamma$ est homotope à zéro dans $N_X$ si et seulement si $\Gamma$ est homotope à zéro dans $N_Z$ pour toute partie finie $Z \subset X$.
Si $\Gamma$ est homotope à zéro dans $N_X$, alors pour toute partie finie $Z \subset X$ on a $N_X \subset N_Z$ donc $\Gamma$ est homotope à zéro dans $N_Z$.
Réciproquement, supposons que pour toute partie finie $Z \subset X$, le lacet $\Gamma$ est homotope à zéro dans $N_Z$. Considérons une surface à bord compacte connexe $K_\Gamma \subset N_X$ contenant $\Gamma$. Comme $M$ est connexe, toute composante connexe de $M \setminus K_\Gamma$ rencontre une composante de la frontière $\partial K_\Gamma$ de $K_\Gamma$. Par compacité de $K_\Gamma$, les composantes connexes de $M \setminus K_\Gamma$ sont donc en nombre fini. Pour chaque composante connexe $C$ de $M \setminus K_\Gamma$ rencontrant $X$, on choisit un point $z_C \in C \cap X$. On note $Z$ l’ensemble fini obtenu par réunion de ces points. Enfin, on note $N$ la réunion de $K_\Gamma$ et des composantes connexes de $M \setminus K_\Gamma$ qui ne rencontrent pas $C$.
Considérons le revêtement universel $\widehat\pi : \widehat N_Z \to N_Z$ de $N_Z$ et une composante connexe $\widehat N \subset \widehat N_Z$ de la préimage de $N$ par $\widehat\pi$. Le lacet $\Gamma$ se relève à $\widehat N$ en un chemin $\widehat\Gamma$ issu de $\widehat z$ qui est un lacet puisque, par hypothèse, $\Gamma$ est homotope à zéro dans $N_Z$. Par ailleurs, remarquons que $\widehat N$ est simplement connexe car s’il existait une composante connexe bornée de $\widehat N_Z \setminus \widehat N$, elle se projetterait sur une composante connexe de $M \setminus N$ ne rencontrant pas $Z$ ce qui contredirait la construction de $N$ et $Z$. Le lacet $\widehat\Gamma$ est donc homotope à zéro dans $\widehat N$ et son projeté $\Gamma$ est donc homotope à zéro dans $N \subset N_X$ donc dans $N_X$.
L’unicité de $(X, \widehat F_X)$ est immédiate lorsque le groupe des automorphismes du revêtement universel de $N_X$ est de centre trivial. Lorsque $X$ est fini, cette propriété est toujours vérifiée ici compte tenu des cas particuliers que nous avons exclus.
Supposons maintenant $X$ infini. Soient deux relèvements $(X, \widehat F_X) \in {\mathcal}R'$ et $(X, \widehat G_X) \in {\mathcal}R'$. Choisissons un point $z \in N_X$ et deux chemins $\alpha$ et $\beta$ issus de $z$, le premier associé à $\widehat F_X$ et le second à $\widehat G_X$. Considérons maintenant le lacet $\Gamma = \alpha.\beta^-$.
Pour tout sous-ensemble fini $Z \subset X$ de cardinal au moins $3$, par définition de ${\mathcal}R'$, on peut trouver $(Z, \widehat F_Z) \in {\mathcal}R$ vérifiant $(Z, \widehat F_Z) {\preccurlyeq}(X, \widehat F_X)$ et $(Z, \widehat G_Z) \in {\mathcal}R$ vérifiant $(Z, \widehat G_Z) {\preccurlyeq}(X, \widehat G_X)$. Mais puisque $Z$ est fini de cardinal au moins $3$, le groupe des automorphismes du revêtement universel de $N_Z$ est de centre trivial et $\widehat F_Z$ est donc unique d’où $\widehat F_Z = \widehat G_Z$. Les chemins $\alpha$ et $\beta$ sont donc tous deux associés à $\widehat F_Z$ donc $\Gamma$ est homotope à zéro dans $N_Z$.
Si $Z \subset X$ est un sous-ensemble fini de cardinal inférieur ou égal à $2$, on peut trouver un ensemble $Z'$ fini de cardinal $3$ vérifiant $Z \subset Z' \subset X$. D’après ce qui précède, $\Gamma$ est homotope à zéro dans $N_{Z'}$ donc dans $N_Z$ comme précédemment.
Nous pouvons donc utiliser le lemme \[Le:T1\] et en déduire que $\Gamma$ est homotope à zéro dans $N_X$ ce qui montre que $\alpha$ et $\beta$ sont homotopes dans $N_X$ donc $\widehat F_X = \widehat G_X$.
Preuve du théorème \[Th:princ\]
-------------------------------
Nous démontrerons dans la partie \[sec:induc\] les résultats suivants concernant l’existence de relèvements maximaux.
\[Prop:existmax\] Soient $F \in {\operatorname{Homeo}}_*(M)$ et $(X,\widehat F_X) \in {\mathcal}R$. Alors il existe $(Y,\widehat F_Y) \in {\mathcal}R$ maximal vérifiant $(X,\widehat F_X) {\preccurlyeq}(Y,\widehat F_Y)$.
[ ]{}
Soient $F \in {\operatorname{Homeo}}_*(M)$ et $(X,\widehat F_X) \in {\mathcal}R'$. Alors il existe $(Y,\widehat F_Y) \in {\mathcal}R'$ maximal dans ${\mathcal}R'$ vérifiant $(X,\widehat F_X) {\preccurlyeq}(Y,\widehat F_Y)$.
Pour prouver le théorème \[Th:princ\], il reste à montrer que les relèvements maximaux permettent l’utilisation du théorème \[Th:Brouwer\] c’est-à-dire sont sans point fixe.
\[Prop:MaximaFaible\] Soit $(X, \widehat F_X) \in {\mathcal}R$. S’il existe un point $y \in {\operatorname{Fix}}(F) \setminus X$ dont les relevés à $\widehat N_X$ sont des points fixes de $\widehat F_X$, alors $(X,\widehat F_X)$ n’est pas maximal dans $({\mathcal}R,{\preccurlyeq})$.
Plus précisément, si l’on note $Y = X \cup \{y\}$, il existe $\bigl(Y,\widehat F_Y\bigr) \in {\mathcal}R$ vérifiant $\bigl(X,\widehat F_X\bigr) {\preccurlyeq}\bigl(Y,\widehat F_Y\bigr)$.
[ ]{}
Soit $(X, \widehat F_X) \in {\mathcal}R'$. S’il existe un point $y \in {\operatorname{Fix}}(F) \setminus X$ dont les relevés à $\widehat N_X$ sont des points fixes de $\widehat F_X$, alors $(X,\widehat F_X)$ n’est pas maximal dans $({\mathcal}R',{\preccurlyeq})$.
Plus précisément, si l’on note $Y = X \cup \{y\}$, il existe $\bigl(Y,\widehat F_Y\bigr) \in {\mathcal}R'$ vérifiant $\bigl(X,\widehat F_X\bigr) {\preccurlyeq}\bigl(Y,\widehat F_Y\bigr)$.
Comme $\widehat F_X$ commute avec les automorphismes du revêtement universel $\widehat\pi_X : \widehat N_X \rightarrow N_X$, s’il fixe un relevé à $\widehat N_X$ d’un point $y \in {\operatorname{Fix}}(F) \setminus X$, il les fixe tous.
Considérons un relèvement $(X, \widehat F_X) \in {\mathcal}R'$. D’après la proposition \[Prop:MaximaFaible\] (respectivement [\[Prop:MaximaFaible\]’]{}), le relèvement $(X, \widehat F_X)$ est maximal dans ${\mathcal}R$ (resp. dans ${\mathcal}R'$) si et seulement si $\widehat F_X$ est sans point fixe. Ainsi $(X, \widehat F_X)$ est maximal dans ${\mathcal}R$ si et seulement s’il est maximal dans ${\mathcal}R'$.
Avant de démontrer les propositions \[Prop:MaximaFaible\] et [\[Prop:MaximaFaible\]’]{} dans le paragraphe suivant, nous allons prouver le théorème \[Th:princ\]. Nous nous appuyons pour cela sur les propositions [\[Prop:MaximaFaible\]’]{} démontrée ci-après et [\[Prop:existmax\]’]{} démontrée dans la partie \[sec:induc\]. Signalons que pour obtenir la troisième condition dans le théorème \[Th:princ\], nous utilisons ces propositions et non pas les propositions \[Prop:MaximaFaible\] et \[Prop:existmax\] ; nous donnerons cependant une preuve de l’ensemble de ces résultats.
Considérons $(\emptyset,\widetilde F) \in {\mathcal}R'$ où $\widetilde F$ est le relèvement associé à $I$ de $F$ au revêtement universel $\widetilde M$ de $M$. D’après la proposition [\[Prop:existmax\]’]{}, il existe $(X,\widehat F_X) \in {\mathcal}R'$ maximal et vérifiant $(\emptyset,\widetilde F) {\preccurlyeq}(X,\widehat F_X)$, ce qui signifie que tout chemin associé à $\widehat F_X$ est aussi associé à $\widetilde F$. De plus, d’après la proposition [\[Prop:MaximaFaible\]’]{}, $\widehat F_X$ n’a pas de point fixe. Enfin, la troisième assertion du théorème repose sur la définition de ${\mathcal}R'$. En particulier, l’affirmation (a) est la traduction de la propriété $X \subset \left( Y \cup \widehat\pi_Y({\operatorname{Fix}}(\widehat F_Y)) \right)$.
Éléments maximaux de $({\mathcal}R, {\preccurlyeq})$ et $({\mathcal}R', {\preccurlyeq})$
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
L’objet de ce paragraphe est la preuve des propositions \[Prop:MaximaFaible\] et [\[Prop:MaximaFaible\]’]{}. Celle-ci s’appuie sur la proposition \[PropTh:XyNonEnlace\] qui découle du lemme d’Alexander mais dont nous donnerons une démonstration complète dans la partie \[sec:contrac\]. Il s’agit d’une formulation de la proposition \[Prop:MaximaFaible\] dans le langage des isotopies restreintes. Pour déduire les propositions \[Prop:MaximaFaible\] et [\[Prop:MaximaFaible\]’]{} de la proposition \[PropTh:XyNonEnlace\], nous allons utiliser le théorème d’Epstein (proposition \[PropDef:123\], ${\textrm{(P3)}} \Rightarrow {\textrm{(P1)}}$). Signalons que notre preuve du théorème \[Th:princ\] fait appel au théorème d’Epstein uniquement pour ces preuves des propositions \[Prop:MaximaFaible\] et [\[Prop:MaximaFaible\]’]{}.
\[PropTh:XyNonEnlace\] Soient $F \in {\operatorname{Homeo}}_*(M)$ et $(X,I) \in {\mathcal}I$ une isotopie restreinte. Soit $y \in {\operatorname{Cont}}(I) \setminus {\operatorname{Fix}}(I)$. Alors il existe une isotopie restreinte $(X,I') \in {\mathcal}I$ fixant $y$ avec $I'$ homotope à $I$ relativement au complémentaire d’un compact de $N_X$.
Remarquons d’abord qu’il suffit de s’intéresser à la composante connexe $N$ de $N_X$ qui contient le point $y$. En effet, les autres composantes connexes sont inchangées lorsque l’on enlève $y$ et leur revêtement universel est également inchangé. Pour simplifier les notations, nous supposons donc $N_X$ connexe.
Utilisons le théorème d’Epstein. D’après la proposition \[PropDef:123\] et la remarque \[Rem:UniCommu2\], il existe une isotopie restreinte $(X,I_X)$ telle que $(X,\widehat F_X)$ soit associé à $(X,I_X)$. D’après la proposition \[PropTh:XyNonEnlace\], on peut modifier $(X,I_X)$ pour obtenir une isotopie $(X,J_Y)$ qui fixe $y$. Considérons le relèvement $(X,\widehat F_{J_Y}) \in {\mathcal}R$ associé à l’isotopie restreinte $(X,J_Y)$. Comme $\widehat F_{J_Y}$ est un relèvement de $F_{|N_X}$ qui fixe les relevés de $y$, c’est $\widehat F_X$.
Notons $I_Y$ la restriction de $J_Y$ à $N_Y$ et considérons le relèvement $(Y, \widehat F_Y) \in {\mathcal}R$ associé à l’isotopie restreinte $(Y,I_Y)$. Il reste à vérifier que l’on a bien $(X, \widehat F_X) {\preccurlyeq}(Y, \widehat F_Y)$ :
1. par hypothèse, $Y = X \cup \{y\}$ vérifie $X \subset Y \subset
\Bigl( X \cup \widehat\pi_X \bigl( {\operatorname{Fix}}(\widehat F_X) \bigr) \Bigr)$ ;
2. soit $z \in N_Y$. Considérons le chemin $I_Y(z)$ qui n’est autre que $J_Y(z)$. Il est donc associé à $\widehat F_Y$ mais aussi à $\widehat F_X$, ce qui achève la démonstration d’après la remarque \[Rem:R03\].
Nous pouvons également démontrer facilement la proposition [\[Prop:MaximaFaible\]’]{} dans le cas particulier où $X$ est totalement discontinu. Cette situation est relativement simple car $Y$ est alors fortement non enlacé (voir la remarque \[Rem:NEF\]).
D’après la proposition \[PropDef:123\], il existe une isotopie restreinte $(X, I_X) \in {\mathcal}I$ associée au relèvement $(X, \widehat F_X)$. Comme les points de $X$ sont isolés, cette isotopie se prolonge en une isotopie $I$ définie sur $M$ et fixant les points de $X$. Par hypothèse, les relevés de $y$ à $\widehat N_X$ sont des points fixes de $\widehat F_X$. D’après la proposition \[PropTh:XyNonEnlace\] on peut modifier $I$ en une isotopie $J$ qui fixe les points de $Y$. À la restriction à $N_{Y}$ de l’isotopie $J$ est associé un relèvement $(Y, \widehat F_Y) \in {\mathcal}R$.
Montrons que $(Y, \widehat F_Y)$ appartient à ${\mathcal}R'$. En effet, pour tout sous-ensemble $Z \subset Y$, la restriction de $J$ à $N_Z$ permet de définir un relèvement vérifiant $(Z, \widehat F_Z) {\preccurlyeq}(Y, \widehat F_Y)$ puisque pour tout point $z \in N_Y$, le chemin $J(z)$ est associé à $\widehat F_Y$ et à $\widehat F_Z$.
Intéressons-nous maintenant à la proposition [\[Prop:MaximaFaible\]’]{} dans le cas où $X$ n’est pas totalement discontinu. Pour la démontrer, nous allons utiliser les lemmes suivants :
\[Le:T2\] Soient $(Z, \widehat F_Z)$ et $(Y, \widehat F_Y)$ deux éléments de ${\mathcal}R$ vérifiant $Z \subset Y \subset \Bigl(Z \cup \,\widehat\pi_Z\bigl({\operatorname{Fix}}(\widehat F_Z)\bigr)\Bigr)$. On suppose de plus que l’ensemble $Z$ contient un point $y$ isolé dans $Y$ et que les composantes connexes de $N_Z$ et de $N_Y$ qui contiennent $y$ dans leur adhérence ne sont homéomorphes ni à l’anneau ouvert, ni au disque.
Alors, tout anneau $A \subset N_Y$ entourant $y$ (c’est-à-dire tel que $A \cup \{y\}$ soit un disque) contient des chemins associés à $\widehat F_Y$. Ces chemins sont de plus associés à $\widehat F_Z$. Dans le cas particulier où $N_Y$ est connexe, cela signifie que l’on a $(Z, \widehat F_Z) {\preccurlyeq}(Y, \widehat F_Y)$.
D’après la proposition \[PropDef:123\], on sait qu’il existe une isotopie $(Z,I_Z)$ telle que $(Z, \widehat F_Z)$ soit associé à $(Z,I_Z)$ et une isotopie $(Y,I_Y)$ telle que $(Y, \widehat F_Y)$ soit associé à $(Y,I_Y)$. Comme $y$ est un point de $Z$ isolé dans $Y$ donc dans $Z$, le lacet $\beta = \bigl(I_Y.(I_Z)^- \bigr)(w)$ est contenu dans $A$ si l’on choisit $w$ suffisamment proche de $y$. Choisissons un tel point $w$ puis un lacet $\Gamma \subset N_Y$ basé en $w$ et non homotope à zéro dans $N_Y \cup \{y\}$. Si l’on suppose que $N_Y$ n’est homéomorphe ni à l’anneau ni au disque, un tel choix est possible puisque $N_Y \cup \{y\}$ ne peut alors être homéomorphe ni au disque ni à la sphère.
On note $C_Z$ la composante connexe de $N_Z$ dont l’adhérence contient $y$ ; elle contient également $w$. On note également $\widehat\pi : \widehat C_Z \to C_Z$ le revêtement universel de $C_Z$ et $\widehat G$ le groupe des automorphismes de revêtement. Choisissons un relèvement $\widehat w \in \widehat C_Z$ de $w$ et notons $\widehat\beta$ et $\widehat\Gamma$ les relèvements de $\beta$ et $\Gamma$ issus de $\widehat w$. L’extrémité de $\widehat\beta$ relève $w$ et s’écrit donc sous la forme $\widehat T(\widehat w)$ avec $\widehat T \in \widehat G$. De même, l’extrémité de $\widehat\Gamma$ s’écrit $\widehat U(\widehat w)$ avec $\widehat U \in \widehat G$. Remarquons maintenant que $I_Y$ définit dans $N_Y$, donc dans $N_Z$, et plus précisément dans $C_Z$, une homotopie entre $\Gamma$ et $F(\Gamma)$. L’isotopie $(I_Z)^-$ définit ensuite une homotopie entre $F(\Gamma)$ et $\Gamma$ toujours dans $C_Z$. En relevant à $\widehat C_Z$ ces deux homotopies successives, on obtient une homotopie libre entre $\widehat\Gamma$ et $\widehat T(\widehat\Gamma)$. Le long de cette homotopie, l’origine de $\widehat\Gamma$ décrit $\widehat\beta$ et son extrémité $\widehat U(\widehat w)$ décrit $\widehat U(\widehat\beta)$ d’extrémité $\widehat U \circ \widehat T(\widehat w)$. Or l’extrémité de $\widehat T(\widehat\Gamma)$ est $\widehat T \circ \widehat U(\widehat w)$ et on obtient ainsi $\widehat U \circ \widehat T(\widehat w) = \widehat T \circ \widehat U(\widehat w)$ donc $\widehat U \circ \widehat T = \widehat T \circ \widehat U$.
Comme l’on suppose que $C_Z$ n’est homéomorphe ni au disque, ni à l’anneau, on en déduit que $\widehat U$ et $\widehat T$ appartiennent à un même sous-groupe monogène infini de $\widehat G$. Il existe donc $(k,l) \in {\mathbb{Z}}^2 \setminus \{(0,0)\}$ tel que $\widehat T^k = \widehat U^l$ ce qui signifie que $\beta^k$ et $\Gamma^l$ sont librement homotopes dans $C_Z$ donc dans $C_Z \cup \{y\}$. Or $\beta$ est homotope à zéro dans $C_Z \cup \{y\}$ puisque l’on a choisi $w$ de sorte que $\beta$ soit contenu dans l’anneau $A$ autour de $y$. En revanche, $\Gamma^l$ n’est homotope à zéro dans $C_Z \cup \{y\}$ que si $l = 0$ ([@Epstein66], Lemma 4.3) auquel cas $\widehat T^k$ est l’identité avec $k \neq 0$ donc $\widehat T$ est l’identité. Ainsi le lacet $\beta$ est homotope à zéro dans $C_Z$. On en déduit que $I_Y(w)$, qui est associé à $\widehat F_Y$, est homotope à extrémités fixées dans $C_Z$ à $I_Z(w)$ lui-même associé à $\widehat F_Z$. Ainsi $I_Y(w)$ est associé à $\widehat F_Y$ et à $\widehat F_Z$. Par connexité de l’anneau $A$, tout chemin contenu dans $A$ et associé à $\widehat F_Y$ sera également associé à $\widehat F_Z$ ce qui achève la démonstration.
Nous allons également utiliser un lemme topologique qui repose sur des arguments du type lemme d’Alexander :
\[Le:Alex\] Soit $D$ un disque ouvert contenu dans un ouvert $N$ d’une surface $M$. Soient $y$ et $y'$ deux points de $D$. Soient $\alpha$ et $\beta$ deux chemins contenus dans $N \setminus \overline D$, ayant même origine $z$ et même extrémité $z'$.
Si $\alpha$ et $\beta$ sont homotopes à extrémités fixées dans $N \setminus \{y'\}$, alors ils sont homotopes à extrémités fixées dans $N \setminus \{y\}$.
Soit $\phi : [0,1]^2 \to N$ une homotopie entre $\alpha$ et $\beta$, à valeurs dans $N \setminus \{y'\}$ c’est-à-dire vérifiant :
- pour tout $t \in [0,1]$, $\phi(0,t) = \alpha(t)$ et $\phi(1,t) = \beta(t)$ ;
- pour tout $s \in [0,1]$, $\phi(s,0) = z$ et $\phi(s,1) = z'$.
Comme $\overline D$ est fermé, et $\alpha$, $\beta$ sont contenus dans son complémentaire, il existe $\epsilon \in ]0,1[$ tel que pour tout $(s,t) \in ([0,\epsilon] \cup [1-\epsilon,1])\times[0,1]$ l’on ait $\phi(s,t) \notin \overline D$. Par ailleurs, on peut construire une isotopie $(\psi_s)_{s \in [0,1]}$ entre l’identité ${\operatorname{id}}_N$ et elle-même, à support dans $D$, vérifiant : $$\forall s \in [\epsilon,1-\epsilon] \qquad
\psi_s(y') = y$$ Une construction plus détaillée de ce type d’application figure dans la partie \[sec:contrac\]. L’application $(s,t) \mapsto \psi_s\bigl(\phi(s,t)\bigr)$ réalise une homotopie entre $\alpha$ et $\beta$ dans $N \setminus \{y\}$ car $\phi(s,t)$ ne vaut jamais $y'$ donc $\psi_s\bigl(\phi(s,t)\bigr)$ n’est jamais $y$.
Nous supposons ici que $X$ n’est pas totalement discontinu, et en particulier que $X$ est infini. Dans la preuve de la proposition \[Prop:MaximaFaible\], nous avons en général construit le seul relèvement $(Y,\widehat F_Y)$ possible sauf dans un cas bien particulier : lorsque la composante $C_X$ de $N_X$ contenant $y$ est un disque. En effet, dans ce cas, le groupe des automorphismes de revêtement de $C_Y = C_X \setminus \{y\}$ n’est pas de centre trivial (voir remarque \[Rem:UniCommu\]).
Une première étape de la preuve va consister à choisir $\widehat F_Y$ convenablement lorsque $C_X$ est un disque ; ce relèvement $\widehat F_Y$ sera fourni par la proposition qui suit.
\[Prop:T3\] Soient $\bigl(X, \widehat F_X\bigr) \in {\mathcal}R'$ et $y \in {\operatorname{Fix}}(F) \setminus X$ tel que les relevés de $y$ à $\widehat N_X$ soient des points fixes de $\widehat F_X$. On suppose $X$ de cardinal supérieur ou égal à $2$, on note $C_X$ la composante connexe de $N_X$ contenant $y$ et $C_Y = C_X \setminus \{y\}$.
Alors, il existe un unique relèvement $(Y, \widehat F_Y) \in {\mathcal}R$ vérifiant :
1. $\bigl(X, \widehat F_X\bigr) {\preccurlyeq}\bigl(Y, \widehat F_Y\bigr)$ ;
2. pour tout sous-ensemble fini $Z_1 \subset X$ de cardinal supérieur ou égal à $2$, en notant $Z = Z_1 \cup\{y\}$ et $(Z, \widehat F_Z) \in {\mathcal}R$ l’unique relèvement correspondant, tout chemin de $C_Y$ associé à $\widehat F_Y$ est associé à $\widehat F_Z$.
Commençons par vérifier, pour tout sous-ensemble $Z_1 \subset X$ de cardinal supérieur ou égal à $2$, l’existence et l’unicité d’un relèvement $\bigl(Z, \widehat F_Z\bigr) \in {\mathcal}R$ où l’on a posé $Z = Z_1 \cup \{y\}$. D’après l’hypothèse $\bigl(X, \widehat F_X\bigr) \in {\mathcal}R'$, il existe $\bigl(Z_1, \widehat F_{Z_1}\bigr) \in {\mathcal}R$ vérifiant $\bigl(Z_1, \widehat F_{Z_1}\bigr) {\preccurlyeq}\bigl(X, \widehat F_X\bigr)$. On en déduit, puisque les relevés de $y$ sont des points fixes de $\widehat F_X$, qu’ils sont également points fixes de $\widehat F_{Z_1}$ (voir remarque \[Rem:R01\]) d’où l’existence de $\bigl(Z, \widehat F_Z\bigr) \in {\mathcal}R$ d’après la proposition \[Prop:MaximaFaible\]. L’unicité de $\bigl(Z, \widehat F_Z\bigr)$ provient quant à elle de la remarque \[Rem:UniCommu\] car $Z$ est fini de cardinal supérieur ou égal à $3$.
Nous allons maintenant procéder en deux étapes. Dans un premier temps, nous allons montrer que pour tout sous-ensemble fini $Z_1 \subset X$ de cardinal supérieur ou égal à $2$, en posant $Z = Z_1 \cup \{y\}$, il existe un unique relèvement $\bigl(Y, \widehat F_Y\bigr) \in {\mathcal}R$ vérifiant $\bigl(X, \widehat F_X\bigr) {\preccurlyeq}\bigl(Y, \widehat F_Y\bigr)$ et tout chemin de $C_Y$ associé à $\widehat F_Y$ est associé à $\widehat F_Z$. Dans un second temps, nous montrerons que ce relèvement $\bigl(Y, \widehat F_Y\bigr)$ ne dépend pas de $Z_1$ ; la démonstration sera alors achevée.
**Construction de $\bigl(Y, \widehat F_Y\bigr)$ pour un sous-ensemble fini $Z_1 \subset X$ fixé, de cardinal supérieur ou égal à $2$.** Remarquons que l’on peut travailler indépendamment sur chaque composante connexe de $N_X$. Sur le revêtement universel des composantes connexes de $N_X$ autres que $C_X$, la première condition impose de choisir $\widehat F_Y$ coïncidant avec $\widehat F_X$ autrement dit l’on définit $\widehat F_Y$ à partir des chemins associés à $\widehat F_X$ qui seront également associés à $\widehat F_Y$.
Intéressons-nous maintenant à $C_X$ et distinguons deux cas :
- si $C_X$ n’est pas homéomorphe au disque, l’existence de $\bigl(Y,\widehat F_Y\bigr) \in {\mathcal}R$ vérifiant $\bigl(X, \widehat F_X\bigr) {\preccurlyeq}\bigl(Y, \widehat F_Y\bigr)$ est assurée par la proposition \[Prop:MaximaFaible\] et son unicité par la remarque \[Rem:UniCommu\]. Par ailleurs, le lemme \[Le:T2\] appliqué à $\bigl(Z, \widehat F_Z\bigr)$, $\bigl(Y, \widehat F_Y\bigr)$ et au point isolé $y$ assure l’existence de chemins de $C_Y$ associés à $\widehat F_Y$ et à $\widehat F_Z$.
- si $C_X$ est homéomorphe au disque, utilisons la proposition \[PropDef:123\] : il existe une isotopie restreinte $(Z,J_Z)$ telle que $(Z, \widehat F_Z)$ soit associé à $(Z, J_Z)$. Si $w \in C_X$ est suffisamment proche de $y$ isolé dans $Z$, alors $J_Z(w)$ est contenu dans l’anneau $C_Y$. Parmi les relèvements $\widehat F_Y$ possibles (il en existe d’après la proposition \[Prop:MaximaFaible\]), on choisit celui associé à $J_Z(w)$ et on obtient la propriété recherchée.
**Le relèvement $\bigl(Y, \widehat F_Y\bigr)$ construit ne dépend pas de $Z_1$.** Cette propriété est immédiate lorsque $C_X$ n’est pas homéomorphe au disque, puisque l’on a alors unicité d’un relèvement $\bigl(Y, \widehat F_Y\bigr)$ vérifiant $\bigl(X, \widehat F_X\bigr) {\preccurlyeq}\bigl(Y, \widehat F_Y\bigr)$ (remarque \[Rem:UniCommu\]). Nous allons maintenant chercher à la démontrer lorsque $C_X$ est homéomorphe au disque.
Soient $Z_1 \subset X$ et $Z_1' \subset X$ deux sous-ensembles finis de cardinaux supérieur ou égal à $2$. On note $Z = Z_1 \cup \{y\}$, $Z' = Z_1' \cup \{y\}$ puis $Z_1'' = Z_1 \cup Z_1'$ et $Z'' = Z_1'' \cup \{y\}$. La construction précédente fournit trois relèvements $\bigl(Y, \widehat F_Y\bigr)$, $\bigl(Y, \widehat F'_Y\bigr)$ et $\bigl(Y, \widehat F''_Y\bigr)$ tels que les chemins de $C_Y$ associés à $\widehat F_Y$, $\widehat F'_Y$ et $\widehat F''_Y$ soient également associés respectivement à $\widehat F_Z$, $\widehat F_{Z'}$ et $\widehat F_{Z''}$. D’après le lemme \[Le:T2\] appliqué à $\bigl(Z, \widehat F_Z\bigr)$ et $\bigl(Z'', \widehat F_{Z''}\bigr)$ d’une part, à $\bigl(Z', \widehat F_{Z'}\bigr)$ et $\bigl(Z'', \widehat F_{Z''}\bigr)$ d’autre part, le point isolé étant $y$, on a $\bigl(Z, \widehat F_Z\bigr) {\preccurlyeq}\bigl(Z'', \widehat F_{Z''}\bigr)$ et $\bigl(Z', \widehat F_{Z'}\bigr) {\preccurlyeq}\bigl(Z'', \widehat F_{Z''}\bigr)$. Un chemin de $C_Y$ associé à $\widehat F''_Y$ est associé à $\widehat F_{Z''}$ mais il est donc également associé à $\widehat F_Z$ et $\widehat F_{Z'}$ donc à $\widehat F_Y$ et $\widehat F'_Y$ d’après la construction de $\widehat F_Y$ et $\widehat F'_Y$. On en déduit $\widehat F'_Y = \widehat F_Y$ comme espéré.
Nous pouvons maintenant démontrer la proposition [\[Prop:MaximaFaible\]’]{}.
On suppose ici $X$ infini, le cas fini ayant déjà été traité. La proposition \[Prop:T3\] fournit un relèvement $\bigl(Y, \widehat F_Y\bigr)$ bien déterminé. Nous considérons désormais ce relèvement.
Nous pouvons maintenant **vérifier que $(Y,\widehat F_Y)$ appartient à ${\mathcal}R'$**. Considérons donc un sous-ensemble fermé $Z$ de $Y = X \cup \{y\}$ et montrons l’existence de $(Z,\widehat F_Z) \in {\mathcal}R$ vérifiant $(Z,\widehat F_Z) {\preccurlyeq}(Y,\widehat F_Y)$. Il n’est pas restrictif de supposer que $Z$ est de cardinal supérieur ou égal à $3$. En effet, si $Z$ est de cardinal au plus $2$, on peut choisir $Z'$ de cardinal $3$ vérifiant $Z \subset Z' \subset Y$. Si l’on sait construire $(Z', \widehat F_{Z'}) \in {\mathcal}R$ vérifiant $(Z', \widehat F_{Z'}) {\preccurlyeq}(Y, \widehat F_Y)$, alors $Z'$ est fortement non enlacé (et $\widehat F_{Z'}$ est unique) et on peut donc trouver $(Z, \widehat F_Z) \in {\mathcal}R$ vérifiant $(Z, \widehat F_Z) {\preccurlyeq}(Z', \widehat F_{Z'}) {\preccurlyeq}(Y, \widehat F_Y)$. On considère donc $Z$ de cardinal supérieur ou égal à $3$. Deux cas se présentent.
Le **premier cas** est celui où $Z$ est un sous-ensemble fermé de $X$. Dans ce cas, puisque $(X,\widehat F_X)$ appartient à ${\mathcal}R'$, il existe $(Z,\widehat F_Z) \in {\mathcal}R$ vérifiant $(Z,\widehat F_Z) {\preccurlyeq}(X,\widehat F_X)$ et par transitivité $(Z,\widehat F_Z) {\preccurlyeq}(Y,\widehat F_Y)$.
Le **deuxième cas** est celui où $Z$ est de la forme $Z = Z_1 \cup \{y\}$ avec $Z_1$ sous-ensemble fermé de $X$. On note $C_{Z_1}$ la composante connexe de $N_{Z_1}$ qui contient $y$ et $C_Z = C_{Z_1} \setminus \{y\}$ . Comme précédemment, puisque $\bigl(X, \widehat F_X\bigr)$ appartient à ${\mathcal}R'$, on sait qu’il existe $(Z_1,\widehat F_{Z_1}) \in {\mathcal}R$ vérifiant $(Z_1,\widehat F_{Z_1}) {\preccurlyeq}(X, \widehat F_X) {\preccurlyeq}(Y,\widehat F_Y)$. La proposition \[Prop:MaximaFaible\] assure l’existence d’un relèvement $\bigl(Z, \widehat F_Z\bigr) \in {\mathcal}R$ vérifiant $\bigl(Z_1, \widehat F_{Z_1}\bigr) {\preccurlyeq}\bigl(Z, \widehat F_Z\bigr)$. On a vu qu’il y a en général unicité de ce relèvement sauf dans le cas particulier où $C_Z$ est homéomorphe à l’anneau et il faut alors choisir $\widehat F_Z$ convenablement. Soit $A \subset C_Y$ un anneau autour de $y$, de sorte que $A \cup \{y\}$ soit un disque. Lorsque $C_Z$ est homéomorphe à l’anneau, on choisit le revêtement $\widehat F_Z$ tel que les chemins contenus dans $A$ et associés à $\widehat F_Y$ (il en existe) soient associés à $\widehat F_Z$.
Il faut maintenant vérifier que l’on a $(Z, \widehat F_Z) {\preccurlyeq}(Y, \widehat F_Y)$. D’après la remarque \[Rem:R03\], il suffit de montrer que dans chaque composante de $N_Y$, il existe un chemin associé à $\widehat F_Y$ et $\widehat F_Z$. Plus précisément, il suffit de montrer ce résultat dans chaque composante connexe de $C_Z \cap N_X$. En effet, par construction de $\widehat F_Z$, dans les composantes connexes de $N_Z$ autres que $C_Z$, les chemins associés à $\widehat F_Z$ sont les chemins associés à $\widehat F_{Z_1}$ qui vérifie $(Z_1, \widehat F_{Z_1}) {\preccurlyeq}(Y, \widehat F_Y)$.
1. Intéressons-nous d’abord à la **composante connexe $U^*=C_X$ de $C_Z \cap N_X$** bordant $y$. Plusieurs cas se présentent :
1. si $C_Z$ est homéomorphe à l’anneau, on a choisi $\widehat F_Z$ de sorte que $U^*$ contienne un chemin adapté à $\widehat F_Y$ et à $\widehat F_Z$ ;
2. si $C_Z$ n’est pas homéomorphe à l’anneau, on considère un sous-ensemble fini $W_1 \subset Z_1$ de cardinal au moins 2 et on note $W = W_1 \cup \{y\}$. Considérons un anneau $A \subset N_Y$ autour de $y$ (tel que $A \cup \{y\}$ soit un disque). On sait qu’il existe un unique relèvement $(W, \widehat F_W) \in {\mathcal}R$ et que $A$ contient un chemin $\alpha$ associé à $\widehat F_W$.
Considérons tout d’abord l’inclusion $W \subset Z$ avec $W$ contenant $y$ isolé dans $Z$, $C_Z$ non homéomorphe à l’anneau, de même que la composante connexe de $N_W$ bordant $y$ (car $W_1$ est fini de cardinal au moins $2$). Le lemme \[Le:T2\] assure que $\alpha$ est associé à $\widehat F_Z$.
Considérons ensuite l’inclusion $W \subset Y$. D’après la proposition \[Prop:T3\], $\alpha$ est aussi associé à $\widehat F_Y$. On a obtenu un chemin $\alpha \in U^*$ associé à $\widehat F_Z$ et $\widehat F_Y$.
2. Intéressons-nous maintenant aux autres composantes connexes de $C_Z \cap N_X$ et choisissons donc une composante connexe $U$ de $C_Z \cap N_X$ autre que $U^*$. D’après la proposition \[PropDef:123\], il existe une isotopie restreinte $(Y,I_Y)$ associée à $\widehat F_Y$. Il faut montrer que $I_Y(z)$ est également associée à $\widehat F_Z$, pour un point $z \in U$.
Pour cela, considérons un point $w \in \partial U$ accessible par un arc simple $\beta$ à valeurs dans $U$ (voir figure \[Fig:RR\]). On considère de même un point $w' \in \partial U^*$ distinct de $w$ et accessible par un arc simple $\beta'$ à valeurs dans $U^*$ issu de $y$. Notons $W_1 = Z_1 \cup \{ w, w'\}$ et $W = Z \cup \{w,w'\} = Z_1 \cup \{w,w',y\}$. Puisque $(X, \widehat F_X)$ appartient à ${\mathcal}R'$, il existe $(W_1, \widehat F_{W_1}) \in {\mathcal}R$ vérifiant $(W_1, \widehat F_{W_1}) {\preccurlyeq}(X, \widehat F_X)$. La proposition \[Prop:MaximaFaible\] assure l’existence d’un relèvement $(W, \widehat F_W) \in {\mathcal}R$ vérifiant $\bigl(W_1, \widehat F_{W_1}\bigr) {\preccurlyeq}\bigl(W, \widehat F_{W}\bigr)$. Il existe comme précédemment une isotopie restreinte $(W, I_{W})$ associée à $(W, \widehat F_{W})$ (qui se prolonge en $(W_1, I_{W_1})$ associée à $\widehat F_{W_1}$).
Si $z \in \beta$ est suffisamment proche de $w$, alors les deux arcs $I_Y(z)$ et $I_{W}(z)$ sont disjoints de $\beta'$. On peut alors trouver un disque ouvert $D \subset N_X$ vérifiant $w' \in \partial D$ et $\beta' \subset \bigl(D \cup \{w'\}\bigr)$ et tel que $I_X(z)$ et $I_{W}(z)$ ne rencontrent pas $\overline D$. Or on a $(W_1, \widehat F_{W_1}) {\preccurlyeq}(X, \widehat F_X)$ donc $I_Y(z)$ est homotope dans $N_{W_1}$ à $I_{W}(z)$. Si $y' \in \beta'$ est suffisamment proche de $w'$, $I_Y(z)$ et $I_W(z)$ sont homotopes dans $N_{W_1} \setminus \{y'\}$. D’après le lemme \[Le:Alex\], les chemins $I_Y(z)$ et $I_W(z)$ sont donc homotopes à extrémités fixées dans $N_{W_1} \setminus \{y\} = N_W$. Or $I_W(z)$ est associé à $\widehat F_W$ donc $I_Y(z)$ l’est aussi. Ainsi, on a bien trouvé un chemin $I_Y(z)$ associé à $\widehat F_Y$ et $\widehat F_Z$ comme attendu.
Existence de relèvements maximaux {#sec:induc}
=================================
Suites croissantes de $({\mathcal}R, {\preccurlyeq})$
-----------------------------------------------------
Ce paragraphe est consacré à la démonstration des propositions \[Prop:existmax\] et [\[Prop:existmax\]’]{}. L’existence de relèvements maximaux dans $({\mathcal}R,{\preccurlyeq})$ repose sur le lemme de Zorn. L’essentiel des difficultés consiste à montrer la proposition suivante :
\[Prop:Zorn3\] Soit $F \in {\operatorname{Homeo}}_*(M)$ et soit $\bigl(X_n,\widehat F_n\bigr)_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}}$ une suite strictement croissante dans $({\mathcal}R,{\preccurlyeq})$. Alors la suite admet un majorant $\bigl(X_\infty,\widehat F_\infty\bigr) \in {\mathcal}R$ vérifiant $\displaystyle X_\infty = \overline{\bigcup_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}} X_n}$.
[ ]{}
Soit $F \in {\operatorname{Homeo}}_*(M)$ et soit $\bigl(X_n,\widehat F_n\bigr)_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}}$ une suite strictement croissante dans $({\mathcal}R',{\preccurlyeq})$. Alors la suite admet un majorant $\bigl(X_\infty,\widehat F_\infty\bigr) \in {\mathcal}R'$ vérifiant $\displaystyle X_\infty = \overline{\bigcup_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}} X_n}$.
Rappelons que l’on suppose donné $(X,\widehat F_X) \in {\mathcal}R$. On utilise le lemme de Zorn avec l’ensemble ${\mathcal}E$ des relèvements $\bigl(Y, \widehat F_Y\bigr) \in {\mathcal}R$ qui vérifient $\bigl(X, \widehat F_X\bigr) {\preccurlyeq}\bigl(Y, \widehat F_Y\bigr)$. On va donc montrer que ${\mathcal}R$ est inductif. Soit ${\mathcal}F = \bigl(Y_j,\widehat F_j\bigr)_{j \in J}$ une famille de ${\mathcal}E$ totalement ordonnée. Si ${\mathcal}F$ contient un élément maximal, la démonstration est achevée. Sinon, l’ensemble $Y = \bigcup\limits_{j \in J} Y_j$ est distinct de chaque $Y_j$ d’après la remarque \[Rem:R02\]. Comme $M$ est séparable, on peut trouver une suite croissante d’ensembles finis $(X_n)_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}}$ vérifiant : $$\bigcup_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}} X_n \;\subset\; Y
\qquad \text{et} \qquad
\overline{ \bigcup_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}} X_n } = \overline Y.$$ Or, ${\mathcal}F$ est totalement ordonnée. Pour tout entier $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$, comme $X_n$ est fini et contenu dans $Y$, il existe donc un ensemble $Y_{j_n}$ contenant $X_n$. Nous allons maintenant extraire de la suite $\bigl(Y_{j_n}, \widehat F_{j_n}\bigr)_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}}$ une sous-suite strictement croissante dans $({\mathcal}R, {\preccurlyeq})$.
Pour tout entier $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$, puisque $Y_{j_n}$ est distinct de $Y$, il existe un entier $m > n$ tel que l’on n’ait pas $X_m \subset Y_{j_n}$, ni *a fortiori* $Y_{j_m} \subset Y_{j_n}$. Comme ${\mathcal}F$ est totalement ordonnée, on en déduit $\bigl(Y_{j_n},\widehat F_{j_n}\bigr) {\preccurlyeq}\bigl(Y_{j_m},\widehat F_{j_m}\bigr)$ avec $Y_{j_n} \neq Y_{j_m}$. Il existe donc une sous-suite $\bigl(Y_{j_{\varphi(n)}},\widehat F_{j_{\varphi(n)}}\bigr)_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}}$ de la suite $\bigl(Y_{j_n},\widehat F_{j_n}\bigr)_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}}$, strictement croissante dans $({\mathcal}R,{\preccurlyeq})$. D’après la proposition \[Prop:Zorn3\], cette sous-suite est majorée par un élément de la forme $\bigl(\overline Y,\widehat F_\infty\bigr) \in {\mathcal}R$.
Il reste à vérifier que $\bigl(\overline Y,\widehat F_\infty\bigr)$ majore bien tous les éléments de ${\mathcal}F$. Soit $\bigl(Y', \widehat F'\bigr) \in {\mathcal}F$ un tel élément. Si on avait $X_n \subset Y'$ pour tout $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$, on aurait aussi $\overline Y \subset Y'$, ce dernier ensemble étant fermé. Comme ${\mathcal}F$ est totalement ordonnée, $\bigl(Y',\widehat F'\bigr)$ serait alors un élément maximal de ${\mathcal}F$, ce qui contredit l’hypothèse. Il existe donc un entier $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$ tel que l’on n’ait pas $X_n \subset Y'$ ce qui entraîne $\bigl(Y',\widehat F'\bigr) {\preccurlyeq}\bigl(Y_{j_n},\widehat F_{j_n}\bigr) {\preccurlyeq}\bigl(Y_\infty,\widehat F_\infty\bigr)$. Le relèvement $\bigl(Y_\infty,\widehat F_\infty\bigr)$ est bien un majorant de ${\mathcal}F$.
La démonstration est identique à celle de la proposition \[Prop:existmax\] en remplaçant ${\mathcal}R$ par ${\mathcal}R'$ et en utilisant la proposition [\[Prop:Zorn3\]’]{} au lieu de la proposition \[Prop:Zorn3\].
Nous allons maintenant démontrer la proposition \[Prop:Zorn3\]. Une partie de la preuve (le lemme \[Le:NP4\]) sera reportée au paragraphe suivant.
Introduisons l’ensemble $$X_\infty = \overline{\bigcup_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}} X_n} \qquad
\text{et son complémentaire $N_\infty = M \setminus X_\infty$.}$$ Le revêtement universel de $N_\infty$ est obtenu par réunion des revêtements universels de chaque composante connexe de $N_\infty$. De plus, M. Brown et J.M. Kister [@BK84] ont montré que $F$ fixe les composantes connexes de $N_\infty$. [^4] Il suffit donc de définir $\widehat F_\infty$ sur chaque composante connexe de $N_\infty$.
Plaçons-nous dans une composante connexe $N'_\infty$ de $N_\infty$. On peut alors écrire $N'_\infty$ comme la réunion d’une suite croissante de surfaces à bord, compactes et connexes : $N'_\infty = \bigcup_{n\in{\mathbb{N}}} M'_n$, par exemple parce que $M$ est dénombrable à l’infini et triangulable (théorème de Radó [@Rado25] ou [@Moise77] page 60) et tout compact rencontre un nombre fini de triangles. De plus, $M \backslash M'_n$ a toujours un nombre fini de composantes connexes. Ensuite, pour tout $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$, nous notons $M_n$ la réunion de $M'_n$ et des composantes connexes de $M \backslash M'_n$ qui ne rencontrent pas $X_\infty$. Ainsi, d’une part $N'_\infty$ est la réunion croissante des sous-variétés connexes à bord $M_n$, d’autre part chaque composante connexe de $M \backslash M_n$ rencontre $X_\infty$. Quitte à extraire une sous-suite, on peut également supposer $F(M_n) \subset M_{n+1}$.
Les composantes connexes de $M \setminus M_n$ sont en nombre fini et chacune intersecte $X_\infty$. Il existe donc une suite extraite $\left(X_{\varphi(n)}\right)_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}}$ telle que pour tout $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$, chaque composante connexe de $M \backslash M_n$ intersecte au moins un point de $X_{\varphi(n)}$. Pour éviter d’alourdir inutilement les notations, nous pouvons remplacer la suite $(X_n,\widehat F_n)$ par la suite $\left(X_{\varphi(n)},\widehat F_{\varphi(n)}\right)_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}}$ ou en d’autres termes supposer que les composantes connexes de $M \backslash M_n$ contiennent chacune au moins un point de $X_n$.
Pour tout $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$, on introduit également $N_n = M \backslash X_n$ et $\widehat\pi_n : \widehat N_n \rightarrow \nobreak N_n$ son revêtement universel. Enfin, on choisit arbitrairement un point de la pré-image de $M_0$ par $\widehat\pi_n$ et pour tout $m \in {\mathbb{N}}$, on note $\widehat M_m^n \subset \widehat N_n$ la composante connexe de la pré-image de $M_m$ par $\widehat\pi_n$ contenant ce point.
\[Rem:Msc\] Si $n \geq m$, la composante $\widehat M^n_m$ est une surface à bord dont les bords sont des droites (ou un cercle dans le cas particulier où $M_m$ est un disque). De fait, $\widehat M^n_m$ est simplement connexe. En effet, $\widehat N_n$ est simplement connexe et toutes les composantes connexes de $M \backslash M_m$ contiennent un point de $X_m$ et donc de $X_n$.
Nous avons vu précédemment que s’il existe un relèvement $(Y,\widehat F_Y) \in {\mathcal}R$, tout lacet de $N_Y$ est librement homotope à son image (proposition \[PropDef:123\]). Une première étape de la preuve de la proposition \[Prop:Zorn3\] sera de prouver le résultat *a priori* plus faible suivant que nous allons admettre momentanément.
\[Le:NP4\] Pour tout lacet $\Gamma \subset N'_\infty$, il existe une homotopie libre dans $N'_\infty$ entre $\Gamma$ et $F(\Gamma)$ qui, pour tout $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$, est associée à $\widehat F_n$.
Achevons la preuve de la proposition \[Prop:Zorn3\] et construisons le relèvement $\widehat F_\infty$. Choisissons un lacet $\Gamma \subset N'_\infty$ basé en un point $z \in N'_\infty$. D’après le lemme \[Le:NP4\], il existe une homotopie libre entre $\Gamma$ et $F(\Gamma)$ qui, pour tout $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$, soit associée à $\widehat F_n$. Notons $\alpha$ le chemin décrit par $z$ le long de cette homotopie. Nous allons montrer que ce chemin est adapté à $X_\infty$.
Pour cela, considérons un lacet $\gamma \subset N'_\infty$ basé en $z$. Il existe un entier $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$ tel que les lacets $\gamma$ et $F(\gamma)$ ainsi que le chemin $\alpha$ soient tous contenus dans $M_n$. Choisissons un relèvement $\widehat z_n \in \widehat M^n_n$ de $z$ à $\widehat N_n$. Alors les lacets $\gamma$ et $\alpha.F(\gamma).\alpha^{-}$ se relèvent en deux chemins issus de $\widehat z_n$ entièrement contenus dans $\widehat M_n$. Or $\alpha$, associé à $\widehat F_n$, est donc adapté à $X_n$ d’après la proposition \[Prop:PlusPrecis\]. Il en résulte que les lacets $\gamma$ et $\alpha.F(\gamma).\alpha^{-}$ sont homotopes dans $N_n$. Leurs relèvements dans $\widehat N_n$ d’origine $\widehat z_n$ ont donc même extrémité. Comme $\widehat M_n$ est simplement connexe d’après la remarque \[Rem:Msc\], ils sont homotopes dans $\widehat M_n$ à extrémités fixées. Cette homotopie se projette sur une homotopie dans $M_n$ donc dans $N'_\infty$ entre les lacets $\gamma$ et $\alpha.F(\gamma).\alpha^{-}$. Nous avons bien montré que $\alpha$ est adapté à $X_\infty$.
La proposition \[Prop:PlusPrecis\] assure l’existence de $\widehat F_\infty$ et le chemin $\alpha$ sera associé à $\widehat F_\infty$. Il reste à vérifier, pour tout $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$, la relation $(X_n,\widehat F_n) {\preccurlyeq}(X_\infty,\widehat F_\infty)$. Pour cela, considérons un entier $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$ ; des inclusions $$\begin{gathered}
\forall p \geq n \qquad X_p \subset \left( X_n \cup \widehat\pi_{X_n}( {\operatorname{Fix}}(\widehat F_n)) \right),\\
\text{on tire} \qquad\qquad
X_n \subset X_\infty \subset \left( X_n \cup \widehat\pi_{X_n}( {\operatorname{Fix}}(\widehat F_n)) \right).
\end{gathered}$$ Par ailleurs, le chemin $\alpha$ est associé à $\widehat F_\infty$ et à $\widehat F_n$, ce qui montre $(X_n,\widehat F_n) {\preccurlyeq}(X_\infty,\widehat F_\infty)$ grâce à la remarque \[Rem:R03\].
Il faut maintenant montrer que si l’on suppose que pour tout entier $n$ le relèvement $(X_n,\widehat F_n)$ appartient à ${\mathcal}R'$, alors $(X_\infty,\widehat F_\infty)$ que l’on vient de construire appartient lui aussi à ${\mathcal}R'$. Pour cela, considérons un sous-ensemble fermé $Y \subset X_\infty$. Il suffit de montrer que le chemin $\alpha$ est adapté à $Y$. En utilisant la proposition \[Prop:PlusPrecis\], on en déduira qu’il existe un relèvement $(Y, \widehat F_Y) \in {\mathcal}R$ et on pourra vérifier $(Y, \widehat F_Y) {\preccurlyeq}(X_\infty,\widehat F_\infty)$.
Soit un lacet $\Gamma \subset N_Y$ basé en $z$, origine de $\alpha$. Notons $\Delta$ le lacet $\alpha.F(\Gamma).\alpha^-$. Comme $\Delta$ est compact et $Y$ est fermé, on peut construire un voisinage compact de $\Delta$ qui ne rencontre pas $Y$ et qui est une variété à bord. Notons $M'$ la variété à bord obtenue en réunissant ce voisinage avec les composantes connexes de son complémentaire qui ne rencontrent pas $Y$. Remarquons que $M \setminus M'$ a un nombre fini de composantes connexes. On choisit un point $x_i \in \bigcup_{j \in {\mathbb{N}}} X_j$ dans chacune de ces composantes connexes ; on obtient une famille finie $(x_i)_{1 \leq i \leq p}$. Il existe donc $j_0 \in {\mathbb{N}}$ tel que $X_{j_0}$ contienne tous les $(x_i)_{1 \leq i \leq p}$. Comme $\alpha$ est adapté à $X_{j_0}$, les lacets $\Gamma$ et $\Delta$ sont homotopes dans $N_{j_0} = M \setminus X_{j_0}$.
Notons $\widehat\pi_{j_0} : \widehat N_{j_0} \to N_{j_0}$ le revêtement universel de $N_{j_0}$. Relevons $\Gamma$ à $\widehat N_{j_0}$ en un chemin $\widehat\Gamma$ et relevons ensuite $\Delta^-$ en $\widehat\Delta^-$ à partir de l’extrémité de $\widehat\Gamma$. Puisque $\Gamma$ et $\Delta$ sont homotopes dans $N_{j_0}$, $\widehat\Gamma.\widehat\Delta^-$ est un lacet. On note $\widehat M'$ la composante connexe de $\widehat\pi_{j_0}^{-1}(M')$ qui contient $\widehat\Gamma$. Par construction de $M'$ et de la famille $(x_i)_{1 \leq i \leq p}$, l’ensemble $\widehat M'$ est simplement connexe. Le lacet $\widehat\Gamma.\widehat\Delta^-$ est donc contractile dans $\widehat M'$. De plus, $\widehat M'$ ne rencontre pas la préimage par $\widehat\pi_{j_0}$ de $Y \setminus X_{j_0}$. Il en résulte que $\widehat\Gamma.\widehat\Delta^-$ est contractile dans la préimage de $N_Y$ donc $\Gamma.\Delta$ est contractile dans $N_Y$. On a montré, comme annoncé, que $\alpha$ est adapté à $Y$ d’où l’existence d’un relèvement $(Y, \widehat F_Y) \in {\mathcal}R$ d’après la proposition \[Prop:PlusPrecis\].
Nous voulons montrer $(Y, \widehat F_Y) {\preccurlyeq}(X_\infty, \widehat F_\infty)$. En utilisant la remarque \[Rem:R03\] sachant que $\alpha$ est adapté à $Y$ et à $X_\infty$, il reste à montrer : $$Y \subset X_\infty \subset \left( Y \cup \widehat\pi_Y({\operatorname{Fix}}(\widehat F_Y)) \right)$$ et plus précisément la seconde inclusion. Par continuité de $\widehat F_Y$, cela revient à montrer : $$\forall n \in {\mathbb{N}}\qquad X_n \subset \left( Y \cup \widehat\pi_Y({\operatorname{Fix}}(\widehat F_Y)) \right)$$
Considérons donc un entier $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$ et un point $x \in X_n \setminus (X_n \cap Y)$ et montrons $x \in \widehat\pi_Y({\operatorname{Fix}}(\widehat F_Y))$. Pour cela, considérons un chemin $\beta \subset N_Y$ de $z$ vers $x$ et le lacet $\gamma = \beta^-.\alpha.F(\beta)$ basé en $x$. On va faire le même raisonnement que ci-dessus. On commence par considérer un voisinage compact de $\gamma$ dans $N_Y$ et la variété à bord $M''$ obtenue en réunissant ce voisinage avec les composantes connexes de son complémentaire qui ne rencontrent pas $Y$. Dans chaque composante connexe de $M \setminus M''$, on choisit un point $x'_i \in \bigcup_{j \in {\mathbb{N}}} X_j$ et on obtient une famille finie $(x'_i)_{1 \leq i \leq p}$. On note $Y'$ l’ensemble des points $(x'_i)_{1 \leq i \leq p}$ et on choisit $m \geq n$ vérifiant $Y' \subset X_m$.
Puisque $(X_m, \widehat F_{X_m})$ appartient à ${\mathcal}R'$, il existe un relèvement $\widehat F_{Y'}$ vérifiant $\left( Y', \widehat F_{Y'}\right) {\preccurlyeq}\left(X_m, \widehat F_{X_m}\right)$. Soit $\widehat x' \in \widehat N_{Y'}$ un relevé de $x$. De $\left( Y', \widehat F_{Y'}\right) {\preccurlyeq}\left(X_m, \widehat F_{X_m}\right)$, on déduit $\widehat F_{Y'}(\widehat x') = \widehat x'$. Relevons $\beta$ et $\alpha$ à $\widehat N_{Y'}$ en $\widehat\beta$ d’extrémité $\widehat x'$ et $\widehat\alpha$ de même origine que $\widehat\beta$. Comme $\alpha$ est associé à $\widehat F_{Y'}$, le lacet $\gamma$ se relève à $\widehat N_{Y'}$ en $\widehat\gamma = \widehat\beta^-.\widehat\alpha.\widehat F_{Y'}(\widehat\beta)$ d’extrémité $\widehat F_{Y'}(\widehat x') = \widehat x'$. C’est donc un lacet et $\gamma$ est homotopiquement trivial dans $N_{Y'}$.
Enfin, remarquons comme précédemment que, par construction de $Y'$, la composante connexe $\widehat M''$ de $\widehat\pi_{Y'}^{-1}(M'')$ qui contient $\widehat\gamma$ est simplement connexe et ne rencontre pas la préimage de de $Y \setminus (Y \cap Y')$ par $\widehat\pi_{Y'}$. Ainsi $\widehat\gamma$ est contractile dans la préimage de $N_Y$ et $\gamma$ est contractile dans $N_Y$. Pour tout relevé $\widehat x \subset \widehat N_Y$ de $x$, on peut relever $\gamma$ en un lacet de $\widehat N_Y$ d’origine $\widehat x$. Comme $\alpha$ est associé à $\widehat F_Y$, on en déduit $\widehat F_Y(\widehat x) = \widehat x$ ce qui achève la démonstration.
Homotopie entre tout lacet et son image
---------------------------------------
Pour démontrer le lemme \[Le:NP4\], nous allons avoir besoin d’un lemme préliminaire.
\[Le:P5\] Soit $\Gamma\subset N'_{\infty}$ un lacet non contractile basé en un point $z \in M$. On se donne un entier $m$ suffisamment grand pour que les propriétés suivantes soient vérifiées :
- les lacets $\Gamma$, $F(\Gamma)$, $F^2(\Gamma)$ sont inclus dans $M_m$ ;
- il existe un chemin $\delta$ joignant $z$ à $F(z)$ tel que $\delta$ et $F(\delta)$ sont inclus dans $M_m$.
Alors il existe une homotopie libre $\phi_m$ de $\Gamma$ à $F(\Gamma)$ à support dans $M_m$ et associée à $\widehat F_m$.
Notons $\widehat G_m$ le groupe des automorphismes de revêtement du revêtement universel $\widehat\pi_m~: \widehat N_m\to N_m$. Considérons un relèvement $\widehat \Gamma$ de $\Gamma$ à $\widehat N_m$ issu d’un relevé $\widehat z\in \widehat M_m^m$ de $z$ et commençons par montrer que $\widehat\Gamma$ n’est pas un lacet.
Par l’absurde, si c’était le cas, alors $\widehat\Gamma$ serait un lacet contenu dans $\widehat M_m^m$ qui est simplement connexe d’après la remarque \[Rem:Msc\]. Ainsi $\Gamma$ serait contractile dans $M_m$, ce qui contredit les hypothèses du lemme. Ainsi $\widehat\Gamma$ n’est pas un lacet. Il en résulte que le chemin $\widehat \Gamma$ joint $\widehat z$ à un point de la forme $\widehat T(\widehat z)$, où $\widehat T\in\widehat G_m$ est distinct de l’identité.
Montrons maintenant que $\widehat F_m(\widehat \Gamma)$ est contenu dans $\widehat M_m^m$ et donc en particulier que $\widehat F_m(\widehat z)$ appartient à $\widehat M_m^m$. Par hypothèse, $\widehat \Gamma$ est inclus dans $\widehat M_m^m$. On en déduit que $\widehat T(\widehat z)\in \widehat M_m^m$, et donc que $\widehat T(\widehat M_m^m)= \widehat M_m^m$. Notons $\widehat \delta$ le relèvement de $\delta$ à $\widehat N_m$ d’extrémité $\widehat F_m(\widehat z)$. L’origine de $\widehat \delta$ s’écrit $\widehat S(\widehat z)$, où $\widehat S\in \widehat G_m$ (voir la partie gauche de la figure \[Fig:LemmeDouble\]). La composante connexe de $\widehat \pi^{-1}(M_m)$ qui contient $\widehat F_m(\widehat z)$ est donc $\widehat S(\widehat M_m^m)$. Nous allons supposer que $\widehat S(\widehat M_m^m)\not=\widehat M_m^m$ et aboutir à une contradiction.
Par hypothèse, nous savons que $\widehat F_m(\widehat \Gamma)$ est inclus dans $\widehat S(\widehat M_m^m)$. Puisque $\widehat F_m(\widehat \Gamma)$ joint $\widehat F_m(\widehat z)$ à $\widehat F_m\circ\widehat T(\widehat z)=\widehat T \circ \widehat F_m(\widehat z)$, on en déduit que $\widehat T$ stabilise $\widehat S(\widehat M_m^m)$. Pour les mêmes raisons, cet automorphisme stabilise également $\widehat S^2(\widehat M_m^m)$. En effet, $\widehat F_m^2(\widehat \Gamma)$ joint $\widehat F^2_m(\widehat z)$ à $\widehat F^2_m\circ\widehat T(\widehat z)=\widehat T \circ \widehat F^2_m(\widehat z)$ et est inclus dans une composante connexe de $\widehat \pi^{-1}(M_m)$ ; il faut montrer que c’est $\widehat S^2(\widehat M_m^m)$. Il suffit pour cela de remarquer que $\widehat F^2_m(\widehat z)$ appartient à $\widehat S^2(\widehat M_m^m)$. En effet, par hypothèse, on sait que $\widehat F_m(\widehat \delta)$ appartient à une composante connexe de $\widehat \pi^{-1}(M_m)$, que son origine $\widehat F_m\circ \widehat S(\widehat z)=\widehat S\circ \widehat F_m(\widehat z)$ est incluse dans $\widehat S^2(\widehat M_m^m)$ et que son extrémité est $\widehat F^2_m(\widehat z)$.
Puisque $M_m$ est une surface à bord, toute composante connexe $\gamma$ de la préimage $\pi_m^{-1}(\partial M_m)$ de la frontière de $M_m$ est une droite topologique proprement plongée dans $\widehat N_m$ et son stabilisateur dans $\widehat G_m$ est un groupe monogène infini $\widehat G(\gamma)$. De plus pour tout $\widehat U\in \widehat G_m$, s’il existe un entier $r\neq0$ tel que $\widehat U^r\in \widehat G(\gamma)$, alors $\widehat U\in\widehat G(\gamma)$. Ceci implique que si $\gamma'$ est une autre composante connexe de de $\pi_m^{-1}(\partial M_m)$, alors $\widehat G(\gamma)= \widehat G(\gamma')$ ou $\widehat G(\gamma)\cap \widehat G(\gamma') = \{{\operatorname{id}}_{\widehat N_m}\}$. Il existe une composante connexe $\widehat \alpha$ de la frontière de $ \widehat M_m^m$ qui sépare l’intérieur de $\widehat M_m^m$ de $\widehat S( \widehat M_m^m)$. On sait alors que $\widehat \beta= \widehat S(\widehat \alpha)$ est la composante connexe de la frontière de $\widehat S(\widehat M_m^m)$ qui sépare l’intérieur de $\widehat S(\widehat M_m^m)$ de $\widehat S^2( \widehat M_m^m)$. L’automorphisme $\widehat T$, stabilisant $\widehat M_m^m$ et $\widehat S( \widehat M_m^m)$, stabilise également $\widehat \alpha$. De même, puisqu’il stabilise $ \widehat S(\widehat M_m^m)$ et $\widehat S^2( \widehat M_m^m)$, il stabilise également $\widehat \beta$. De $\widehat T \neq {\operatorname{id}}_{\widehat N_m}$, on déduit $\widehat G(\alpha)= \widehat G(\beta)$.
Puisque $\widehat G(\beta)$ est l’image de $\widehat G(\alpha)$ par l’automorphisme intérieur $\widehat U\mapsto \widehat S\circ \widehat U\circ \widehat S^{-1}$, cet automorphisme laisse invariant $\widehat G(\alpha)$. Ainsi, si $\widehat U$ est un générateur de $\widehat G(\alpha)$, alors $\widehat S\circ \widehat U\circ \widehat S^{-1}$ en est également un, et on a donc $\widehat S\circ \widehat U = \widehat U\circ \widehat S$ ou $\widehat S\circ \widehat U = \widehat U^{-1}\circ \widehat S$ :
- dans le premier cas, Epstein a montré que $\widehat S$ et $\widehat U$ engendrent un groupe monogène infini ([@Epstein66], Lemma 4.3), ce qui n’est possible que si $\widehat S$ est dans $\widehat G(\alpha)$ ;
- dans le second cas, on obtient $\widehat U^{-1} = \widehat S \circ \widehat U \circ \widehat S^{-1}$ puis : $$\widehat U \circ \widehat S^2 = (\widehat U^{-1})^{-1} \circ \widehat S^2 = (\widehat S \circ \widehat U \circ \widehat S^{-1})^{-1} \circ \widehat S^2 = \widehat S \circ \widehat U^{-1} \circ \widehat S = \widehat S^2\circ \widehat U$$ et on peut conclure au même résultat.
La contradiction provient de ce que $\widehat S$ ne stabilise pas $\widehat\alpha$. On vient de montrer $\widehat S(\widehat M_m^m) = \widehat M_m^m$ et donc, comme annoncé, $\widehat F_m(\widehat z)$ est contenu dans $\widehat M_m^m$.
Poursuivons la démonstration : nous pouvons donc choisir un chemin $\widehat\eta$ de $\widehat z$ à $\widehat F_m(\widehat z)$ contenu dans $\widehat M_m^m$ qui se projette en un chemin $\eta$ de $z$ à $F(z)$ (voir la partie droite de la figure \[Fig:LemmeDouble\]). Le chemin $\widehat F_m(\widehat\Gamma)$ a pour origine $\widehat F_m(\widehat z)$ et pour extrémité $\widehat F_m \circ \widehat T(\widehat z)$ qui n’est autre que $\widehat T \circ \widehat F_m(\widehat z)$ extrémité de $\widehat T(\widehat\eta)$. On peut donc construire une homotopie libre $\widehat \phi_m$ entre $\widehat\Gamma$ et $\widehat F_m(\widehat\Gamma)$ telle que $\widehat z$ parcoure $\widehat\eta$ le long de l’homotopie. Cette homotopie $\widehat \phi_m$ se projette en une homotopie libre $\phi_m$ entre $\Gamma$ et $F_m(\Gamma)$. Comme $\widehat M_m^m$ est simplement connexe d’après la remarque \[Rem:Msc\], on peut choisir $\phi_m$ à support dans $M_m$. De plus, comme $\eta$ est associé à $\widehat F_m$, l’homotopie $\widehat \phi_m$ est associée à $\widehat F_m$ et à support dans $M_m$.
Considérons un lacet $\Gamma \subset N'_\infty$, non contractile dans $N'_\infty$, basé en un point $z \in N'_\infty$. On considère également un chemin $\delta$ de $z$ à $F(z)$ contenu dans $N'_\infty$. Il existe un entier $m \in {\mathbb{N}}$ tel que $\Gamma$, $F(\Gamma)$, $F^2(\Gamma)$, $\delta$ et $F(\delta)$ soient contenus dans $M_m$. On en déduit que $\Gamma$ n’est pas contractile dans $N_m$. D’après le lemme \[Le:P5\], pour tout $n \geq m$, il existe une homotopie libre $\phi_n$ de $\Gamma$ à $F(\Gamma)$ à support dans $N_\infty$ et associée à $\widehat F_n$. Considérons l’homotopie $\phi_m$ ; nous allons prouver qu’elle est associée à $\widehat F_n$ pour tout $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$.
Notons $\alpha_m = \phi_m(z)$. Le chemin $\alpha_m$ est associé à $\widehat F_m$ donc également associé à $\widehat F_n$ pour tout $n \leq m$ car la suite $\bigl(X_p, \widehat F_p\bigr)_{p \in {\mathbb{N}}}$ est croissante pour ${\preccurlyeq}$. Il en résulte que pour tout $n \leq m$, $\phi_m$ est associée à $\widehat F_n$.
Pour tout $n \geq m$, on choisit un relèvement $\widehat\Gamma_n \subset \widehat M_m^n$ de $\Gamma$ à $\widehat N_n$. Notons $\alpha_n = \phi_n(z)$. Ce chemin $\alpha_n$ est associé à $\widehat F_n$ donc à $\widehat F_m$, toujours d’après la relation d’ordre ${\preccurlyeq}$. D’après la remarque \[Rem:UniChAdapt\], $\alpha_n$ est homotope à $\alpha_m$ à extrémités fixées dans $N_m$. Il reste à montrer qu’ils sont en réalité homotopes dans $N'_\infty$.
Pour cela, considérons le lacet $\alpha_n.\alpha_m^-$. Notons $\widehat z$ un relèvement de $z$ au revêtement universel $\widehat N'_\infty$ de $N'_\infty$. Relevons le chemin $\alpha_n$ en un chemin $\widehat\alpha_n$ issu de $\widehat z$ puis $\alpha_m^-$ en un chemin $\widehat\alpha_m^-$ issu de l’extrémité de $\widehat\alpha_n$. Il existe un automorphisme $\widehat T$ du revêtement $\widehat\pi : \widehat N'_\infty \to N'_\infty$ tel que l’extrémité de $\widehat\alpha_n . \widehat\alpha_m^-$ soit $\widehat T(\widehat z)$. De même relevons $\Gamma$ en un chemin $\widehat\Gamma \subset \widehat N'_\infty$ d’origine $\widehat z$. Notons $\widehat U$ l’automorphisme du revêtement $\widehat\pi : \widehat N'_\infty \to N'_\infty$ envoyant l’origine de $\widehat\Gamma$ sur son extrémité.
On retrouve les arguments employés à la fin de la démonstration de la proposition [\[Prop:MaximaFaible\]’]{}. L’homotopie $\phi_n.\phi_m^-$, entre $\Gamma$ et lui-même, se relève en une homotopie entre le chemin $\widehat\Gamma$ et le chemin $\widehat T\bigl(\widehat\Gamma\bigr)$ d’extrémité $\widehat T \circ \widehat U (\widehat z)$. D’autre part, l’extrémité $\widehat U(\widehat z)$ de $\widehat\Gamma$ décrit $\widehat U(\widehat\alpha_n.\widehat\alpha_m^-)$ le long de l’isotopie et est donc envoyée sur $\widehat U \circ \widehat T(\widehat z)$. On en déduit $\widehat U \circ \widehat T = \widehat T \circ \widehat U$.
Si $N'_\infty$ n’est ni le tore, ni l’anneau, il en découle que $U$ et $T$ appartiennent à un même sous-groupe monogène du groupe des automorphismes de revêtement. Ce résultat perdure si $N'_\infty$ est l’anneau car le groupe des automorphismes de revêtement est alors monogène. Enfin, $N'_\infty$ ne peut être le tore car cela signifierait que $X_\infty$ est vide ce qui est impossible compte tenu des hypothèses de la proposition \[Prop:Zorn3\]. Finalement, il existe toujours $(k,l) \in {\mathbb{Z}}^2$ tel que $\widehat T^k = \widehat U^l$.
Cela signifie que $(\alpha_n.\alpha_m^-)^k$ est librement homotope à $\Gamma^l$ dans $N'_\infty$ donc dans $N_m$. Or le premier lacet est homotopiquement trivial dans $N_m$ tandis que le second ne l’est que si $l=0$ auquel cas $\widehat T$ est l’identité. On obtient alors que $\alpha_n$ et $\alpha_m$ sont homotopes dans $N'_\infty$ à extrémités fixées. Comme $\alpha_n$ est associé à $\widehat F_n$, $\alpha_m$ est également associé à $\widehat F_n$. D’après la remarque \[Rem:Associe\], $\phi_m$ est donc associée à $\widehat F_n$.
Lacets contractiles {#sec:contrac}
===================
L’objet de cette partie est la démonstration de la proposition \[PropTh:XyNonEnlace\]. Nous en donnerons une preuve topologique qui consiste à ramener le lacet contractile sur un point. Le cas le plus simple est celui où le lacet est entièrement contenu dans un disque de $N_X$ ; nous l’aborderons en premier avant de nous intéresser au cas général.
\[Le:PPhi\] Soit $D$ un disque topologique fermé de $M$.
Alors il existe une famille $(\phi^D_{x,x',s})_{(x,x',s) \in \mathring D \times \mathring D \times [0,1]}$ d’homéomorphismes de $M$ vérifiant :
1. l’application $(x,x',s) \mapsto \phi^D_{x,x',s}$ est continue de $\mathring D \times \mathring D \times [0,1]$ dans ${\operatorname{Homeo}}_*(M)$.
2. pour tout $(x,x',s) \in \mathring D \times \mathring D \times [0,1]$, la restriction $(\phi^D_{x,x',s})_{|M\setminus D}$ est l’identité de $M \setminus D$ ;
3. pour tout $(x,s) \in \mathring D \times [0,1]$, l’homéomorphisme $\phi^D_{x,x,s}$ est l’identité de $M$ ;
4. pour tout $(x,x') \in \mathring D \times \mathring D$, l’homéomorphisme $\phi^D_{x,x',0}$ est l’identité de $M$ ;
5. pour tout $(x,x') \in \mathring D \times \mathring D$, on a $\phi^D_{x,x',1}(x) = x'$.
Considérons un homéomorphisme $h : D \rightarrow \mathbb D$ entre $D$ et le disque unité fermé $\mathbb D$ de ${\mathbb{R}}^2$. Considérons ensuite l’homéomorphisme $k$ du disque unité ouvert $\mathring{\mathbb D}$ sur ${\mathbb{R}}^2$ défini par $k(z) = \tan\left(\frac\pi2 |z|\right) z$ pour tout $z \in \mathring{\mathbb D}$. Enfin, pour tout $u \in {\mathbb{R}}^2$, notons $t_u : x \mapsto x + u$ la translation affine de ${\mathbb{R}}^2$ de vecteur $u$. Pour tout $(x,x',s) \in \mathring D \times \mathring D \times [0,1]$, on définit $\phi^D_{x,x',s}$ par : $$\begin{cases}
(\phi^D_{x,x',s})_{| \mathring D} = h^{-1} \circ k^{-1} \circ
t_{s.(k\circ h(x')-k\circ h(x))} \circ k \circ h\\
(\phi^D_{x,x',s})_{| M \setminus \mathring D} = {\operatorname{id}}_{M \setminus \mathring D}.
\end{cases}$$ L’application $(\phi^D_{x,x',s})_{| \mathring D}$ est un homéomorphisme de $\mathring D$ qui se prolonge par continuité, ainsi que sa réciproque, en l’identité sur le bord $\partial D$ de $D$. On en déduit que l’on a bien défini un homéomorphisme $\phi^D_{x,x',s}$ de $M$. Grâce à la continuité de $(x,x',s) \mapsto (\phi^D_{x,x',s})_{| \mathring D}$, on obtient l’assertion 1. Les trois assertions suivantes sont faciles à vérifier. Enfin, un calcul rapide conduit à $(\phi^D_{x,x',1})_{| \mathring D}(x) = x'$ qui n’est autre que la dernière assertion.
\[Le:DisqueSuite\] Soit $D_N$ un disque topologique fermé d’une surface $N$, $x$ et $x'$ deux points de $D_N$, $\gamma$ et $\gamma'$ deux chemins de l’intérieur de $D_N$ d’origines $x$ et d’extrémités $x'$. Il existe une isotopie $J = (G_t)_{t \in [0,1]}$ de l’identité de $D_N$ à elle-même vérifiant :
1. $J$ est à support dans $D_N$ ;
2. pour tout $t \in [0,1]$, on a $G_t\circ\gamma(t) = \gamma'(t)$ ;
3. $J$ est homotope à extrémités fixées à l’isotopie identité relativement au complémentaire de $D_N$.
On utilise le lemme précédent et pour tout $t \in [0,1]$, on définit $G_t$ par : $$G_t = \phi^{D_N}_{\gamma(t),\gamma'(t),1}$$ L’application $H$ définie par : $$H(s,t) = \phi^{D_N}_{\gamma(t),\gamma'(t),s}$$ réalise bien une homotopie entre l’isotopie identité $H(0,t)$ et $G_t = H(1,t)$, relativement au complémentaire de $D_N$.
Dans le cas particulier où le lacet $\gamma = I(y)$ est contenu dans un disque fermé $D_N \subset N_X$, la proposition \[PropTh:XyNonEnlace\] est un corollaire immédiat du lemme \[Le:DisqueSuite\]. En effet, celui-ci assure l’existence d’une isotopie $J = (G_t)_{t \in [0,1]}$ de l’identité de $N_X$ à elle-même à support dans $D_N$ et vérifiant, pour tout $t \in [0,1]$, $G_t \circ \gamma(t) = y$. L’isotopie restreinte $(X,I')$ définie par $I' = J \circ I$ convient.
Le principe de la démonstration qui suit est de se ramener à ce cas particulier.
Notons $(X,I) \in {\mathcal}I$ sous la forme $I = (F_t)_{t \in [0,1]}$. Considérons le carré $K = [0,1]^2$ et un paramétrage $\theta_0 : [0,1] \to \partial K$ du bord de $K$ vérifiant $\theta_0(0) = \theta_0(1) = (0,0)$. Soit $\varphi : \partial K \to N_X$ définie par $\varphi \circ \theta_0(t) = F_t(y)$ pour tout $t \in [0,1]$. Comme $I(y)$ est un lacet, $\varphi$ est correctement définie et continue sur $\partial K$. De plus le lacet $I(y)$ est contractile, donc $\varphi$ se prolonge en une application $\varphi : K \rightarrow N_X$ continue (nous conservons la notation $\varphi$ après prolongement).
Pour tout $n \in {\mathbb{N}}$ avec $n \geq 2$, on peut découper le carré $K$ en $n^2$ « petits carrés » de côté $\frac1n$ de la forme $\left[ \frac an, \frac{a+1}n\right] \times \left[ \frac bn, \frac{b+1}n\right]$ avec $a \in {\mbox{$\{0,\ldots,n-1\}$}}$ et $b \in {\mbox{$\{0,\ldots,n-1\}$}}$. Comme $\varphi$ est continue sur le compact $K$, il existe un entier $n \geq 2$ tel que l’image par $\varphi$ de chacun des $n^2$ « petits carrés » soit contenue dans l’intérieur d’un disque topologique fermé de $M$. On choisit désormais une telle valeur de $n$ et on note $L$ la réunion des $n^2$ disques de $M$ associés.
Nous allons maintenant construire une famille décroissante $(K_i)_{0 \leq i \leq n^2}$ de sous-ensembles de $K$ telle que pour tout $i \in {\mbox{$\{0,\ldots,n^2-1\}$}}$, $K_i$ soit la réunion, qui est simplement connexe, de $n^2-i$ « petits carrés » fermés, définie de la façon suivante :
- on pose $K_0 = K$ ;
- soit $i \in {\mbox{$\{1,\ldots,n^2-1\}$}}$ ; supposons $K_{i-1}$ construit comme réunion de $n^2-i+1$ « petits carrés ». Parmi ces « petits carrés », on considère, parmi ceux contenant les points d’ordonnées maximales, celui qui contient les points d’abscisses maximales et on le note $C_i$. On note $K_i$ la réunion des $n^2-i$ « petits carrés » restants.
- en répétant ce procédé, on « enlève les petits carrés » un à un en commençant par les plus hauts et pour chaque ligne les plus à droite. On obtient nécessairement $K_{n^2-1} = \left[0,\frac1n\right] \times \left[0,\frac1n\right]$, seul « petit carré » contenant $\{(0,0)\}$, que l’on note $C_{n^2}$.
- on pose enfin $K_{n^2} = \{(0,0)\}$.
On construit de même une suite de paramétrages $(\theta_i)_{i \in [0,1]}$ avec $\theta_i : [0,1] \to \partial K_i$ du bord de $K_i$ de la façon suivante :
- $\theta_0$ a déjà été construit ;
- soit $i \in {\mbox{$\{1,\ldots,n^2-1\}$}}$ ; supposons $\theta_{i-1}$ construit. Il existe un segment $[a_i,b_i] \subset ]0,1[$ tel que la restriction $(\theta_{i-1})_{|[a_i,b_i]}$ soit à valeurs dans $ \partial C_i$ et $(\theta_{i-1})_{|[0,a_i[ \cup ]b_i,1]}$ soit à valeurs dans $\partial K_{i-1} \setminus \partial C_i$. On choisit $\theta_i : [0,1] \to \partial K_i$ de sorte que l’on ait $(\theta_{i-1})_{|[0,a_i[ \cup ]b_i,1]} = (\theta_i)_{|[0,a_i[ \cup ]b_i,1]}$ ;
- on pose enfin $\theta_{n^2}(t) = (0,0)$ pour tout $t \in [0,1]$.
Soit $i \in {\mbox{$\{1,\ldots,n^2\}$}}$. L’ensemble $\varphi(C_i)$ est contenu dans l’intérieur d’un disque topologique fermé $D_i$. Considérons les chemins $t \mapsto \theta_{i-1}(t)$ et $t \mapsto \theta_i(t)$ avec $t \in [a_i,b_i]$. Ces deux chemins ont même extrémité et même origine ; ils paramètrent chacun une partie de $\partial C_i$. Utilisons le lemme \[Le:PPhi\] et définissons l’isotopie $J^i = (G^i_t)_{t \in [0,1]}$ de l’identité de $N_X$ à elle-même par : $$\forall t \in [0,1] \qquad
G^i_t =
\phi^{D_i}_{\varphi\circ\theta_{i-1}(t),\varphi\circ\theta_i(t),1}$$ On obtient alors $G^i_t \circ \varphi \circ \theta_{i-1}(t) = \varphi \circ \theta_i(t)$ pour tout $t \in [0,1]$. Par récurrence immédiate, on trouve : $$\begin{aligned}
\forall t \in [0,1], \quad
&G^{n^2}_t \circ G^{n^2-1}_t \circ \ldots \circ
G^2_t \circ G^1_t \circ \varphi \circ \theta_0(t)
= \varphi \circ \theta_{n^2}(t)\\
\text{ou encore}\quad\forall t \in [0,1], \quad
&G^{n^2}_t \circ G^{n^2-1}_t \circ \ldots \circ
G^2_t \circ G^1_t \circ F_t(y) = y.\end{aligned}$$ Définissons l’isotopie restreinte $(X,I')$ en posant $I' = J^{n^2} \circ \ldots \circ J^1 \circ I$. L’équation précédente assure que $I'$ fixe $y$ et se met bien sous la forme $I' = J \circ I$ avec $J$ à support dans $L$.
[^1]: Lycée François I$^{\text{er}}$, 11 rue Victor Hugo 77300 Fontainebleau, `[email protected]`
[^2]: Cette notion d’homotopie est souvent désignée par *homotopie relativement aux extrémités*.
[^3]: Dans le cas où $N_X$ n’est pas connexe, il faut disposer d’un chemin adapté par composante connexe pour construire le relèvement $\widehat F$. Si c’est le cas, la construction est possible et le relèvement obtenu commute avec les automorphismes du revêtement universel $\widehat\pi_X : \widehat N_X \rightarrow N_X$.
[^4]: Dans le cas particulier qui nous intéresse, on peut redémontrer ce résultat facilement. En effet, supposons par l’absurde qu’il existe un point $x \in N_\infty$ tel que $x$ et $F(x)$ soient dans deux composantes distinctes $U$ et $V$ de $N_\infty$. On peut alors choisir trois arcs disjoints (sauf en $x$) dans $U \cup X_\infty$ de $x$ vers trois points de $X_\infty$ dont l’ordre cyclique détermine l’orientation près de $x$. Les images dans $V \cup X_\infty$ de ces arcs déterminent une orientation opposée près de $F(x)$ ce qui contredit que $F$ préserve l’orientation.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- |
\
Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands\
E-mail:
title: The ridge laboratory
---
Introduction
============
One of the most interesting results obtained in measurements of heavy-ion collisions at RHIC is the existence of the so-called “ridge” [@star-ridge]. For a trigger hadron of relatively high transverse momentum, the angular correlation with associated hadrons on the same side in central heavy-ion collisions can be described as a two-component structure:
- a narrow peak symmetric in $\Delta \phi$ and $\Delta \eta$ similar in strength and shape to correlation structures in p+p collisions interpreted as originating from jets and
- an enhancement narrow in $\Delta \phi$ but broad in $\Delta \eta$ (the ridge).
![Yield of particles associated with a high $p_T$ trigger hadron as a function of $\Delta \phi$ and $\Delta \eta$ in central Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV/nucleon as measured by the STAR experiment [@star-ridge].[]{data-label="fig:ridge"}](ridge-color-2.eps){width="80.00000%"}
An example of a correlation function as measured by the STAR experiment is shown in Fig. \[fig:ridge\]. Findings related to the ridge phenomenon are:
1. It persists up to very large momenta of the trigger particle ($p_T \approx 8 \, \mathrm{GeV}/c$), suggesting a jet-related origin.
2. The shape shows a very weak decrease with increasing $\Delta \eta$ and is consistent with a constant for $\Delta \eta < 1.8$. This large range in pseudorapidity requires the correlation to be generated at very early times, when the different rapidity regions are still causally connected.
3. The momentum distribution of the ridge-associated particles is very similar to that of the bulk of produced particles (or underlying event) and as such different from the distribution of particles associated with the jet-like peak.
There are observations of similar correlation structures for particles of lower momentum, which do not appear to allow a similar, simple separation into a jet-peak and a ridge [@star-minijet]. It is still under discussion how closely these two phenomena may be related. In what follows I will mostly relate to the properties of the former (hard ridge) and not so much discuss possible explanations for the latter (soft ridge). Also, recently the PHOBOS experiment has reported a semi-soft ridge to exist still for a pseudorapidity separation of $\Delta \eta \approx 4$ [@phobos-ridge].
Mechanisms for ridge generation
===============================
The phenomenology of the ridge suggests that there exists a correlation in $\Delta \phi$ between a hadron from jet fragmentation with a part of the bulk matter spread out in rapidity. Different mechanism leading to the ridge have been discussed in the literature, but none has so far been clearly identified.
In [@voloshin-ridge1] it is first discussed qualitative that transverse flow effects may lead to correlations in rapidity, but no quantitative estimates are given. According to [@dumitru-ridge; @gavin-ridge2] quantum fluctuations extending over a large range in rapidity from glasma flux tubes may be responsible. Here superimposed effects of transverse flow lead to angular correlations. [@gavin-ridge] discusses in particular the interplay of viscosity and transverse flow. These investigations [@dumitru-ridge; @gavin-ridge2; @gavin-ridge] are intended as an explanation for the “soft ridge”, and will likely not explain the structure associated with a high $p_T$ trigger particle. In [@ma-ridge] attempts are made to explain the ridge as longitudinal broadening of jets. The obtained width is however too narrow to explain the observations.
Ref. [@shuryak-ridge] introduces a simple model to estimate the correlations arising from the simultaneous effects of parton energy loss and transverse flow. It relies on the fact that from energy loss the hard-scattered parton providing the trigger particle has a directional bias. The spatial position of the hard scattering will be close to the surface and the direction of emission will be focused along the outgoing radial direction. Simple parameterizations for the distribution of the hard scattering points $P_{prod}$ assuming collision scaling (eq. 2 in the paper) and the quenching probability $P_{quench}$ assuming a simple exponential damping with a characteristic quenching length $l_{abs}$ (eq. 3) are given. The product $P_{trig}(r,\phi_1) \equiv P_{prod} \cdot P_{quench}$ then describes the distribution of source points and emission angles of the observable trigger particles. Figure \[fig1\] shows on the left the distributions for a typical quenching length ($l_{abs} = 0.5 \, \mathrm{fm}$) studied in [@shuryak-ridge].[^1] The source points are very strongly biased to the surface and the partons are strongly focussed in emission angle in this case. As mentioned in the paper, this focussing is the origin of the azimuthal angle correlation of the ridge structure in this model. It is argued in the paper that bulk matter (originating from flux tubes, strings etc.) produced around the point of hard scattering shows a similar direction bias as the trigger from radial flow. The results given in [@shuryak-ridge] show still a too large angular width, which already calls for additional mechanisms to reproduce the data. Moreover, the absorption length of $l_{abs} = 0.5 \, \mathrm{fm}$ leads to a much stronger inclusive suppression ($R_{AA} \approx 0.01$) than observed experimentally. More realistic values of $R_{AA}$ are obtained with absorption lengths of the order of $l_{abs} \approx 3 \, \mathrm{fm}$. For such parameter values the angular correlation would be much weaker, as is mentioned in [@shuryak-ridge]. In addition, bulk matter elements at all possible emission angles $\phi_2$ should have similar yield of particles as illustrated in Figure \[fig1\] in the center, while a visible correlation structure in $\Delta \phi = \phi_1 - \phi_2$ as claimed in [@shuryak-ridge] would need a higher yield at small relative angles. In fact, the hard scattering will take away some energy from the volume element in question, which would rather translate to a reduced yield from the bulk at small relative angles. This makes it unlikely that this model by itself can explain the ridge correlation.
However, there is a natural mechanism, which can enhance the bulk matter. The energy loss of the parton is likely to be deposited in the bulk system leading to a boost or thermal enhancement and in consequence to a larger yield at the same angle visible as a correlation structure (see Figure \[fig1\] right).
![Left: Distribution of number of triggers from hard scatterings as a function of their radial position $R$ and emission angle $\phi_1$ relative to the surface normal following the prescription of [@shuryak-ridge]. Also indicated is the expected inclusive suppression factor $R_{AA}$. Center and right: Illustration of angular emission patterns of jet and bulk as discussed in the text.[]{data-label="fig1"}](jet-flow.eps){width="\textwidth"}
Such an interaction of jets with the medium is used by another class of models, e.g. via momentum kicks (i.e. elastic energy loss) [@wong-ridge] or via gluon radiation enhancing the thermal medium [@hwa-ridge]. We will not discuss those mechanisms in detail here, but both models seem to explain many aspects of the experimental phenomena. If these, or similar explanations are valid this would make the ridge a very useful tool to study the jet-medium interaction. There is, however, a limit in the possible rapidity range for such model where the correlation is created by final state interactions, as I will discuss below.
In [@voloshin-ridge2] the authors estimate effects of collective flow on jets. Quantitatively this leads to interesting results, but the major assumption of the calculations, maximal coupling of jets to collective flow is certainly questionable. It is very briefly discussed how jets may obtain e.g. transverse flow. One of the possible mechanisms given, initial state $k_T$ broadening, does not lead to *collective* flow – so no space-momentum correlations. Another mechanism mentioned relates to radial colour fields. Those should be delayed relative to longitudinal fields [@fries-color] and should thus only act on partons after the hard scattering. While the fragmentation of a jet is certainly modified by such final state effects (like e.g. parton energy loss), it is unlikely that it will so strongly influence the higher $p_T$ fragments, which appear to emerge like in vacuum fragmentation.
A large extent in rapidity can naturally be explained by initial state effects. Mechanisms have to provide some coupling between a hard scattered parton and the underlying event. Brodsky has proposed [@brodsky] that the directional bias in initial $k_T$ of the parton one gets from using a high $p_T$ trigger should also be reflected in a similar bias in the DGLAP radiation of that parton. The latter radiation would be distributed over a broad range in rapidity, possibly interact with the matter present and turn into hadrons leading to the ridge. As for all such initial state effects one would expect a direct photon trigger to be accompanied by a similar correlation, while for final state mechanisms photons should have a strongly reduced correlation.
In principle, Fermi motion of the nucleons could introduce a similar effect. Here a directional bias of the hard scattered partons would also be carried by the spectator partons in the same nucleon, which should contribute to the bulk matter. However, the small magnitude of Fermi momentum may be insufficient to produce a strong enough effect.
Time scales and rapidity range
==============================
A limit on the time when the correlation can be last introduced is given in [@dumitru-ridge]. For two particles freezing out at $\tau_{\mathrm{fo}}$ to be causally related with a rapidity separation $2 \Delta y$, the process responsible has to happen at a time: $$\tau < \tau_{\mathrm{fo}} \cdot \exp\left(- \Delta y \right).
\label{eq1}$$ For the symmetric case of two (soft) particles both emitted from the same mechanism as discussed in [@dumitru-ridge] $\Delta y$ corresponds to half the rapidity difference between the two. If one deals with a hard parton defining the rapidity of the trigger particle and emitting another particle (e.g. a gluon) which then creates the associated hadron $\Delta y$ would just be the rapidity difference between those.[^2] This limit does, however, not take into account transverse degrees of freedom. In particular mechanisms involving energy transfer from a high-energy parton to the bulk will involve particles (e.g. radiated gluons) carrying transverse momentum. If their longitudinal velocity is just a fraction $\beta_L < 1$, the correlation cannot stretch out as far in rapidity. An analog estimate to eq. \[eq1\] yields: $$\tau < \tau_{\mathrm{fo}} \cdot \left[ \exp\left(- \Delta y \right) - \frac{1-\beta_L}{\beta_L} \sinh\left(\Delta y \right) \right].
\label{eq2}$$ The requirement for final state effects $\tau>0$ then yields a limited rapidity range, which is just the rapidity of the emitted gluon in the longitudinal rest frame of the hard scattered parton: $$\Delta y_{max} \approx \frac{1}{2} \ln \left( \frac{1 + \beta_L}{1-\beta_L} \right).
\label{eq3}$$ For an emission angle of e.g. $60^{\circ}$ the maximum rapidity range of the correlation would already only be of the order of $\Delta y_{max} \approx 1.3$. As gluons reaching to the higher rapidities would have less transverse momentum, one should in addition expect a decrease of the strength of the correlation with increasing rapidity difference. The STAR data do not completely rule out such a dependence – a careful analysis of this dependence will be very interesting. But it is difficult to explain a correlation at $\Delta y \approx 4$ as observed by PHOBOS [@phobos-ridge] with such mechanisms.
Conclusions
===========
There exists at present no theoretical model quantitatively explaining all experimental observations related to the ridge. Models using final state interactions must run into the constraints of causality, which will limit the rapidity range and should also lead to a decrease of the correlation strength for larger rapidity difference. However, if these can be shown to be responsible for the effect (or some part of it), the ridge would provide an interesting laboratory to study both parton energy loss and properties of the bulk matter. The strength of the correlation should be a measure of the amount of energy loss. Furthermore, the associated particles in the ridge represent a sample of the bulk from a relatively well defined region of the fireball with probably slightly higher temperature and/or velocity. So all studies of the thermal properties – certainly hadrochemical composition and inverse slopes for different species, more speculatively also photon and charm production – of this matter may be studied in a controlled way.
Models involving initial state correlations are free from the limitations imposed by interaction time scales, so they could extend over the entire rapidity range. Such models still have to be quantified and compared to experimental data.
A number of additional tests should be performed:
- For initial state mechanisms one would expect the ridge structure to be also present for photon triggers, while it should be strongly reduced in this case for models built on parton energy loss.
- Dijet events should have different sensitivity for the structure – for final state mechanisms because of their different surface bias and for initial state mechanisms because of the approximate momentum balance.
- Heavy quark triggers should also show a difference for final state models. A slightly weaker correlation would be expected. May be the dead-cone effect in gluon radiation would even lead to a more complicated angular substructure of the correlation.
For LHC this will certainly remain an interesting topic. The larger accessible rapidity range should make the discrimination of initial and final state effects clearer. The larger background from the increased multiplicity will make such studies more difficult, but at the same time, the much larger dynamic range in $p_T$ and higher yield for hard scattered partons will be advantageous.
[ *I’d like to thank the organisers for the stimulating workshop. Fruitful discussions with S. Brodsky and T. Renk are gratefully acknowledged.*]{}
[99]{} J. Putschke et al. (STAR Collaboration), *J.Phys.G* [**34**]{} (2007) S679; \[[arXiv:nucl-ex/0701074]{}\]. J. Adams et al. (STAR Collaboration), *J.Phys.G* [**32**]{} (2006) L37. E. Wenger et al. (PHOBOS Collaboration), *J.Phys.G* [**35**]{} (2008) 104080; \[[arXiv:0804.3038]{}\]. S.A. Voloshin, *Phys.Lett. B* [**632**]{} (2006) 490; \[[arXiv:nucl-th/0312065]{}\]. A. Dumitru et al., *Nucl.Phys.A* [**810**]{} (2008) 91; \[[arXiv:0804.3858]{}\]. S. Gavin, L. McLerran, and G. Moschelli (2008) \[[arXiv:0806.4366]{}\]. S. Gavin and G. Moschelli, *J.Phys.G* [**35**]{} (2008) 104084; \[[arXiv:0806.4366]{}\]. G.L. Ma et al., *Eur.Phys.J.C* [**57**]{} (2008) 589; \[[arXiv:0807.3987]{}\]. E. Shuryak, *Phys. Rev. C* [**76**]{} (2007) 047901; \[[arXiv:0706.3531]{}\]. C.Y. Wong (2009) \[[arXiv:0901.0726]{}\]. C.B. Chiu and R.C. Hwa (2009) \[[arXiv:0809.3018]{}\]. C.A. Pruneau, S. Gavin, and S.A. Voloshin, *Nucl.Phys.A* [**802**]{} (2008) 107; \[[arXiv:0711.1991]{}\]. R.J. Fries, J.I. Kapusta, and Y. Li (2006) \[[arXiv:nucl-th/0604054]{}\]. S. Brodsky, these proceedings.
[^1]: In the presentation at the workshop erroneous estimates of the inclusive suppression have been used - this is corrected here.
[^2]: In the first case both particles can move longitudinally with respect to their common origin, while in the second the associated particle can move longitudinally relative to the trigger.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We give a general theoretical description of electro-osmotic flow at striped super-hydrophobic surfaces in a thin double layer limit, and derive a relation between the electro-osmotic mobility and hydrodynamic slip-length tensors. Our analysis demonstrates that electro-osmotic flow shows a very rich behavior controlled by slip length and charge at the gas sectors. In case of uncharged liquid-gas interface, the flow is the same or inhibited relative to flow in homogeneous channel with zero interfacial slip. By contrast, it can be amplified by several orders of magnitude provided slip regions are uniformly charged. When gas and solid regions are oppositely charged, we predict a flow reversal, which suggests a possibility of huge electro-osmotic slip even for electro-neutral surfaces. On the basis of these observations we suggest strategies for practical microfluidic mixing devices. These results provide a framework for the rational design of super-hydrophobic surfaces.'
author:
- 'Aleksey V. Belyaev'
- 'Olga I. Vinogradova'
bibliography:
- 'electroosmos.bib'
title: 'Electro-osmosis on anisotropic super-hydrophobic surfaces'
---
[**Introduction.**]{}– Electro-osmotic (EO) “plug” flows are established when an electric field forces the diffuse ionic cloud adjacent to a charged surface in an electrolyte solution into motion. This classical subject of colloid science [@lyklema1995] is currently experiencing a renaissance in micro- and nanofluidics [@stone2004; @eijkel.jct:2005], which raises fundamental question of how to pump and mix fluids at micron scales, where pressure-driven flows and inertial instabilities are suppressed by viscosity. Electro-osmosis offers unique advantages in this area of research and technologies, such as low hydrodynamic dispersion, no moving parts, electrical actuation and sensing, energy conversion and storage, and easy integration with microelectronics.
Until recently, almost all studies of EO have assumed uniform surface charge and no-slip hydrodynamic boundary conditions at the surface. In such a situation the *scalar* electro-osmotic mobility $M_1$, which relates an apparent EO “slip” velocity $\textbf{\emph{U}}_1$ (outside of the *thin* double layer) to the tangential electric field $\textbf{\emph{E}}_t$ is given by the classical Smoluchowski formula [@anderson.jl:1989]
$$\label{smoluchovsky}
M_1 =-\frac{ U_1}{E_t}=\frac{ q_1}{\eta \kappa},$$
where $\eta$ is the viscosity of the solution, $ q_1$ is the *constant* charge density of the no-slip surface, which can be related to the zeta potential across the diffuse (flowing) part of the double layer, $\zeta_1=q_1/\kappa\varepsilon$, where $\varepsilon$ is the permittivity of the solution, and $\kappa=\lambda_D^{-1}$ is the inverse Debye screening length, that characterizes the thickness of the electrical Debye layer (EDL).
Recent studies demonstrated the existence of a hydrodynamic slip at hydrophobic smooth and homogeneous surface, which can be quantified by the slip length $b$ (the distance within the solid at which the flow profile extrapolates to zero) [@vinogradova1999; @lauga2005]. The combination of the strategies of EO and hydrophobic slip, can yield enhanced EO flow.
For a charge density $q_2$ of the slipping interface, simple arguments show that the EO mobility is given by [@muller.vm:1986; @joly2004]: $$\label{isotropic}
M_2 =-\frac{ U_2}{E_t} = \frac{q_2}{\eta \kappa} (1 + b \kappa)$$ Since the EO flow amplification scales as $(1+b\kappa)$, and $b$ can be of the order of tens of nanometers [@vinogradova:03; @charlaix.e:2005; @joly.l:2006; @vinogradova.oi:2009], for typically nanometric Debye length an order of magnitude enhancement might be expected.
![(Color online) (a) Sketch of the superhydrophobic effective slippage effect on the EO flow. The real situation is approximated by a periodic cell of size $L$, with patterns of charges and flow boundary conditions (b) Illustration of tensorial EO response: $\theta = \pi/2$ corresponds to transverse, whereas $\theta = 0$ to longitudinal stripes.[]{data-label="fig:geometry"}](fig1_belyaev.eps){width="8.5"}
It is now natural to assume that a massive amplification of EO flow can be reached on super-hydrophobic surfaces where effective, in general case tensorial, slip length, $\mathbf{b}_{\rm eff}$, could be the order of several microns [@ou2005; @joseph.p:2006; @tsai.p:2009]. The controlled generation of such flows is by no means obvious, since both the slip length and the electric charge distribution on a SH surface are inhomogeneous and often anisotropic. Despite its fundamental and practical significance EO flow over SH surfaces has received little attention. Recently, [@Squires08] investigated EO flow past inhomogeneously charged, flat SH surfaces in the case of thick channels ($h \gg L$), thin EDL ($\kappa L \gg 1$), and predicted
$${\bf M} = M_1\cdot\left(\mathbf{I} + \frac{q_2}{q_1} {\bf b}_{\rm eff} \kappa \right)
\label{squires}$$
by using the Lorentz reciprocal theorem for the Stokes flow and by assuming *perfect* slip ($b = \infty$) at gas sectors. Here $\mathbf{I}$ is the unit tensor, and we keep notations, $q_1$ and $q_2$, to characterize the surface charge density at the no-slip and slip regions, as above. This expression indicates negligible flow enhancement in case of an uncharged liquid-gas interface (which has been confirmed by later studies [@Huang08; @bahga:2009]), and shows that surface anisotropy generally leads to a *tensorial* EO response.
In this Letter, a general situation of EO flow past SH surfaces with patterns of arbitrary *partial* slip, is considered (Fig.\[fig:geometry\]). Our focus is on the canonical EO geometry of a thick parallel-plate channel with a two-component (no-slip and slip) coarse texture, varying on scales larger than the EDL thickness.
[**General theory.**]{}– To highlight the effect of anisotropy, we focus on an idealized, flat, periodic, charged, striped SH surface in the Cassie state, sketched in Fig. \[fig:geometry\], where the liquid-solid interface has no slip ($b_1=0$) and the liquid-gas interface has partial slip ($b_2=b,\,\, 0 \le b \le \infty $). As a simple estimate, lubricating gas sectors of height $e$ with viscosity $\eta_g$ much smaller than $\eta$ [@vinogradova.oi:1995d] have a local slip length $b_2 \approx e
(\eta/\eta_g) \approx 50\, e$, which can reach tens of $\mu$m. Let then $\phi_1$ and $\phi_2=\delta/L$ be the area fractions of the solid and gas phases with $\phi_1+\phi_2=1$. Pressure-driven flow past such stripes has been shown to depend on the direction of the flow, and the eigenvalues of the slip-length tensor [@Bazant08] read [@belyaev.av:2010a] $$\label{beff_par_largeH}
b_{\rm eff}^{\parallel} \simeq \frac{L}{\pi} \frac{\ln\left[\sec\left(\displaystyle\frac{\pi \phi_2}{2 }\right)\right]}{1+\displaystyle\frac{L}{\pi b}\ln\left[\sec\displaystyle\left(\frac{\pi \phi_2}{2 }\right)+\tan\displaystyle\left(\frac{\pi \phi_2}{2}\right)\right]},$$ $$\label{beff_ort_largeH}
b_{\rm eff}^{\perp} \simeq \frac{L}{2 \pi} \frac{\ln\left[\sec\left(\displaystyle\frac{\pi \phi_2}{2 }\right)\right]}{1+\displaystyle\frac{L}{2 \pi b}\ln\left[\sec\displaystyle\left(\frac{\pi \phi_2}{2 }\right)+\tan\displaystyle\left(\frac{\pi \phi_2}{2}\right)\right]}.$$ These expressions depend strongly on a texture period $L$. When $b/L \ll 1$ they predict the area-averaged isotropic slip length, $b_{\rm eff}^{\perp, \parallel} \simeq \phi_2 b$. When $b/L \gg 1$, expressions (\[beff\_par\_largeH\]) and (\[beff\_ort\_largeH\]) take form $$\label{beff_ort_largeH_id}
b_{\rm eff}^{\perp} \simeq \frac{L}{2 \pi} \ln\left[\sec\left(\displaystyle\frac{\pi \phi_2}{2 }\right)\right],\quad b_{\rm eff}^{\parallel}\simeq2 b_{\rm eff}^{\perp},$$ that coincides with results obtained for the perfect slip ($b = \infty$) stripes [@lauga.e:2003].
The EO mobility is represented by $2 \times 2$ matrices diagonalized by a rotation [@bahga:2009]. By symmetry, the eigen-directions of $\mathbf{M}$ correspond to longitudinal ($\theta=0$) and transverse ($\theta=\pi/2$) alignment with the applied electric field (Fig. \[fig:geometry\]), so we need only to compute the eigenvalues, $M^{\parallel}$ and $M^\perp$, for these cases.
We consider a semi-infinite electrolyte in the region $y>0$ above a patterned surface at $y=0$ subject to an electric field, $\textbf{\emph{E}}_t=E_t \hat{\textbf{\emph{x}}}$, in the $x$ direction. For nano-scale patterns ($L < 1\mu$m), we can neglect convection ($Pe \ll 1$ for a typical ionic diffusivity $D$), so that $\psi(x,y,z)$ is independent of the fluid flow [@epaps]. We also assume weak field ($|E_t| L \ll |\psi|$) and weakly charged surface ($|\psi|\ll k_B T/ (z e) = 25/z$ mV) for a $z:z$ electrolyte, so that $\psi$ satisfies the Debye-Hückel equation with a boundary condition of prescribed surface charge, $$\label{PB_DH}
\nabla^2 \psi = \kappa^2 \psi,\quad \varepsilon\: \partial_y \psi = - q(x,0,z)$$ The fluid flow satisfies Stokes’ equations with an electrostatic body force $$\label{Stokes}
\eta \nabla^2 \textbf{\emph{u}} = \nabla p+\varepsilon \kappa^2 \psi E_t \hat{\textbf{\emph{x}}}, \quad \nabla \cdot \textbf{\emph{u}}=0,$$ with the boundary conditions at $y=0$ $$\label{BCel}
\textbf{\emph{u}}_t = b(x,z) \partial_y \textbf{\emph{u}}_t, \quad \hat{\textbf{\emph{y}}}\cdot \textbf{\emph{u}}=0,$$ where $\textbf{\emph{u}}_t = u \hat{\textbf{\emph{x}}} + w \hat{\textbf{\emph{z}}}$ is the lateral, and $ v = \hat{\textbf{\emph{y}}}\cdot \textbf{\emph{u}}$ is normal to the surface velocities. We also neglect surface conduction (which tends to reduce EO flow) compared to bulk conduction ($Du \ll 1$) [@epaps]. Far from the surface, $y\rightarrow\infty$, $ \textbf{\emph{u}}$ approaches EO slip velocity $\textbf{\emph{U}}=-\mathbf{M}\cdot \textbf{\emph{E}}_t$ and $$\label{BCv}
\psi\rightarrow 0, \quad \partial_y \textbf{\emph{u}}\rightarrow 0.$$ For a longitudinal configuration only velocity component parallel to $\textbf{\emph{E}}_t=E_t \hat{\textbf{\emph{x}}}$ remains. In case of transverse to applied field stripes, normal velocity $v \cdot \hat{\textbf{\emph{y}}}$ does not vanish due to mass conservation condition in (\[Stokes\]), which can significantly modify the EO flow. Rigorous calculations [@epaps] allow one to find exact solutions for $U^{\parallel,\perp}$, and thus obtain the eigenvalues of the EO mobility tensor: $$\label{U_ort_thin}
M^{\parallel, \perp} = M_1 \left(b^{\parallel, \perp}_{\rm{eff}} \frac{q_2-q_1+q_2\kappa b}{q_1 b}+1\right),$$ where the effective slip lengths are given by Eqs.(\[beff\_par\_largeH\]),(\[beff\_ort\_largeH\]). The flow is thus anisotropic and there is a simple relationship between the EO mobility and hydrodynamic slip-length tensors [@note2] $$\label{result}
{\bf M} = M_1 \cdot\left[ \mathbf{I} + \frac{{\bf b}_{\rm eff}}{b}\left(\frac{q_2}{q_1}\left(1 + \kappa b\right) - 1 \right)\right]$$ In the limit of $b/L \gg 1 $ the general expression transforms to Eq. (\[squires\]). When $b/L \ll 1$ we get isotropic EO flow $$\label{result_smallb}
M = \phi_1 {M}_1 + \phi_2 {M}_2$$
![Eigenvalues of normalized EO mobility. Solid curves represent longitudinal, and dashed - transverse alignment of stripes with electric field. $M^{\parallel,\perp}/M_1$ vs amplitude of the local slip $b/L$ for (a) uncharged slip areas ($q_2=0, \phi_2=0.5, \kappa L = 10^2$), (b) uniform charge distribution ($q_2=q_1$; $\phi_2=0.45$, $\kappa L=10^3$) and (c) oppositely charged slip and no-slip areas ($q_2=-q_1$. $\phi_2=0.35$, $\kappa L=10^2$). $M^{\parallel,\perp}/M_1$ plotted against (d) the fraction of gas sectors ($b/L=0.1$, $q_2=-q_1$, $\kappa L=10^2$). []{data-label="fig:electrokin"}](fig2_belyaev.eps){width="8.5"}
[**Discussion.**]{}– To demonstrate examples of very rich and unusual fluid behavior at the SH surface it is instructive to consider some limiting cases of Eq. (\[result\]) with different values of $q_1$ and $q_2$. The results (shown in Fig. \[fig:electrokin\]) are somewhat remarkable. We see, in particular, that if gas area is uncharged, the EO flow related then only to the charge $q_1$ on the solid-liquid interface is generally *inhibited* as compared with a homogeneous, solid no-slip surface with uniform charge density (see Fig. \[fig:electrokin\](a)) $${\bf M} = M_1 \cdot \left[ \mathbf{I} - \frac{{\bf b}_{\rm eff}}{b}\right]
\label{cassie-formula-long}$$ We remark and stress that in contrast to common expectations the situation described by Eq.(\[cassie-formula-long\]) corresponds to $M^\parallel \le M^\perp$, i.e. the maximal directional mobility is attained in a transverse, and minimal - in longitudinal direction [@Mob_note]. When $b/L \ll 1$ we simply get ${M} = \phi_1 {M}_1$. In other words, the (isotropic) EO mobility shows no manifestation of the slip, being equal to the surface averaged velocity generated by no-slip regions. This result coincides with expected for hydrophilic slip sectors. In the limit of $b/L \gg 1$ this inhibition becomes negligibly small, and we obtain the simple result of [@Squires08; @bahga:2009], where EO mobility becomes equal to ${M}_1$ regardless of the orientation or area fraction of the slipping stripes. These results suggest that although the absence of the screening cloud near the gas region tends to inhibit the effective EO slip, the hydrodynamic slip acts to suppress this inhibition.
The situation is very different if the slipping interface carries some net charge, which is not an unreasonable assumption [@kirby2008]. There are several experimental evidences that charge may exist on solid hydrophobic surfaces immersed in water without compromising the slip [@Audry2010]. The nature of this charge is discussed well in .
However, in this case the strict analysis should deal with modified Navier boundary condition $$\label{mod_Navier}
\emph{\textbf{u}}_t = b(x,z) \left(\partial_y \textbf{\emph{u}}_t + q_2 \textbf{\emph{E}}_t/\eta\right)$$ with additional electrostatic stress on mobile surface charges. In this paper we nevertheless neglect the term $q_2 \textbf{\emph{E}}_t/\eta$, and its effect on EO mobility would be the topic for our further studies. To gain some insight into the possible EO flow *enhancement*, we consider first the case of uniform surface charge $q_1=q_2$, where Eq. (\[result\]) gives $${\bf M} = {M}_1 \cdot\left[ \mathbf{I} + \kappa {\bf b}_{\rm eff}\right]
\label{const-q-formula}$$ which might be seen as a natural tensorial analog of Eq. (\[isotropic\]). Fig. \[fig:electrokin\](b) includes theoretical results calculated with Eq. (\[const-q-formula\]) for a geometry of stripes, and is intended to demonstrate that the flow is truly anisotropic and can exhibit a large enhancement from effective hydrodynamic slip, possibly by an order of magnitudes. We stress that such an enhancement is possible even at a relatively low gas fraction, i.e. when ${\bf b}_{\rm eff}$ is relatively small (but the amplification factor, $({\bf I} + \kappa {\bf b}_{\rm eff})$, might be huge). Also note that in this situation $M^\parallel \ge M^\perp$, i.e. the fastest/slowest direction can correspond only to longitudinal/transverse stripes.
An interesting scenario is expected for oppositely charged solid and gas sectors. If $q_1=-q_2$, then Eq. (\[result\]) transforms to $${\bf M} = {M}_1 \cdot\left[ \mathbf{I} - 2 \frac{{\bf b}_{\rm eff}}{b} - \kappa {\bf b}_{\rm eff}\right],
\label{opposite-q-formula}$$ which for $b/L \ll 1$ simply gives ${M} = {M}_1 [\phi_1 -\phi_2 (1 + \kappa b)]$. The calculation results for this situation are presented in Fig. \[fig:electrokin\](c), and suggest a very rich fluid behavior. We see, in particular, that inhomogeneous surface charge can induce EO flow along and opposite to the field, depending on the fraction of the gas area as shown in Fig. \[fig:electrokin\](d). Already a very small fraction of the gas sectors would be enough to reverse the effective EO flow. Another striking result is that electro-neutral surface ($ \phi_1 q_1 +\phi_2 q_2 = 0$) can generate extremely large EO slip. With our numerical example this corresponds to $\phi_2=0.5$. In other words, super-hydrophobic surface of average positive charge or even zero charge can induce an EO flow (different for longitudinal and transverse to applied field stripes) in the direction of the applied field as if it is uniformly and negatively charged. These findings are similar to those of [@anderson.jl:1989; @ajdari2002] that the electrokinetic mobility depends on the charge distribution on the object, and not solely on its total charge. However, in our case the flow is dramatically amplified due to hydrodynamic effective slip.
![The ratio of EO velocity components, $|U_z/U_x|$, (at $\phi_2=0.5$, $\kappa L=10^2$) as a function of (a) angle $\theta$ at $b/L=10^2$ and (b) local slip length at the optimal angle $\theta$. From top to bottom $q_2/q_1 = 2, 1, 0.5$ []{data-label="fig:mix"}](fig3_belyaev.eps){width="8.5"}
These results may guide the design of SH surfaces for transverse electrokinetic flows in microfluidic devices [@ajdari2002]. As we have shown above, effective EO mobility of anisotropic striped surfaces is generally tensorial, due to secondary flow transverse to the direction of the applied electric field. Anisotropy ($|U_z/U_x|$) is maximized in certain direction $\theta_{\max}$ (as it is seen in Fig.\[fig:mix\]a) and requires that $q_2/q_1$ and $\kappa b$ are as large as possible. This can be attained at large $q_2/q_1$ (ideally when solid-liquid interface is uncharged) and if the local slip is large compared both to $\lambda_D$ and the texture scale (Fig.\[fig:mix\]b). In a thick SH channel a transverse “plug” EO flow seems to be very fruitful direction compared to transverse hydrodynamic phenomena, where flow is “twisted” only near the wall [@vinogradova.oi:2011].
Another mixing mechanism is related to the formation of patterns of steady convective rolls on the scale proportional to the texture period (Fig. \[fig:vortex\]). This can happen in the situation of oppositely charged and transverse to applied field stripes. Similar recirculating flow patterns can be generated without slip, just by using modulated [@ajdari.a:1995] or patterned [@stroock2000] charge. The formation of these convective rolls in the case of SH surfaces remains very sensitive to $q_2/q_1$, and is also controlled by hydrodynamic slippage. Fig. \[fig:vortex\] illustrates the effect of the local slip on the morphology of the steady rolls formation. We see, in particular, that increase of $b$ leads first to appearance of additional convective patterns near no-slip areas, and then to a transition to a flow morphology, where recirculation of a fluid is observed only at the no-slip regions. This, in turn, induces the flow reversal (as in Fig. \[fig:electrokin\](d))
![(Color online) Streamlines of the EO flow computed at $\phi_2=0.35$ and $\kappa L = 10^2$ for $q_2/q_1=-0.43$ and $\theta=\pi/2$. The origin of coordinates coincides with the center of the gas region. From left to right the local slip length is $b/L = 0.1$, $0.5$ and $10^2$. []{data-label="fig:vortex"}](fig4_belyaev.eps){width="8.5"}
[**Concluding remarks.–** ]{} We have described EO on inhomogeneously charged and slipping anisotropic surfaces. Our analysis provided the necessary tools to describe a significant modification of EO phenomena on SH surfaces: to quantify the inhibition and enhancement of flow, the transition from its anisotropy to isotropy, onsets of convective rolls formation and a relevant flow reversal, which can generate a huge EO slip even in the situation of a zero mean charge. Our results may find numerous applications in microfluidic lab-on-a-chip devices.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The Hyades, Praesepe, and Pleiades are well studied stellar clusters that anchor important secondary stellar age indicators. Recent studies have shown that main sequence turn off-based ages for these clusters may depend on the degree of rotation in the underlying stellar models. Rotation induces structural instabilities that can enhance the chemical mixing of a star, extending its fuel supply. In addition, rotation introduces a modulation of the star’s observed magnitude and color due to the effects of gravity darkening. We aim to investigate the extent to which stellar rotation affects the age determination of star clusters. We utilize the MESA stellar evolution code to create models that cover a range of rotation rates corresponding to $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}=0.0$ to $0.6$ in $0.1$ dex steps, allowing the assessment of variations in this dimension. The statistical analysis package, MATCH, is employed to derive ages and metallicities by fitting our MESA models to Tycho $B_T$, $V_T$ and 2MASS $J$, $K_s$ color-magnitude diagrams. We find that the derived ages are relatively insensitive to the effects of rotation. For the Hyades, Praesepe, and Pleiades, we derive ages based on synthetic populations that model a distribution of rotation rates or a fixed rate. Across each case, derived ages tend to agree roughly within errors, near $680$, $590$, and $110-160$ Myr for the Hyades, Praesepe, and Pleiades, respectively. These ages are in agreement with Li depletion boundary-based ages and previous analyses that used non-rotating isochrones. Our methods do not provide a strong constraint on the metallicities of these clusters.'
author:
- 'Seth Gossage, Charlie Conroy, Aaron Dotter, Jieun Choi, Philip Rosenfield, Philip Cargile, Andrew Dolphin'
title: 'Age Determinations of the Hyades, Praesepe, and Pleiades via MESA Models with Rotation'
---
Introduction {#s:intro}
============
Stellar populations serve as landmarks in understanding the cosmological timeline and as laboratories for testing stellar evolution theory. Star clusters are among the most powerful objects for use in calibrating stellar models owing to the common age, metallicity and distance of their member stars. The most nearby clusters are in many ways best suited for this type of work due to the high quality data ranging from deep color-magnitude diagrams (CMDs), high resolution spectroscopy, and asteroseismology. As such, so-called benchmark clusters like the Hyades, Praesepe, and Pleiades offer some of the best chances of ensuring the accuracy of our models.
Isochrone construction and usage of the Li depletion boundary (LDB) are two of the primary methods for accessing the ages of such clusters. [@BMG1996] were the first to successfully detect the LDB using faint stars in the Pleiades in conjunction with stellar models of [@NRC1993], and derive an age estimate. Isochrones are stellar models covering a range of masses, paused at a moment in time, similar to how we often observe a collection of stars at a single moment. Hence, isochrones are an intuitive means of modeling stellar populations and have a long employment history in astronomy (e.g., @PCdSC1977 [@VRM2002; @JL2005; @EJJ2016; @SXY2018]). Both of these methods are model-dependent, simulating the observables that we collect in databases. Therefore, these methods are subject to the adopted physical assumptions, which are not universal. Nonetheless, model-dependent age determination techniques are widely applicable. Meanwhile, they also serve to test our composite theory of stellar evolution, relying on all of its underlying framework to make credible stellar analogues and predictions.
A number of empirical secondary age determination techniques count on knowing the ages of these clusters, as derived from model-dependent methods (see @DS2009 for a review). For instance, gyrochronology uses these ages to calibrate mass-period relations (e.g. @SB2007 [@MH2008]) and offers the possibility of a high precision tool for determining ages of individual field stars. The zero-point of the relations between these quantities and age is set by the assumed ages of clusters like the Hyades, Praesepe, and Pleiades. The accuracy of gyrochronological results may be compromised if significant uncertainty exists in the ages on which its formalism is built.
Researchers have theorized how rotation may affect the behavior of stars for nearly a century (@HvZ1924; also see e.g., @SS1929 and references therein). However, large databases of stellar models that incorporate these effects have only become available within the last decade or so; e.g. STERN [@IB2011], Geneva [@SE2012] (also @MeMa1997 [@AM1997; @MaZh1998; @AM1999; @MaMe2000a; @MeMa2000]), and recently MIST [@JC2016]. These models take different approaches to modeling the complex effects of rotation, however they all rely on some common theoretical principles. Rotation is thought to alter the chemical mixing within stars due to several induced hydrodynamical instabilities (see e.g. @HL2000 [@MaMe2000b]). As a consequence, the core of a rotating star may gain access to a greater fuel supply than otherwise, leading to both greater luminosity and an extended lifetime. Furthermore, a rotating star may become significantly oblate due to latitudinally dependent centrifugal forces. As described by [@HvZ1924], this effect, at times known as *gravity darkening*, introduces a substantial viewing angle dependence to the observed color and magnitude of a star. Combined, rotationally enhanced chemical mixing and gravity darkening are able to substantially alter the color and magnitude position of key stellar population features on a CMD, particularly the main-sequence turn off (MSTO).
Classically, non-rotating isochrones and stellar models have been used to determine the ages of these benchmark clusters (e.g. @JM1981 [@MP1988; @GM1993; @MAP1998; @JKMT2004]). However, recent studies have highlighted that a significant degree of uncertainty remains in how we model these systems. For instance, [@BH2015a] in fitting these clusters with a coarse grid of rotating Geneva stellar models, interpolated with a finer grid of non-rotating PARSEC models (@LG2002), discovered that the Praesepe and Hyades may be older than previously thought. The effects of rotation, in their modeling resulted in a best-fit age of $\sim800$ Myr, compared to the classically inferred ages of $\sim600$ Myr found via non-rotating models. This discrepancy motivates us to investigate the extent to which stellar rotation affects key cluster parameters, such as age and metallicity, and how extensively this uncertainty might exist across our stellar models.
The importance of rotation for interpreting open cluster CMDs extends well beyond these three benchmark clusters. Recent studies exploring the effects of rotation have been motivated by the potential for rotational effects to explain the extended main sequence turn offs (eMSTOs) of clusters residing in the Large and Small Magellanic Cloud (LMC and SMC); e.g. [@LG2013; @MC2015]. It is still an ongoing debate as to the level that stellar rotation is responsible for this phenomenon, e.g. [@BdM2009; @PG2014; @BH2015c; @PC2017]. Certainly, as demonstrated by [@MaMe2000b; @HL2000] and others, rotation can have strong effects on stars during and near the MSTO phase. The consequent flux and temperature alterations that result from rotational, effects may cause an observer to perceive a MSTO that is collectively brighter or fainter in reality, compared to its theoretically non-rotating model. A brighter or younger MSTO mimics either a younger or older stellar population respectively. Furthermore, with a distribution of stars at various rotation rates and viewing angles, there is a possibility for the appearance of an eMSTO, as now a distribution of fainter and brighter stars (i.e., due to rotation) coexist within the population.
Furthermore, rotation can affect the integrated light of stellar populations as well. The impact of stellar rotation on bolometric luminosity and the ionizing spectra of massive stellar populations was explored by e.g. [@EML2012; @CCB2017]. Both groups modeled the interplay between stellar rotation and the integrated light of galaxies whose spectral energy is dominated by the output from massive stars. In either case, rotation could enhance the ionizing radiation output of massive stars in quantity and duration (although to varying degrees, dependent on model assumptions). In affecting the population’s composite spectral properties, which are tied to its inferred stellar mass and star formation history (see e.g., @CC2013 for a review), rotation may have far-reaching implications in extragalactic astronomy.
Here we present results derived from a self-consistent set of stellar evolution models, similar to the MIST models developed by [@JC2016] (see also @ADo2016), but with a larger range in rotation rate as well a custom mass and metallicity range. These models require neither major interpolations nor extrapolations over stellar mass or metallicity, as has been required in the past. Following an overview of the data featured in §\[s:data\], this paper presents a base description of the physics underlying our models (§\[ssec:models\]), leaving further details to the aforementioned MIST papers. We detail the methods used in applying our models to observed data through a statistical analysis package known as MATCH, written by [@AD2001], in §\[ssec:cmdfitting\]. Subsequently we discuss the results of applying our models to observations of the Hyades, Praesepe, and Pleiades clusters in §\[s:results\], and cast the implications of our findings in a broader context in §\[s:discussion\]. Finally, our work is summarized in §\[s:summary\].
Data {#s:data}
====
In this section we provide a summary of the photometric data used in our CMD fitting for the Hyades (§\[ssec:hyades\]), Praesepe (§\[ssec:praesepe\]), and Pleiades (§\[ssec:pleiades\]) clusters. We also provide a brief summary of the salient properties of each cluster. Although metallicities are cited, we do not adopt any of these listed values. We only use them to compare with our CMD-derived metallicities in later sections.
[ccccc]{}\[!ht\]
The Hyades & 3.349 & 0.0031 & 0.0 & 0.25\
& [@GAIA2017] & [@BT2006]\
The Praesepe & 6.26 & 0.0837 & 0.0 & 0.30\
& [@AG2009] & [@BT2006]\
The Pleiades & 5.64 & 0.1054 & 0.0 & 0.0\
& [@GAIA2016] & [@BT2008] \[t:muav\]
The Hyades {#ssec:hyades}
----------
Of our target clusters, the Hyades is nearest to our solar system, making it a popular object of study amongst astronomers for many years (e.g., @WMS1939 [@PAW1967; @vALH1997; @SR2018]). We adopt a distance modulus $\mu=3.349$ mag ($46.75\pm0.46$ pc) from [@GAIA2017] and an extinction of $A_{\rm{V}}=0.0031$ [@BT2006]. Historically, the age of the cluster has been determined to be around 600 Myr, according to non-rotating isochrone fits; for example, [@MAP1998] derive an age of $625\pm50$ Myr from fitting optical CMD data. [@ELM2018] measured Li surface abundance in 6 brown dwarf candidates of the Hyades, and using the models of [@IB2015], derived an age of $650\pm70$ Myr. The Hyades may have a \[Fe/H\]$=0.103\pm0.008$ according to [@TJ2005]; recently, [@JDC2017] found $0.146\pm0.004$ from spectra of 37 Hyads.
Our optical data is comprised of the “high fidelity” stellar members identified by [@deB2001]; these are stars with relatively high membership likelihood and evidence supporting their status as single stars. Binary systems are removed from this sample, and so our assumed binary fraction is zero. This catalogue is based on the main Hipparcos catalogue [@MAP1997], utilizing derivations of secular parallaxes for cluster candidates to determine membership likelihoods. Using these high fidelity members, we fit stars with $V_T < 8$ magnitudes, forcing the fitting algorithm to focus on the age-sensitive MSTO.
Due to the close proximity of the Hyades a significant spread in the apparent magnitudes will exist due to differential distance effects. This effect must be accounted for when fitting observed CMDs of the Hyades to models. [@deB2001] manage this by considering the absolute magnitude of stars (in their case derived using e.g. the Hipparcos secular parallaxes from the main catalogue, and recorded in their data tables). We do the same, but convert back to an apparent magnitude using the average distance modulus, $\mu$, of the Hyades cluster, $\mu=3.349$ mag. In essence, we place all stars at the mean distance of the cluster.
Our infrared data is sourced by the members of [@BG2013], who used the members of [@SR2011], where the former researchers made efforts to extend membership down to $0.1 M_{\odot}$. In both instances, membership was determined by the convergent point method. Furthermore, field star contamination has been estimated for these data sets; [@BG2013] found that contamination is likely, although decreasing to negligible levels (less than $~10\%$) inwards of $18$ pc within the catalogue. Binaries are present as well, and here we assume a binary fraction of 25%, as suggested by [@JEG1988] (this value was also adopted by @SR2011).
The Praesepe {#ssec:praesepe}
------------
The Praesepe is the furthest of our target clusters at roughly four times the distance to the Hyades, but also appears similar to the Hyades in both its age and chemical composition. We adopt $\mu=6.26$ mag ($\approx179$ pc) [@AG2009] and $A_{\rm{V}}=0.0837$ [@BT2006] for modeling Praesepe. The metallicity of Praesepe has been estimated e.g. by [@AB2013] to be \[Fe/H\]$=0.12\pm0.04$ based on measurements of $11$ Praesepe dwarfs; [@JDC2017] found $0.156\pm0.004$ from spectra of 39 Praesepe members.
Our optical data derives from the 24 members tabulated by [@MDL2002]. We have cross matched these stars to obtain updated Tycho $B_T$, $V_T$ magnitudes via their Hipparcos ID numbers. This has been checked and cleaned of binary and field stars by the catalog’s authors. Here we also impose a $V_T < 9$ magnitude cut, for the same reasons that we made this cut in our data of the Hyades (see \[ssec:hyades\]).
Additionally, we use the near infrared (NIR) 2MASS $J$, $K_s$ magnitudes catalogued by [@PFW2014]. This data set includes 1040 stellar members in total, ranging from $M\approx 0.11-2.4 M_{\odot}$ acquired via proper motion analysis. A binary fraction of 20-40% is suggested for these members; correspondingly, we adopt a binary fraction of 30%. Furthermore, as noted by [@PFW2014], Praesepe members exhibit distinct proper motions from potentially interfering field stars, virtually eliminating confusion between them. The authors estimate that their member list possesses $\sim16\%$ non-members (i.e., 862 true members and 168 non-members). Here we also impose a cut to only include stars with $V_T < 9$; focusing on the MSTO, however also lessening the probability of contaminating stars, as contamination is estimated to lessen towards the population’s bright end.
The Pleiades {#ssec:pleiades}
------------
The Pleiades is closer to us than the Praesepe, at roughly 3 times the distance to the Hyades, possessing an appreciably younger age, as well as a lower metallicity than the previous clusters. Our adopted distance modulus and extinction for this cluster are: $5.64$ mag [@GAIA2016], or $\approx134$ pc, and $A_{\rm{V}}=0.1054$ [@BT2008], respectively. [@DS2009] found \[Fe/H\]$=0.03\pm0.05$ from spectroscopic measurements of 20 Pleiads. The age has been estimated by [@ByN2004] to be $130\pm20$ Myr using the LDB. From CMD analysis, [@GM1993] determined $100$ Myr by fitting non-rotating isochrones to its higher mass stars. Recently, [@SED2015] found an age of $112\pm5$ Myr via the LDB, using the evolutionary models of [@IB1998; @IB2015].
Our optical data is again found using the Hipparcos IDs of cluster members reported in [@MDL2002], subsequently cross matched for $B_T$, $V_T$ magnitudes. Binary and field stars have been removed from this sample by [@LL2000] with a maximum likelihood estimation to determine likely (single) cluster members.
We also use the 2MASS magnitudes of members reported by [@JRS2007]. In fitting this data, we only include stars with $K_s < 5.0$ mag, for the same reasons that we made similar cuts in the Praesepe and Hyades (see \[ssec:hyades\]). There is no estimate of binary fraction for this data but stars in this magnitude range are well known, higher mass members of the Pleiades. They are: Alcyone, Electra, Atlas, Maia, Merope, Taygeta, Pleione, and Celeno – many of these are Be stars. Of the stars listed, Atlas is a double line spectroscopic binary system [@NZ2004]; evidence from lunar occultation [@RCL1994] suggests Taygeta may be a binary system; Pleione may be a single line spectroscopic binary (see e.g. @JIK1996 and @JN2010); Electra’s multiplicity is inconclusive thus far, with contradicting evidence (e.g. @HAA1965 and @JP1971); meanwhile Alcyone is a multiple star system, although most of its members are further than 77 arcsec (as listed in the Washington Double Star Catalog). In practice, we assume Atlas and Taygeta are systems whose photometry may be significantly affected by their companions and remove them. We make cuts in our optical data similar to the infrared data, only using stars with $V_T < 5.0$.
[lcc]{}\[t!\]
0.1 - 8.0 $M_{\odot}$ & -0.75, -0.60, ..., 0.45 & 0.0, 0.1, ..., 0.6\
\[t:modp\]
Methodology {#sec:methods}
===========
Here we give an overview of our models and the fitting procedure from which we derive population age and metallicity. In §\[ssec:models\], a brief overview of the background physics in our stellar models is given and the effects of rotation and gravity darkening are discussed. Following this, §\[ssec:matchmod\] introduces MATCH [@AD2001], which we used to turn our stellar models into composite stellar populations. Our fitting procedure is also done via MATCH, fitting composite stellar populations to data, with an outline of its fitting procedure given in §\[ssec:cmdfitting\], along with mock tests performed to demonstrate its accuracy.
MESA Stellar Models {#ssec:models}
-------------------
Our models are fundamentally based on the MESA stellar evolution code [@BP2011; @BP2013; @BP2015; @BP2018]. MESA is a 1D, open source, parallelized code, written with a modular design for flexibility in customizing its incorporated physics. The stellar structure and composition equations are simultaneously solved via a Newton-Raphson solver. Boundary conditions are necessary for solving stellar structure equations; MESA provides a number of options for their choice. In these models, the ATLAS12 code (@RLK1970 [@RLK1993]) model atmosphere tables set these boundary conditions; as done in [@JC2016]. Furthermore, we use the protosolar abundances of [@MA2009] where metallicities are scaled to $Z=Z_{\odot,protosolar}=0.0142$. In §\[sssec:rotation\], we give an overview of how rotation manipulates a star and §\[sssec:gdark\] is dedicated to a description of gravity darkening and how it is implemented in our stellar models.
In this work, we have expanded upon the grids presented in [@JC2016] by computing a set of models with fine variation in initial rotation rates and a denser grid in metallicity. These are not fully evolved, but truncated to the end of core helium burning (CHeB), with a metallicity range more focused on the solar neighborhood and LMC. Our metallicity range has a higher resolution around values appropriate for our clusters of interest (near solar \[Fe/H\] $= 0.0$). These choices were made to introduce greater variability in rotation rate as a model parameter while maintaining a reasonable model creation timescale. The mass, \[Fe/H\], and rotation ranges covered by our models are listed in Table \[t:modp\].
{width="0.95\linewidth"}
### Stellar Rotation {#sssec:rotation}
In this section we provide a brief overview of the key physical processes related to modeling stellar rotation. See [@JC2016] and the MESA papers [@BP2011; @BP2013; @BP2015; @BP2018] for details. In MESA, surface magnetic effects are not modeled, thus magnetic braking is neglected presently. To compensate and reproduce the observed slow rotation of solar-like stars, models below $1.2 M_{\odot}$ do not rotate. Between $1.2$ and $1.8 M_{\odot}$, rotation is scaled by a factor ranging from 0 to 1 as mass increases, such that models above $1.8 M_{\odot}$ rotate at their full velocity. For reference: MSTO masses range from $\sim1.4-2.5 M_{\odot}$ at isochrone ages of $650-750$ Myr (e.g. the Praesepe and Hyades), and from $\sim2.4-4.5 M_{\odot}$ at ages of $100-150$ Myr (e.g. the Pleiades), in our modeling.
Rotational velocity is commonly characterized by the ratio $v_{\rm{ZAMS}}/v_{c}=\Omega/\Omega_{c}$. This is the zero age main sequence (ZAMS) surface equatorial rotation rate, $v_{\rm{ZAMS}}$, compared with the the critical rotation velocity, $v_{c}$, the velocity that would disrupt the star through centrifugal force. The quantities $\Omega$ and $\Omega_{c}$ are the angular counterparts.
The 1D code, MESA, implements rotation through the shellular approximation described by [@KT1970], and employs the diffusive approximation introduced by [@ES1978] to model rotationally enhanced chemical mixing. The latter scheme requires that a choice be made for two parameters: $f_c$, which dictates how closely compositional mixing follows the flow of angular momentum transport, and $f_{\mu}$ which encodes the efficiency of rotational mixing in the presence of stabilizing molecular weight gradients. Values of $f_c=1/30$ (calibrated to reproduce the surface $^7$Li abundance of the Sun by @MHP1989 [@CZ1992]) and $f_{\mu}=0.05$ (found by @HLW2000 to reproduce nitrogen surface enhancement in evolved 10-20 $M_{\odot}$ stars from @GL1992 [@AH1993; @MV2000]) are adopted in our models.
Although the shellular approximation is virtually ubiquitous in 1D stellar evolution codes, the diffusive approximation is not. Other codes, such as Geneva [@SE2012] take a diffusive-advective approach (as described in @MaMe2000a) instead. Consequently, MESA models can exhibit noticeable distinctions from models developed via alternative codes, in some respects (as pointed out by @JC2016, primarily showcasing the differences of higher mass models). Rotating MIST models tend to be fainter and cooler at the MSTO compared to those same models computed by Geneva, perhaps due to less efficient chemical mixing from rotation effects.
In Figure \[fig:trkcmp\] we reiterate these points, focusing on lower and intermediate masses, as would likely be found in our relatively young target clusters. In these plots we show evolutionary tracks for stellar models of $2, 3, 4$ and $7 M_{\odot}$. Our models are displayed as solid lines, while dashed lines correspond to Geneva models. Rotation rate is encoded by color, wherein red represents $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}=0.0$ (non-rotating) and blue is $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}=0.5$. The two top panels overlay our models and Geneva models with no rotation (top left) and with rotation (top right); these top panels are comparisons across model sets. Our non-rotating models are brighter and hotter than non-rotating Geneva models, however the roles are reversed in comparing rotating models. The two bottom panels compare non-rotating to rotating models within each model set to see how rotation affects the models differently according to each respective code. Our models become cooler as the rotation rate increases (due to gravity darkening; § \[sssec:gdark\]), whereas Geneva models become hotter and brighter as their rotation rate is increased.
{width="0.95\linewidth"}
{width="0.98\linewidth"}
Figure \[fig:vvcvary\] shows these effects on a CMD, as they manifest in the MSTO of an isochrone constructed from our models. Figure \[fig:vvcvary\] shows a $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}=0.0$ isochrone (black) compared to a $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}=0.6$ isochrone (red, dashed) at an age near what has been classically reported for the Pleiades, $\sim100$ Myr, (left panel) and an age near classical reports for the Hyades/Praesepe, $\sim600$ Myr (right panel). The effects are visually quite different between these ages. On the left, a slightly younger isochrone is shown in solid blue to point out how rotation can enhance the MSTO brightness, causing an older rotating population to mimic the morphology of a younger non-rotating one; here our rotating models might predict older ages compared to non-rotating models (albeit, the effect is very slight in our modeling). Whereas on the right, less massive and more slowly rotating stars exist on the MSTO at $600$ Myr and the effects of rotation are modest. Thus, the MSTO barely becomes brighter at these older ages, and primarily appears cooler, mimicking the color-position of an older population (shown as blue in the righthand panel); here our models might find a younger age (decreasing age will make the MSTO hotter again) than predicted by non-rotating models, or could cause shifts in derived metallicity. Hence, our models do not behave as straightforwardly as Geneva models, where rotation primarily makes the MSTO brighter and hotter. The behavior exhibited by Geneva models leads to rotating models predicting younger ages than non-rotating models.
At $100$ Myr, MSTO stellar masses are $\sim2.4-4.5 M_{\odot}$, which rotate fully. Meanwhile at $600$ Myr, the extant MSTO mass range is roughly $\sim1.4-2.5 M_{\odot}$. As discussed at the start of this section, stars below $1.8 M_{\odot}$ do not rotate at full capacity in order to replicate the effects of magnetic braking relevant to lower mass stars with convective envelopes. Thus, the effects of rotation on MSTO morphology do change with age for our models.
That rotating MIST models are cooler and less luminous than their Geneva counterparts (top right panel, Figure \[fig:trkcmp\]) may stem from divergent approaches to rotationally induced angular momentum transport (such differences were also pointed out by @JC2016). Meanwhile, non-rotating MIST models appear more luminous than those of Geneva (top left panel, Figure \[fig:trkcmp\]), perhaps due to differing assumptions made for the treatment of convection.
Convective core overshoot (CCO) mixing is a chief aspect of convection that can influence the MSTO’s CMD morphology and position. CCO is the idea that convectively driven material should not suddenly stop at the theoretical boundaries (e.g., Schwarzschild or Ledoux) of a convective zone. Rather, it seems feasible that momentum should carry material past these boundaries, allowing it to penetrate into non-convective zones, see e.g., [@KHB1963]. The penetration distance, often considered as an extension of the convective zone, is often either a fraction of the pressure scale height (denoted $H_{\rm{P}}$), or is modeled as a diffusive process with an exponentially decaying diffusion coefficient. We adopt the latter formalism, while Geneva adopts the former. Our adoptions (see § 3.6.1 of @JC2016) are roughly equivalent to an extended convective core boundary of $0.2 H_{\rm{P}}$ (§2.1 of @ZM2010), effectively twice the value adopted in Geneva.
Similar to rotationally enhanced mixing, CCO mixing can supply the stellar core with more fuel, enhancing energy production and the MS lifetimes of stars (e.g., @AM1975), thereby affecting a population’s MSTO on a CMD. A studies presented by [@CG2003; @JHW2003] and [@GB2003] looked at the intermediate age clusters NGC 2173, SL 556, and NGC 2155, with non-rotating Padova (@LG2000) and Yonsei-Yale (based on tracks from YREC, @DBG1992) stellar models. Modifying the efficiency of CCO appeared to provide one avenue for the models to explain the observed CMD features. Although, an alternative perspective on CCO is that material outside the convective core (CC) boundary, once mixed via overshoot or some other process, may drive an increase in opacity or erasure of composition gradients, subsequently turning sub-adiabatic material super-adiabatic, and expanding the CC (discussed further in §2 of @BP2018). CCO may partly be the result of a poorly defined CC boundary in our models. The proper treatment of CCO (and convection in general) is another active branch of development in stellar modeling.
Of course, CCO is not a rotational effect, but is discussed here to expound on the behavior shown in Figure \[fig:trkcmp\] and to highlight its important (albeit uncertain) role in stellar evolution. Our models possess a stronger mixing due to CCO (see @JC2016, §3.6.2, and @SE2012, §2.3). As CCO mixing occurs regardless of rotation, this is a possible cause for our non-rotating models maintaining a higher luminosity than their non-rotating Geneva counterparts.
In addition to the differences shown here on a Hertzsprung-Russell diagram (HRD) and CMD, there are also differences in the MS lifetime extension afforded by enhanced rotational mixing. These differences were shown in Figure 20 of [@JC2016] where the ratio $\tau_{\rm{MS,R}}/\tau_{\rm{MS,NR}}$ (MS lifetime with rotation over the same without rotation) is plotted against the initial stellar mass $M_i$ (in units of $M_{\odot}$). Rotating Geneva models with $M_i > 2 M_{\odot}$ show a lifetime extension of roughly $\sim25\%$, while corresponding MIST models only garner an increase of $\lessapprox10\%$.
The physical adoptions made in Geneva do not equate to those made in MIST. The uncertainties present in stellar modeling (convection and rotationally enhanced mixing here; see, e.g., @SC2017 for a review) provide enough leeway for inconsistent model behavior. As will be seen, our findings are different from what was found in [@BH2015a; @BH2015c], likely due to model differences.
### Gravity Darkening {#sssec:gdark}
In addition to enhanced chemical mixing, rotation also introduces oblateness to stellar structure. Latitudinally dependent centrifugal forces result in an oblate deformation of the star. The surface gravity, $g$, of a star is lessened by these forces leading to an effective, latitudinally dependent value, $g_{\rm{eff}}(\theta)$. Here, $\theta$ refers to the polar angle in a spherical coordinate system. The effective gravity of a rotating star is related to its radiative luminosity (e.g., as encapsulated by the von Zeipel theorem; @HvZ1924), leading to a relation $g_{\rm{eff}} \propto T^{4}_{\rm{eff}}(\theta)$ between the effective gravity and temperature of a star. Hence, the observed colors (temperatures) and magnitudes (luminosities) become dependent on the viewing angle of observation. This effect is commonly termed gravity darkening.
The essential physical arguments of [@HvZ1924] qualitatively adhere well to observations, but the power law relation presented in the von Zeipel theorem may be too simplistic. As it was derived based on radiative flux relations, the von Zeipel theorem does not directly apply to stars with convective envelopes; [@LBL1967] derived a more general $g_{\rm{eff}} \propto T^{\beta}_{\rm{eff}}$, with $\beta=0.08$ for convective stars. More recently, in comparison to interferometric observations of rapidly rotating stars [@HAM2005; @JA2006; @GvB2006; @MZ2009] it has been found that $g_{\rm{eff}} \propto T^{4}_{\rm{eff}}$ over estimates temperature variation going between pole and equator. In light of this, [@ELR2011] were motivated to derive a new formulation that can describe gravity darkening; they do so, deriving a relation that depends only the rotation rate of the star, at a given viewing angle, luminosity, and $T_{\rm{eff}}$.
We use the equations of [@ELR2011] to translate the model stellar luminosity $L$ and effective temperature $T_{\rm{eff}}$ across desired viewing angles. The symbol $i$ denotes the inclination (or viewing) angle in this paper; $i=0^{\circ}$ corresponds to an observation directed at the equator, whereas $i=90^{\circ}$ is directed at the star’s pole.
A demonstration of gravity darkening’s effects is shown in Figure \[fig:gdark\] on our MESA models. Several isochrones are displayed for two scenarios: $\sim60$ Myr models are shown in the left panel and $\sim300$ Myr in the right. In both cases, black shows an older isochrone while blue marks a slightly younger isochrone. The solid black line shows $i=0^{\circ}$, dashed is $i=45^{\circ}$, and dot-dashed is $i=90^{\circ}$. In each case, the MSTO of an older isochrone moves towards mimicking that of a younger isochrone as the inclination angle varies from $0^{\circ}$ to $90^{\circ}$, due to the increased luminosity and temperature of the stellar pole. Conceivably, if stars were to host a distribution of various inclination angles, there is the possibility that these effects would create a broadened MSTO.
MATCH Composite Populations {#ssec:matchmod}
---------------------------
The final models that we fit to data are constructed in MATCH [@AD1997; @AD2001], a tool used to study resolved stellar populations (e.g. see @JdJ2008 [@DW2011; @DG2011]). MATCH uses a given set of stellar models (our MESA models in this case) to create its own library of isochrones. These models have a finite resolution in age and metallicity; we have chosen 0.02 dex for both. Thus, it should be noted that there is an inherent spread to the models, as the isochrone parameters do not pertain to delta functions in MATCH. Our composite stellar populations are constructed with the effects of gravity darkening via random viewing angles and we have also developed the ability for our synthetic populations to possess a distribution of rotation rates.
CMDs are populated according to an initial mass function (IMF), describing the occurrence of stellar masses, which are subsequently combined into a composite model population. For this purpose we specify a Kroupa IMF [@PK2001]. Additionally, MATCH is able to consider binary systems when drawing its models, given a binary fraction. Binaries are added according to a flat distribution in mass fraction (i.e., from 0 to 1). So long as both stars are alive in the binary, magnitudes are the sum of fluxes from each star; if the primary has died, the magnitude is of the secondary survivor only. Colors are computed by constructing the magnitude in each filter in this way, and then taking the difference of the magnitudes. MATCH does not model interactions between binary companions. In the following discussion, we will list our adopted values of binary fraction where appropriate (adopted binary fractions are also listed in Table \[t:muav\]).
The ability to model gravity darkening was developed and added to MATCH for this project, where the brightness and temperature of our models are altered according to the equations of [@ELR2011]. These alterations are a function of the model’s viewing angle (which is drawn randomly as it is added to the composite stellar population under construction) and their rotation rate. In order to demonstrate these effects, we have created artificial data sets using the MATCH program “fake”, which generates a set of photometric data for use on a CMD, given some finite period of star formation and metallicity variation. This program is also able to simulate photometric errors, but we take the errors to be zero in all cases, in order to highlight rotation related effects. For this reason, we have also increased model resolution to 0.01 dex in Figures \[fig:modgd\] and \[fig:moddemo\], to lessen the spread due to finite composite population model age and metallicity resolution and create an appearance closer to an SSP.
Effects from gravity darkening are shown in Figure \[fig:modgd\], as incorporated in MATCH. In Figure \[fig:modgd\], an artificial data set that neglects gravity darkening is shown in black, in comparison to an artificial data set that does model gravity darkening which is shown in red. Several scenarios are demonstrated: the left column shows isochrones with $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}=0.3$, while the right shows $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}=0.6$. Meanwhile, the top row compares the effects of gravity darkening at 794 Myr (nearer to the ages of the Hyades and Praesepe), and the bottom row shows 100 Myr (near the age of the Pleiades). The inclusion of gravity darkening has a much stronger effect at higher rotation rates, issuing a greater spread to the MSTO.
![Differences between the effects of gravity darkening (GD) at $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}=0.3$ (left column) and $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}=0.6$ (right column). The effect is stronger for stars that rotate faster, leading to a greater broadening of the MSTO as rotation rate increases. Age is 794 Myr in the top row, 100 Myr in the bottom row, and \[Fe/H\] = 0.15. These simulated clusters have masses of roughly $1\times10^5 M_{\odot}$.[]{data-label="fig:modgd"}](modeldemo_gdark.pdf){width="0.95\linewidth"}
Furthermore, stellar populations likely do not have stars rotating at a fixed value, rather they appear to possess a distribution of rates. Studies such as [@ZR2012] and [@RZG2007] have found evidence for a bimodal distribution of rotation rates for A and low mass B-type stars, with masses estimated around $1.5-3 M_{\odot}$. This mass range is roughly appropriate for the MSTO stars in our target clusters (mentioned at the beginning of §\[sssec:rotation\]). However, there is evidence that this distribution may change with stellar type, where e.g. B and O-type stars appear to exhibit a singly peaked asymmetric distribution (e.g. @P1996 [@HGMcS2010; @RA2013]).
For this work, the ability to model a distribution of rotation rates has been incorporated as a new feature in MATCH. We use a Gaussian distribution as a preliminary choice to model these effects. As the rotation rates of our models range from $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}\in\left[0.0,0.6\right]$, we choose a distribution with mean $0.3$ and standard deviation $0.2$. This distribution is truncated at the $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}$ parameter bounds of our model grid; hereafter this distribution is referenced as $P\left(\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}=0.3\right)$. The rotation rate of a proposed model is drawn from this Gaussian distribution as it is added to the composite population.
Although, as may be seen in Fig. 8 of [@HGMcS2010], for the mass range $2.2 \leq M/M_{\odot} \leq 4.0$, stars may possess a distribution of $v/v_c$ that is peaked nearer to 0.6 (derived from $v\rm{sin}i$ measurements acquired from spectra). This mass range roughly corresponds to the MSTO of the Pleiades, for instance, and so our chosen distribution may not fully represent the distribution of rotation rates in this cluster. In order to test the effects of a distribution that includes higher rotation rates, we have also tested a flat distribution of $\Omega/\Omega_c$ between 0.0 and 0.6. Given that our models are currently limited to $\Omega/\Omega_c = 0.6$, we opt for this rather than creating a new distribution centered on $\Omega/\Omega_c=0.6$. Generally, this flat distribution finds ages within 10 Myr and metallicities very similar to those found with our Gaussian distribution. Our usage of a flat distribution is not an extensive test of a distribution including higher rotation rates, for instance, as may be seen in Fig. \[fig:modgd\] the effects of rotation can vary dramatically towards higher rotation rates, so lack of very fast rotators may neglect a wide range of model behavior. However, usage of a flat distribution is intended to give some preliminary sense of whether results would change significantly in the presence of a greater number of fast rotators or not. In future work, we plan to include models from $\Omega/\Omega_c=0.0$ to $0.9$, allowing us to test a wider range of possible rotation distributions.
{width="0.95\linewidth"}
In Figure \[fig:moddemo\], four panels display a progression of the consequences from including gravity darkening (top right), a distribution of rotation rates (bottom left), and finally both together (bottom right), in comparison to what a synthetic population looks like in absence of these phenomena (black points). Models excluding a distribution of rotation rates are given the fixed value $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}=0.3$. With the relatively modest value of $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}=0.3$, gravity darkening has a weak influence on MSTO morphology, in comparison to that of a distribution of rotation rates (compare the top right and bottom left panels); although bear in mind that the effects of gravity darkening would increase with $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}$, as was shown in \[fig:modgd\].
CMD Fitting {#ssec:cmdfitting}
-----------
Here we present our CMD fitting methodology. First, we describe MATCH and give an overview of its operation in fitting stellar models to data (§\[sssec:match\]). Next, we discuss mock tests that were performed to demonstrate the accuracy of our results, using simulated observations that have stellar densities similar to our target clusters (§\[sssec:mock\]).
### MATCH {#sssec:match}
CMD fitting is carried out via MATCH [@AD1997; @AD2001]. This package includes the ability to fit for star formation histories and key population parameters (metallicity, distance, extinction). We exploit these capabilities to determine the age and metallicity of our target clusters, fixing distance and extinction to values based on existing literature. We do not solve for star formation history, instead running MATCH in “ssp” mode, solving for simple stellar populations (SSPs; populations assumed to form all stars in one burst of star formation, as is often assumed for open clusters).
With a given photometric data set (color and magnitude), and a collection of stellar models (MESA in our case), MATCH generates and compares Hess diagrams of the models and data. The model (i.e., synthetic stellar population constructed from supplied models) that best reproduces the observed stellar densities in the CMD space of the data is found with a Poisson likelihood statistic. This is calculated binwise in the Hess diagram, and combined to produce an overall likelihood for the model-data comparison.
Hess diagram bin size is specified by the user, and though guidelines exist, this aspect of the fitting process ultimately involves a degree of personal judgment. Generally, one wants to avoid choosing a bin size so large that the Hess diagram smooths out morphology in important features (like the MSTO), and not so small that spurious population features arise due to outliers, for example. We set a bin size of 0.10 in magnitude and 0.05 in color.
We derive two sets of ages and metallicities in this work. When deriving fits, we always include the effects of gravity darkening and rotationally enhanced chemical mixing. One set of results purely examines how the effects of stellar rotation on derived age and metallicity as rotation rate, $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}$ is varied. This is important since, as shown in Figure \[fig:modgd\], if the majority of stars rotate near $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}=0.6$, the effects of gravity darkening can be much greater. Our other set of results examines what happens when assuming a distribution of rotation rates. Our adopted distribution is a Gaussian, described in §\[ssec:matchmod\].
In fitting populations at a fixed rotation rate, we fit seven populations constructed with a single value from $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}\in\left[0.0,0.6\right]$ (steps of 0.1 dex) separately. We select the population that produces the highest maximum posterior probability from these seven models as the best-fit. To examine the case where stars possess a Gaussian distribution of rotation rates (described in §\[ssec:matchmod\]), we simply take the set of best-fit age and metallicity that produces the highest posterior probability according to this model, providing a second set of derived age and metallicity.
{width="0.95\linewidth"}
### Testing Parameter Recovery with Mock Data {#sssec:mock}
Here we perform a number of mock tests in order to demonstrate the level of accuracy that MATCH may achieve in fitting our models to data. A rotation distribution and the modeling of gravity darkening are new additions to MATCH, and our data is fairly sparse in comparison to what MATCH is typically used for. Thus, we apply our models to an artificial data set (described below) and test for the ability of MATCH to recover the input age and \[Fe/H\] values used to construct this artificial data. We vary the number $N$ of artificial data points (i.e., $N$ is the number of stars in our artificial data) to test accuracy as the observations become more sparse.
An artificial data set with parameters similar to the Hyades, namely: $\rm{log}$ age $= 8.90$, \[Fe/H\] $= 0.15\pm0.01$, $\mu = 3.34$, $A_{\rm{V}}=0.0031$, was fit using our models in conjunction with MATCH. The artificial data is created using the previously mentioned MATCH program “fake”. In these tests, our artificial clusters contain no multiplicity, and so our binary fraction is set to zero. Below are the results of several trial runs, fitting for the artificial cluster age and metallicity.
Figure \[fig:xvsn\] shows the results of these mock tests. Here we plot the best-fit age (top row) and metallicity (bottom row) vs. N, where each point represents an average of 10 trial runs (to average over stochastic fluctuations). Red points correspond to models assigned a single rotation rate, fit to artificial data at a single rotation rate. Blue points correspond to models where a Gaussian distribution of rotation rates was used, fit to artificial data created with a Gaussian distribution of rotation rates. Errors shown are the average errors of the 10 trial runs. These errors were calculated via analysis of resultant posterior probability distribution, marginalized for the corresponding parameter; i.e., from the 16% and 84% percentiles of the posterior. The true values are represented by the light blue horizontal band, bounded by dashed black lines. For these tests, we are using the same models that will be used to fit the observations of our target clusters, which have a resolution 0.02 dex in age and metallicity. We create stars in a single formation episode whose duration in time and spread in metallicity is 0.02 dex (matching the resolution of our model composite stellar populations). Hence, the input age and metallicity bins, represented by the blue bands in Figure \[fig:xvsn\], span from log age = 8.90 to 8.92, and \[Fe/H\] = 0.14 to 0.16 dex, respectively.
Ranging from artificial clusters comprised of several hundred to several thousand total stellar members, the input cluster parameters are often found, or are off by at most 0.05 dex or so. This range in stellar numbers is chosen to replicate that of our target clusters. For instance, our sample of the Hyades contains lists of roughly one to several hundred stars in optical and NIR, respectively; the Pleiades lists contain several hundred; our list for the Praesepe consists of only 24 stars at the cluster turn off in the optical (although with $\sim$1000 total members in infrared for Praesepe). As seen in Figure \[fig:xvsn\], log age appears to not be recovered well in 2MASS $J$, $K_s$ for the case $N=100$ or so. However our NIR data lists contain nearer to $1000$ total members.
Models become more degenerate in age and metallicity with fewer total stars, as both the MSTO and MS become less populous under IMF sampling. Accordingly, it is expected that the recovered parameter uncertainties should become larger as $N$ is decreased, as may be seen in Figure \[fig:xvsn\]. Still, the error bars remain relatively small (of order $\lesssim0.03$ dex for log age and \[Fe/H\] for the worst cases) for results derived with the lowest stellar densities tested here.
Results {#s:results}
=======
In this section we turn to modeling the benchmark open clusters: the Hyades, Praesepe, and Pleiades, in order to estimate their population ages and metallicities. To this end we utilize a variety of photometric catalogues covering the optical (Tycho $B_T$, $V_T$) and infrared (2MASS $J$, $K_s$), in conjunction with a statistical analysis package, MATCH, which performs the model-data comparison. The adopted distance moduli, extinction $A_{\rm{V}}$, and binary fractions used to model each cluster are collected in Table \[t:muav\]. We fixed these values and assumed no error in them as they are fairly well determined for these clusters. Errors were calculated via analysis of the marginalized posterior probability distribution (as in §\[sssec:mock\]) calculated through our fitting procedure (§ \[sssec:match\]). In several cases, derived metallicities encounter the boundary of our search space (\[Fe/H\]$=0.40$). Hence, posterior probability distribution is not fully sampled in most cases. For these cases, we report the lower limit in Table \[t:results\], defined as the limit containing 68% of the probability in the posterior probability distribution.
Fitting MESA models to the Hyades, Praesepe, and Pleiades with MATCH {#ssec:fits}
--------------------------------------------------------------------
We are exploring the effects that stellar rotation has on derived cluster age and metallicity. With fixed distance and extinction, we fit to the MS and MSTO of the Hyades, Praesepe, and Pleiades. This is performed through Hess diagrams comparing observed to synthetic magnitudes and colors. A pair of results is presented sequentially for each cluster below; derived assuming a single population rotation rate, or assuming a Gaussian distribution of rates (referenced as $P\left(\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}=0.3\right)$; §\[sssec:match\]).
{width="0.95\linewidth"}
Figures \[fig:hyadfits\_rot\], \[fig:praefits\_rot\], and \[fig:pleifits\_rot\] show best fitting isochrones overlaid with observed data from the Hyades, Praesepe, and Pleiades. These are representative isochrones from our MESA models; representative in that they exist on model grid points, while the reported best fit values from MATCH belong to a continuum. The displayed isochrone ages are the closest grid point values to the MATCH reports. We have overlaid the Hess diagram of the best-fit $P\left(\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}=0.3\right)$ model in these figures to give a sense of what our models truly look like (shown in gray). For instance, refer back to Figure \[fig:moddemo\] for the general appearance of our models, with the effects of gravity darkening and a distribution of rotation rates broadening the MSTO.
Best fit isochrones appear to trace the data qualitatively well. Although, in Figures \[fig:hyadfits\_rot\] and \[fig:praefits\_rot\], corresponding to the Hyades and Praesepe, it may be seen that the red clump region in each CMD is not fit very well, perhaps due to complexities in convection (see §\[ssec:cov\]). Teal isochrones correspond to fits assuming no distribution of rotation rates. In black, the fit utilizing $P\left(\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}=0.3\right)$ is shown. Solid lines represent isochrones at the best fit values of age and metallicity. Dashed lines are the best fit isochrone at its $\pm$ uncertainty values in age; these are not displayed with $P\left(\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}=0.3\right)$, for clarity. Derived errors and best fit values are collected in Table \[t:results\].
{width="0.95\linewidth"}
{width="0.95\linewidth"}
For the Hyades, we mostly find ages that are consistent with classical non-rotating CMD analyses, and the LDB age determined by [@ELM2018], in both filter sets. Metallicities are within $\sim0.05$ dex of spectroscopic values. For instance, in $B_T$, $V_T$, the age is found to be $676^{+67}_{-11}$ Myr and \[Fe/H\]$=0.23^{+0.02}_{-0.02}$ when modeling a distribution of rotation rates. This age is nearer to results found using non-rotating models, although on the higher end. Ages of $\sim680$ Myr are found for the Hyades, whether using a distribution of rotation rates or a fixed value. This is true for the Hyades in all cases, except with our age determined via NIR data when modeling a distribution of rotation rates.
For the Hyades in NIR, when using a Gaussian rotation distribution, we see an age of $741^{+55}_{-11}$ Myr. This older age may result from the greater color span of MSTO stars here. In some sense, this resembles a broadened MSTO; using a distribution of rotation rates also makes the MSTO more broad. Thus, the $P\left(\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}=0.3\right)$ model can fit both the redder and bluer MSTO stars by sitting in the middle, driving an older age than the fixed $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}$ model, which is forced to fit either the redward or blueward MSTO stars moreso. On this point, note that our best fit single $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}$ model for the Hyades in NIR is high (0.6) compared to the lower value found in optical. This is due to the relatively low color span of MSTO stars in optical compared to NIR for the Hyades; the effects of gravity darkening produce a greater color spread in MSTO stars at higher rotation rates, driving the best fit model its higher $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}$ value. However, the MSTO spread in this case may be due to complications in the photometry. Membership and binarity uncertainties could be at play here, i.e., this older age could be spurious; (e.g., @TGK2016 find a tighter NIR MSTO morphology, identifying single stars in the Hyades). We excluded several of the redder MSTO stars from this fit, indicated in Figure \[fig:hyadfits\_rot\] by the open circles (there are 3 on the upper MSTO) in 2MASS $J$, $K_s$. This was done to reduce the influence of redward MSTO stars on derived age here. The Praesepe and Pleiades do not display as large of a color span in their MSTOs with NIR data.
It may also be noted that a much higher value of $\Omega/\Omega_c$ is preferred in fitting the NIR data of the Hyades (0.6 vs. 0.3 in optical). This is likely due to the MSTO of the Hyades having a greater spread in color and more MSTO stars in the NIR data. Adopting a higher $\Omega/\Omega_c$ grants models a broadened MSTO, via gravity darkening (e.g., Fig. \[fig:modgd\]). We speculate that this allows a better fit to the NIR data, but is statistically worse in application to the Hyades optical morphology, which lacks a significant color spread in its MSTO. However, we leave a more thorough explanation of this discrepancy to future work.
Thus, for the Hyades, our ages mostly resemble those of classical non-rotating isochrone determinations, e.g., [@MAP1998]. The metallicity results roughly align with the measurement of \[Fe/H\] $\approx0.15$ from [@JDC2017], although our results from the optical bands tend to favor values nearer to \[Fe/H\]$=0.20$, while in NIR we find nearer to \[Fe/H\]$=0.10$.
The situation for the Praesepe is similar to that of the Hyades: we see results nearer to reports from non-rotating models. This is the case across the NIR and optical data sets, whether using fixed $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}$ or $P\left(\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}=0.3\right)$. Here, the ages tend towards $\sim590$ Myr, while the best fits for \[Fe/H\] are near $\sim0.09$ in the NIR and in $B_T$, $V_T$, we find \[Fe/H\]$\sim0.25$. Here our optical data set contains fewer MS stars than our NIR, making metallicity more difficult to determine, driving higher \[Fe/H\] values here.
For the Pleiades, we similarly find ages that agree with classical, non-rotating analyses, as well as LDB results. Our ages fall within the range $\sim112-160$ Myr, in concordance with values derived from the LDB, and non-rotating isochrones. In the NIR, using a distribution of rotation rates, the ages have a large uncertainties. The MSTO of the Pleiades in NIR is relatively more extended, driving this behavior. Values of \[Fe/H\] range from $-0.01$ to $0.40$ (our \[Fe/H\] search boundary); these tend to be higher than established values. Similar to the scenario seen with the optical data set for the Praesepe, the number of stars here is very low: only 7. Our magnitude cuts of $V_T < 5.0$ and $K_s < 5.0$ were made to focus more on the MSTO, at the expense of constraints from the numerous MS Pleiads.
{width="0.95\linewidth"}
{width="0.95\linewidth"}
With the Pleiades, we did attempt fits with less severe magnitude cuts, but this in turn led to an increased age. On a Hess diagram, the low stellar density in the MSTO makes its stars appear as outliers in determining a global fit, despite these few stars being perhaps the most significant to extracting an accurate age. With relatively few stars, our uncertainties on age are larger for this cluster than the others. Moreover, many of the derived metallicities are unbounded and not well determined.
Discussion {#s:discussion}
==========
Here we present a comparison of ages derived in previous literature to our derived ages for the Hyades, Praesepe, and Pleiades in §\[ssec:complit\]. Following this is a discussion on our results in comparison to ages derived using rotating models built with the Geneva code, and interpolated with PARSEC stellar models for a greater range in metallicity and finer mass resolution (§\[ssec:compgeneva\]). Finally, we discuss the effect of mixing length on the red clump region (§\[ssec:cov\]). The red clump’s CMD position is sensitive to the efficiency of convection, and our default models were found to not match this region well; altering the efficiency may be a possible solution, at least in some cases.
Comparison to Literature Ages and Metallicities {#ssec:complit}
-----------------------------------------------
Figure \[fig:bvres\] shows our best fit age and \[Fe/H\] from fitting to optical data in comparison to several literature values; Figure \[fig:2mres\] shows the same for our infrared data fits. For the Hyades, Praesepe, and Pleiades, we generally find ages that align with classical results (although see §\[ssec:fits\] about the higher age derived for the Hyades in our NIR fit). Our metallicities for the Hyades, Praesepe, in the optical, and the Pleiades in both optical and infrared, appear to be inconsistent with literature values. Metallicity is unconstrained in these cases, leading to a dubious metallicity determination that lies near the end of our search space in metallicity: 0.40 dex. That metallicity appears unconstrained here is probably due to the relatively low stellar number densities present in these data sets, and the issues that this may cause with analysis on a Hess diagram. Additionally, we excluded much of the MS in our fits to the Pleiades, sacrificing its use in constraining metallicity, opting to focus on the sparse, brighter Pleiads for an age determination that is driven more by the MSTO.
The derived ages of the Hyades and Praesepe from CMD analysis using non-rotating isochrones and the LDB congregate near $625-650$ Myr (see references in §\[ssec:hyades\] and §\[ssec:praesepe\]). For the Pleiades, non-rotating isochrone and LDB analysis have derived ages from about $100-130$ Myr (see references in §\[ssec:pleiades\]). Our ages are consistent with classical non-rotating isochrone CMD fits and LDB results (where available) for the Hyades, Praesepe, and Pleiades.
Our results contrast with the ages derived by [@BH2015a] (see e.g., the points labeled BH15 in Figure \[fig:bvres\] and \[fig:2mres\]). Derived ages of the Hyades and Praesepe from CMD analysis using rotating Geneva isochrones, carried out by [@BH2015a; @BH2015b], using a Bayesian approach, are greater than classical reports. An age of $750\pm100$ Myr was derived for Hyades ($800\pm50$ if fixing metallicity to $[Fe/H]=0.10$). The age of the Praesepe was determined to be $790\pm60$ Myr. Lastly, an age of $\sim95\pm35$ Myr was determined for the Pleiades, consistent with classical non-rotating age determinations and the LDB. Our derived ages agree with these studies for the Pleiades, but we do not find as great of an age increase for the Hyades nor the Praesepe via our models and methods.
The metallicity results for the Hyades and Praesepe are lower by $\sim0.05$ dex of literature values in our 2MASS fits; in $B_T$, $V_T$, best fit \[Fe/H\] for the Hyades and Praesepe are higher by $\sim0.05$ dex of literature values. Our metallicity results for the Pleiades are generally inconsistent with literature values (those being \[Fe/H\]$\approx0.0$); this is likely due to our magnitude cuts excluding much of the MS in favor of MSTO stars, and thus \[Fe/H\] becoming unconstrained in this CMD region. For instance, note the similarity in CMD position of the isochrones in Figure \[fig:pleifits\_rot\] (right panel), although they differ by $\sim0.10-0.15$ dex in metallicity.
Generally, rotating models are preferred owing to a mildly higher probability over non-rotating models. MATCH uses a Poisson equivalent to $\chi^2$ as a fit statistic (e.g., see @AD2001, §2.3), designated via $-2\rm{ln}P$ (a lower value corresponds to higher probability), where $\rm{P}$ is the cumulative Poisson likelihood ratio, incorporating all Hess diagram bins. For the Hyades, we find $-2\rm{ln}P=104$ in optical photometry for the best fitting model, while the non-rotating model shows $-2\rm{ln}P=120$, for instance. The best-fit model with a Gaussian distribution of rotation rates achieved $-2\rm{ln}P=101$ in this case. Typically, rotating models are preferred according to the fit statistic by roughly $3-25$% over non-rotating models.
The results derived via models with a Gaussian distribution of $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}$ or a fixed value are often similar. However, as these clusters contain relatively low stellar densities in their MSTOs, they do not provide a strong distinction between more realistic models that include a distribution of rotation rates, and those that possess a fixed population $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}$ value. With precise photometry from upcoming data sets like $Gaia$ DR2, and in studying more populous clusters such as those in the LMC and SMC, we will have a better opportunity to assess the role of a rotation distribution.
Comparison to Geneva Models {#ssec:compgeneva}
---------------------------
Our models behave differently from Geneva models, as highlighted in § \[sssec:rotation\], so it may be no surprise that our results differ from work that utilizes the Geneva models. Rotation has more modest consequences for stellar evolution under our physical assumptions, so we do not observe a strong affect on derived ages due to stellar rotation. No major differences in derived age appear to manifest from using a Gaussian distribution of rotation rates as opposed to a single value. Indeed, the MSTOs present in these clusters tend to not be especially well populated, and so any spread that may exist due to a distribution of rotation rates may be difficult to observe.
As rotation tends to make the MSTO primarily cooler in our modeling, at least at ages near $600$ Myr (see Figure \[fig:vvcvary\]), it makes sense that we do not find a significantly older age for the Hyades or Praesepe. Rather, adopting a younger age would increase the brightness and make the MSTO hotter, helping an isochrone compensate for the effects incurred by an increased rotation rate. Vice versa in the case of the Pleiades at $\sim120$ Myr, here increasing rotation primarily makes the models brighter, leading models with higher $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}$ to mimic younger stars at fixed age[^1].
This is in contrast to results found by [@BH2015a], [@BH2015b], where the Praesepe and Hyades showed an age increase of roughly 200 Myr as a result of stellar rotation in their modeling. In Geneva models, the changes in isochrone morphology due to rotation are almost completely opposite to the effects seen in our models. Geneva models are hotter, brighter, and live longer on the MS (meaning the population evolves more slowly), as discussed in §\[sssec:rotation\]. It seems plausible that this discrepancy may stem from a more modest rotational mixing efficiency in MIST compared to Geneva. Whether this is precisely the case, or perhaps if other model differences come into play more strongly will require further investigation. It is also important to bear in mind that our model set is limited to $\Omega/\Omega_c=0.0$ to $0.6$ presently, while the Geneva models allow study from $\Omega/\Omega_c=0.0$ to $1$. Extending our model grid to include $\Omega/\Omega_c > 0.6$ will be fruitful for comparison, aside from perhaps being necessary to study realistic rotation distributions (e.g., those discussed in @HGMcS2010); we aim to incorporate models with higher rotation in future work.
Furthermore, our models possess a greater mixing due to CCO. This was shown in Figure \[fig:trkcmp\] to make our non-rotating models hotter and brighter than their Geneva counterparts. The effects of CCO mixing are similar to rotationally enhanced mixing, effectively expanding the stellar core, granting it more fuel to burn longer, brighter, and hotter. Our non-rotating age determinations are near what [@BH2015a] found with their rotating models (see Table \[t:results\] and Figures \[fig:bvres\] and \[fig:2mres\]). It seems plausible that this is due to the higher level of CCO mixing in our models, as CCO makes the MSTO hotter and brighter. Proper 1D treatment of convection is yet another complication in stellar evolution theory and CMD-based analyses.
The physical assumptions made in our models §\[ssec:models\] and in Geneva are both able to simulate observational constraints. Much of our adopted physics follow from the assumptions made in MIST (@JC2016; see §8 and 9 of that paper for comparisons to data), while the physics adopted in Geneva (@SE2012; see §5 of that paper for comparisons to data) are similar, although there are differences, for example, in the treatment of rotational mixing and the assumed strength of convective core overshoot mixing. In our adopted formalism, the rotational mixing parameters $f_c$ and $f_{\mu}$ are tuned to match the observed nitrogen enrichment in galactic MS B-type stars (with the observations from e.g., @GL1992 [@K1992; @MHB2008; @IH2009]), following [@HLW2000]. The Geneva models are capable of reproducing these observed surface abundances without having any parameters calibrated to do so in their formalism, followed from [@MaZh1998]. Thus, although physical assumptions may differ between model sets, neither is ruled out by observational constraints thus far.
Effect of Mixing Length on the Red Clump {#ssec:cov}
----------------------------------------
Although our fits appear to match the observed MS and MSTO regions relatively well for these clusters, in Figures \[fig:hyadfits\_rot\] and \[fig:praefits\_rot\], it is clear that our best-fit isochrones miss the red clump region. Figure \[fig:amlt\] displays the range of convective mixing at various values, to demonstrate how it can affect the red clump region. In particular, we vary the parameter $\alpha_{\rm{MLT}}$, responsible for setting the enhanced range of convective mixing, according to the Mixing Length Theory (MLT) of [@BV1958]. This parameter essentially dictates how far a fluid parcel travels, $l_{\rm{MLT}}$, before mixing thermally with its surroundings; this length scale is characterized as some fraction of the pressure scale height, $H_{\rm{P}}$, and is related to the constant $\alpha_{\rm{MLT}}$ via $l_{\rm{MLT}}=\alpha_{\rm{MLT}}H_{\rm{P}}$.
![Showcasing the effect of altering the convective mixing length parameter $\alpha_{\rm{MLT}}$. The default value of $\alpha_{\rm{MLT}}$ is $1.82$ in our models (shown as black), calibrated to reproduce solar Li surface abundances. Analogous isochrones are shown at $\alpha_{\rm{MLT}}=1.60$ (red) and $\alpha_{\rm{MLT}}=2.00$ (blue) for comparison. The data featured here is the cross matched data from the member list of @deB2001 for the Hyades.[]{data-label="fig:amlt"}](hyades_alphamlt_vary.pdf){width="0.95\linewidth"}
By default $\alpha_{\rm{MLT}}=1.82$ in our models, based on solar calibration (discussed further in @JC2016). Figure \[fig:amlt\] shows isochrones, at age $649$ Myr (similar to our derived ages for the Hyades and Praesepe), \[Fe/H\]$=0.15$, $\Omega/\Omega_{\rm{c}}=0.4$, and inclination $i=0^{\circ}$, at various $\alpha_{\rm{MLT}}=1.60$, $1.82$ (default), and $2.00$. Altering $\alpha_{\rm{MLT}}$ makes the modeled red giant stars hotter or cooler, providing potential for a better fit to a given data set. In Figure \[fig:amlt\] it is shown that a greater $\alpha_{\rm{MLT}}$ may provide a better fit in the case of the Hyades. However, in the Praesepe this may lead to a worse fit, as it would pull the model away from two of the redder red clump stars.
Some 3D modeling efforts have seen evidence that $\alpha_{\rm{MLT}}$ may vary with e.g., stellar $T_{\rm{eff}}$, $\rm{log} g$, [@RT2015] and metallicity [@MWA2015]. Evidence that $\alpha_{\rm{MLT}}$ may vary with stellar parameters has also been seen in comparing models to observations, as in e.g., [@AB2012; @JT2017; @MJBC2018; @S-HC2018; @TL2018], and [@LSV2018]. However, Choi et al. 2018 (submitted to ApJ) found that model $T_{\rm{eff}}$ can vary by nearly $\pm100$ K according to the treatment of surface boundary conditions in 1D codes. Thus, it appears that discrepancies between models and observations may (at least in part) be due to the chosen boundary conditions used in comparing models to data. Determining precisely how $\alpha_{\rm{MLT}}$ may vary, and according to which stellar properties, is an ongoing task. Efforts by e.g., [@WAEM2017] and [@JRM2017] will aid in having 3D simulations further inform our 1D models. Convection is another uncertain aspect in stellar modeling, alongside the uncertainties of stellar rotation.
Summary {#s:summary}
=======
In this paper our goal was to explore the effect of stellar rotation on the inferred ages of open clusters, using the well-studied examples of the Hyades, Praesepe, and Pleiades. Our results are summarized here:
- Application of self-consistent rotating isochrones (constructed via MESA) to CMD data of the Hyades, Praesepe, and Pleiades has yielded results that suggest no major influence on derived ages from the inclusion of rotation, even when including the effects of gravity darkening and a distribution of rotation rates (see §\[ssec:models\]).
- Our ages, derived using the statistical analysis package MATCH, are similar to values based on non-rotating models. Our models suggest ages of $\sim680$ Myr, $\sim590$ Myr, and $\sim110-160$ Myr for the Hyades, Praesepe, and Pleiades, respectively with our binary cleaned data. Our metallicity determinations roughly agree with literature in cases where the data provides a populous MS (i.e., in NIR for the Hyades and Praesepe, and the optical for the Hyades). These results are collected in Table \[t:results\].
- These results are in contrast to the findings of [@BH2015a] who used Geneva stellar models, where a marked difference between rotating and non-rotating models was found for the Hyades and Praesepe clusters. In that work, rotation increased population ages by $\sim200$ Myr, as derived from the MSTO; our models find a less dramatic increase to derived age.
The physics that we have adopted in our modeling differs from what is adopted in Geneva. Either set of physics is well-founded in that they each are tuned to reproduce certain observations, and can do so successfully. Our models show comparably modest differences as rotation rate is varied; whereas the changes to stellar lifetime, luminosity, and temperature are more dramatic in the Geneva models (see @JC2016 for additional comparisons). Such model uncertainties complicate the establishment of an age for the Praesepe and Hyades based on CMD analysis. However, it is worth noting that our derived ages agree with what others have found via the LDB method, These results demonstrate a reason for caution in using rotating stellar models. We still contend with significant uncertainty in crucial evolutionary processes (particularly rotation and convection in this context), producing correspondingly uncertain results.
Moving forward, our models are primed to look at how stellar rotation may factor into the eMSTOs observed in LMC and SMC clusters. In future work, we plan to compile and present the predicted star formation histories of several such clusters using the models developed here. Gravity darkening and a distribution of rotation rates are able to significantly broaden the MSTO (e.g., @BdM2009 and our Figure \[fig:moddemo\]). It may be that rotation is not able to fully explain for the observed eMSTO morphology (e.g., see @GGC2017), but our upcoming work aims to assess the extent to which rotation can account for an MSTO spread, according to our models. Given alternate, yet still viable sets of physical assumptions exist in our models, we hope to further elucidate what stellar rotation may be capable of.
Acknowledgments {#s:ack}
===============
We thank Timothy Brandt for helpful comments and discussion on earlier drafts of this paper. We would also like to thank the anonymous referee for their comments in improving the clarity of the paper. SG acknowledges the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship under grant No. DGE1745303. CC acknowledges support from NASA grant AST-1313280, and the Packard Foundation. This paper is based upon work supported by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) under Contract No. NNG16PJ26C issued through the WFIRST Science Investigation Teams Program. Some of this material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Award No. 1501205. We would also like to thank Bill Paxton and the MESA community for making this work possible.
natexlab\#1[\#1]{}
, H. A., [Barnes]{}, R. C., [Biggs]{}, E. S., & [Osmer]{}, P. S. 1965, , 142, 1604
, W. D., & [Moravveji]{}, E. 2017, , 836, L19
, M., [Grevesse]{}, N., [Sauval]{}, A. J., & [Scott]{}, P. 2009, , 47, 481
, J. P., [M[é]{}rand]{}, A., [Coud[é]{} du Foresto]{}, V., [et al.]{} 2006, , 645, 664
, I., [Chabrier]{}, G., [Allard]{}, F., & [Hauschildt]{}, P. H. 1998, , 337, 403
, I., [Homeier]{}, D., [Allard]{}, F., & [Chabrier]{}, G. 2015, , 577, A42
, S. A. 2007, , 669, 1167
, D., [Stauffer]{}, J. R., & [Jayawardhana]{}, R. 2004, , 614, 386
, G., [Marcy]{}, G. W., & [Graham]{}, J. R. 1996, , 458, 600
, N., & [de Mink]{}, S. E. 2009, , 398, L11
, G., [Nasi]{}, E., [Girardi]{}, L., [et al.]{} 2003, , 125, 770
, A. M., [Roper]{}, B. W., & [Lum]{}, M. G. 2013, , 775, 58
, K.-H. 1963, , 138, 297
, E. 1958, , 46, 108
, A., [Tanner]{}, J. D., [Basu]{}, S., [et al.]{} 2012, , 755, L12
, T. D., & [Huang]{}, C. X. 2015, , 807, 58
—. 2015, , 807, 25
—. 2015, , 807, 24
, I., [de Mink]{}, S. E., [Cantiello]{}, M., [et al.]{} 2011, , 530, A115
, B., & [Zahn]{}, J.-P. 1992, , 253, 173
, J., [Conroy]{}, C., & [Byler]{}, N. 2017, , 838, 159
, J., [Dotter]{}, A., [Conroy]{}, C., [et al.]{} 2016, , 823, 102
, S.-H., [Yoon]{}, S.-C., [Jung]{}, M.-K., [Kim]{}, D. U., & [Kim]{}, J. 2018, , 853, 79
, C. 2013, , 51, 393
, M., [Goudfrooij]{}, P., [Puzia]{}, T. H., & [de Mink]{}, S. E. 2015, , 450, 3054
, J. D., [Deliyannis]{}, C. P., [Maderak]{}, R. M., & [Steinhauer]{}, A. 2017, , 153, 128
, S. E. 2015, , 813, 108
, J. H. J., [Hoogerwerf]{}, R., & [de Zeeuw]{}, P. T. 2001, , 367, 111
, J. T. A., [Rix]{}, H.-W., [Martin]{}, N. F., [et al.]{} 2008, , 135, 1361
, A. 1997, New Astronomy, 2, 397
, A. E. 2002, , 332, 91
, A. 2016, , 222, 8
, S., [Georgy]{}, C., [Eggenberger]{}, P., [et al.]{} 2012, , 537, A146
, A. S., & [Sofia]{}, S. 1978, , 220, 279
, F., & [Rieutord]{}, M. 2011, , 533, A43
, [Brown]{}, A. G. A., [Vallenari]{}, A., [et al.]{} 2016, , 595, A2
, [van Leeuwen]{}, F., [Vallenari]{}, A., [et al.]{} 2017, , 601, A19
, C., [Zoccali]{}, M., [Bertelli]{}, G., [et al.]{} 2003, , 125, 742
, A., [Rieke]{}, G. H., [Su]{}, K. Y. L., [et al.]{} 2009, , 697, 1578
, D. R., & [Lambert]{}, D. L. 1992, , 387, 673
, L., [Bertelli]{}, G., [Bressan]{}, A., [et al.]{} 2002, , 391, 195
, L., [Bressan]{}, A., [Bertelli]{}, G., & [Chiosi]{}, C. 2000, , 141, 371
, L., [Goudfrooij]{}, P., [Kalirai]{}, J. S., [et al.]{} 2013, , 431, 3501
, B., [R[ö]{}ser]{}, S., [Schilbach]{}, E., [et al.]{} 2013, , 559, A43
, P., [Girardi]{}, L., & [Correnti]{}, M. 2017, , 846, 22
, P., [Girardi]{}, L., [Kozhurina-Platais]{}, V., [et al.]{} 2014, , 797, 35
, D. A., [Dolphin]{}, A. E., [Robberto]{}, M., [et al.]{} 2011, , 738, 137
, D. B., [Demarque]{}, P., [Kim]{}, Y.-C., & [Pinsonneault]{}, M. H. 1992, , 387, 372
, J. E., [Griffin]{}, R. F., [Griffin]{}, R. E. M., & [Zimmerman]{}, B. A. 1988, , 96, 198
, A., & [Langer]{}, N. 2000, , 544, 1016
, A., [Langer]{}, N., & [Woosley]{}, S. E. 2000, , 528, 368
, A. 1993, , 66, 137
, W., [Gies]{}, D. R., & [McSwain]{}, M. V. 2010, , 722, 605
, I., [Brott]{}, I., [Langer]{}, N., [et al.]{} 2009, , 496, 841
, E. J., [von Hippel]{}, T., [van Dyk]{}, D. A., [et al.]{} 2016, , 828, 79
, B. R., & [Lindegren]{}, L. 2005, , 436, 127
, M., & [Chaboyer]{}, B. 2018, , 856, 10
, J. S., & [Tosi]{}, M. 2004, , 351, 649
, J.-I., [Hirata]{}, R., [Ito]{}, M., [et al.]{} 1996, , 48, 317
, J. 1992, , 262, 171
, R., & [Thomas]{}, H.-C. 1970, in IAU Colloq. 4: Stellar Rotation, ed. A. [Slettebak]{}, 20
, T. G., [Brandner]{}, W., [Tognelli]{}, E., [et al.]{} 2016, , 585, A7
, P. 2001, , 322, 231
, R. L. 1970, SAO Special Report, 309
—. 1993, [SYNTHE spectrum synthesis programs and line data]{}
, E. M., [Leitherer]{}, C., [Ekstrom]{}, S., [Meynet]{}, G., & [Schaerer]{}, D. 2012, , 751, 67
, T., [Bedding]{}, T. R., [Huber]{}, D., [et al.]{} 2018, , 475, 981
, L., [Madsen]{}, S., & [Dravins]{}, D. 2000, , 356, 1119
, L. B. 1967, , 65, 89
, S., [Dravins]{}, D., & [Lindegren]{}, L. 2002, , 381, 446
, A. 1975, , 43, 61
—. 1997, , 321, 134
—. 1999, , 347, 185
, A., & [Meynet]{}, G. 2000, , 361, 159
—. 2000, , 38, 143
, A., & [Zahn]{}, J.-P. 1998, , 334, 1000
, Z., [Serenelli]{}, A., [Weiss]{}, A., & [Chaboyer]{}, B. 2010, , 718, 1378
, Z., [Weiss]{}, A., & [Asplund]{}, M. 2015, , 573, A89
, E. E., & [Hillenbrand]{}, L. A. 2008, , 687, 1264
, E. L., [Lodieu]{}, N., [Pavlenko]{}, Y., & [B[é]{}jar]{}, V. J. S. 2018, ArXiv e-prints, arXiv:1802.07155
, P., & [Pigatto]{}, L. 1988, , 193, 148
, H. A., [ten Brummelaar]{}, T. A., [Gies]{}, D. R., [et al.]{} 2005, , 628, 439
, J. C. 1981, , 97, 235
, G., & [Maeder]{}, A. 1997, , 321, 465
—. 2000, , 361, 101
, G., [Mermilliod]{}, J.-C., & [Maeder]{}, A. 1993, , 98, 477
, T., [Hubrig]{}, S., & [Briquet]{}, M. 2008, , 481, 453
, J. R., [Silva Aguirre]{}, V., [Weiss]{}, A., [Christensen-Dalsgaard]{}, J., & [Trampedach]{}, R. 2017, in European Physical Journal Web of Conferences, Vol. 160, European Physical Journal Web of Conferences, 03009
, L. A., [Rappaport]{}, S., & [Chiang]{}, E. 1993, , 413, 364
, J., [Harmanec]{}, P., [Kub[á]{}t]{}, J., [et al.]{} 2010, , 516, A80
, B., [Bildsten]{}, L., [Dotter]{}, A., [et al.]{} 2011, , 192, 3
, B., [Cantiello]{}, M., [Arras]{}, P., [et al.]{} 2013, , 208, 4
, B., [Marchant]{}, P., [Schwab]{}, J., [et al.]{} 2015, , 220, 15
, B., [Schwab]{}, J., [Bauer]{}, E. B., [et al.]{} 2018, , 234, 34
, J. A., & [Hill]{}, G. 1971, , 83, 493
, L. R. 1996, , 463, 737
, M.-N., [Cayrel de Strobel]{}, G., [Cayrel]{}, R., & [Hejlesen]{}, P. M. 1977, , 54, 779
, M. A. C., [Brown]{}, A. G. A., [Lebreton]{}, Y., [et al.]{} 1997, VizieR Online Data Catalog, 333
—. 1998, , 331, 81
, A. E., & [Cole]{}, A. 2017, ArXiv e-prints, arXiv:1705.08186
, M. H., [Kawaler]{}, S. D., [Sofia]{}, S., & [Demarque]{}, P. 1989, , 338, 424
, O. H., [Sim[ó]{}n-D[í]{}az]{}, S., [Sana]{}, H., [et al.]{} 2013, , 560, A29
, S., [de Bruijne]{}, J., [Zari]{}, E., [d’Antona]{}, F., & [Ventura]{}, P. 2018, , arXiv:1804.00759
, A., [Calamai]{}, G., & [Leinert]{}, C. 1994, , 286, 829
, S., [Schilbach]{}, E., [Piskunov]{}, A. E., [Kharchenko]{}, N. V., & [Scholz]{}, R.-D. 2011, , 531, A92
, F., [Zorec]{}, J., & [G[ó]{}mez]{}, A. E. 2007, , 463, 671
, M., & [Cassisi]{}, S. 2017, Royal Society Open Science, 4, 170192
, G., & [Struve]{}, O. 1929, , 89, 222
, W. M. 1939, , 99, 168
, D. R., [Laskar]{}, T., [Valenti]{}, J. A., [Stauffer]{}, J. R., & [Rebull]{}, L. M. 2009, , 138, 1292
, J. R., [Hartmann]{}, L. W., [Fazio]{}, G. G., [et al.]{} 2007, , 172, 663
, J., [Somers]{}, G., [Pinsonneault]{}, M. H., [et al.]{} 2017, , 840, 17
, B. J. 2006, , 132, 2453
—. 2008, , 136, 1388
, B. J., & [Joner]{}, M. D. 2005, , 159, 100
, R., [Christensen-Dalsgaard]{}, J., [Asplund]{}, M., [Stein]{}, R. F., & [Nordlund]{}, [Å]{}. 2015, in European Physical Journal Web of Conferences, Vol. 101, European Physical Journal Web of Conferences, 06064
, W. F., [Lee]{}, J. T., & [Hoffleit]{}, E. D. 1997, Baltic Astronomy, 6, 27
, G. T., [Ciardi]{}, D. R., [ten Brummelaar]{}, T., [et al.]{} 2006, , 637, 494
, D. A., [Richard]{}, O., [Michaud]{}, G., & [Richer]{}, J. 2002, , 571, 487
, L. S., [Basu]{}, S., [Ong]{}, J. J. M., [Bonaca]{}, A., & [Chaplin]{}, W. J. 2018, ArXiv e-prints, arXiv:1803.05924
, H. 1924, , 84, 665
, M., [Lennon]{}, D. J., [Dufton]{}, P. L., & [Lambert]{}, D. L. 2000, , 358, 639
, P. F., [Chen]{}, W. P., [Lin]{}, C. C., [et al.]{} 2014, , 784, 57
, P. A. 1967, , 79, 156
, D. R., [Dalcanton]{}, J. J., [Williams]{}, B. F., [et al.]{} 2011, , 739, 5
, J.-H., [Gallart]{}, C., [Demarque]{}, P., [Yi]{}, S., & [Zoccali]{}, M. 2003, , 125, 754
, S. X., [Reffert]{}, S., [Schilbach]{}, E., [et al.]{} 2018, ArXiv e-prints, arXiv:1802.04234
, M., [Monnier]{}, J. D., [Pedretti]{}, E., [et al.]{} 2009, , 701, 209
, J., & [Royer]{}, F. 2012, , 537, A120
, N., [North]{}, P., [Debernardi]{}, Y., [et al.]{} 2004, , 425, L45
[lcccc]{}\[!h\] The Hyades\
& & 0.0 & $776^{+36}_{-15}$ & $0.24^{+0.01}_{-0.03}$\
& $B_T , V_T$ & 0.3 & $676^{+13}_{-30}$ & $0.24^{+0.02}_{-0.01}$\
& & $P(\frac{\Omega}{\Omega_{\rm{c}}} = 0.3)$ & $676^{+67}_{-11}$ & $0.24\pm0.01$\
\
& & 0.0 & $741^{+17}_{-15}$ & $0.10\pm0.01$\
& $J , K_s$ & 0.6 & $589^{+29}_{-11}$ & $0.12\pm0.01$\
& & $P(\frac{\Omega}{\Omega_{\rm{c}}} = 0.3)$ & $741^{+55}_{-12}$ & $0.10^{+0.01}_{-0.04}$\
The Praesepe\
& & 0.0 & $589^{+13}_{-14}$ & $>0.38$\
& $B_T , V_T$ & 0.5 & $589^{+13}_{-26}$ & $0.24^{+0.03}_{-0.02}$\
& & $P(\frac{\Omega}{\Omega_{\rm{c}}} = 0.3)$ & $617^{+40}_{-10}$ & $0.26^{+0.02}_{-0.04}$\
\
& & 0.0 & $741^{+42}_{-15}$ & $0.08^{+0.01}_{-0.03}$\
& $J , K_s$ & 0.4 & $617^{+14}_{-13}$ & $0.10\pm0.01$\
& & $P(\frac{\Omega}{\Omega_{\rm{c}}} = 0.3)$ & $617^{+17}_{-15}$ & $0.09^{+0.01}_{-0.02}$\
The Pleiades\
& & 0.0 & $123^{+3}_{-15}$ & $>0.29$\
& $B_T , V_T$ & 0.6 & $141^{+27}_{-12}$ & $>0.40$\
& & $P(\frac{\Omega}{\Omega_{\rm{c}}} = 0.3)$ & $112^{+2}_{-26}$ & $>0.30$\
\
& & 0.0 & $162^{+182}_{-65}$ & $>-0.01$\
& $J , K_s$ & 0.6 & $155^{+104}_{-37}$ & $0.18^{+0.29}_{-0.15}$\
& & $P(\frac{\Omega}{\Omega_{\rm{c}}} = 0.3)$ & $155^{+150}_{-46}$ & $>0.03$\
\[t:results\]
[^1]: Note the slight increase in luminosity at the MSTO of the $M>2M_{\odot}$ models in Figure \[fig:trkcmp\] and the more apparent enhancement in Figure \[fig:vvcvary\] at $\sim120 Myr$.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
title: 'Statistical Physics Approach to M-theory Integrals[^1]'
---
Introduction {#Introduction}
============
Recent work in field theory has revealed the existence of an important new class of gauge-invariant matrix models. At the difference of the classic Wigner-type models, interest now focusses on integrals of D non-linearly [*coupled*]{} matrices $X_{\mu}, \mu=1,\ldots
D$. The $X_{\mu}$ are constructed from the generators $T^A$ of the fundamental representation of a given Lie algebra Lie($G$): $X_{\mu}=
X_{\mu}^A T_A$, with $A = 1,\ldots,{\rm dim}(G)$. The group $G$ may be $SU(N)$, but the orthogonal, symplectic and exceptional groups have also come under close scrutiny recently.
These ordinary, multiple Riemann integrals stem from a dimensional reduction of D-dimensional Euclidean continuum Yang-Mills theory to zero dimensions. They have important implications, as the integrals yield the bulk part of the Witten index of supersymmetric quantum mechanical gauge theories, and appear in multi-instanton calculations of large $N$ susy Yang-Mills theories. Furthermore, they appear in proposed formulations of string theory (the IKKT model) and M-theory. It remains to be elucidated whether they contain further non-perturbative information on gauge theories via the Eguchi-Kawai mechanism.
For the sake of brevity (cf. [@kns] for complete definitions), we write down (even for supersymmetric Yang-Mills theories) only the effective bosonic integral, which is obtained after integrating out the ${{\cal N}}$(= number of supersymmetries) Grassmann-valued fermionic matrices $$\begin{aligned}
\lefteqn{{{\cal Z}}^{{{\cal N}}}_{D,G} = \int \prod_{A,\mu}
\frac{d X_{\mu}^{A}}{\sqrt{2 \pi}} \times }
\nonumber \\
& &
e^{ \frac{1}{4 g^2} {{\rm Tr}\,}[X_\mu,X_\nu] [X_\mu,X_\nu]}
({{\cal P}}\left\{ X_{\mu}^{A} \right\}).
\label{int}\end{aligned}$$ In this equation, ${{\cal P}}(\{X\})$ is the Pfaffian of a certain matrix ${{\cal M}}$, which can be constructed from the adjoint representation of the $X_{\mu}$.
During the last few years, intense effort has been brought to bear on these integrals, ranging from the rigorous exact solution for $SU(2)$ [@sestern],[@smilga] to ultra-sophisticated analytical calculations [@mns] which lent support to earlier conjectures [@greengut].
We have initiated a project with the aim to obtain direct non-perturbative information on these integrals by numerical Monte Carlo calculation. In several cases already, this approach has allowed to clarify analytic properties of the integrals, both in the supersymmetric and the purely bosonic case (where the Pfaffian in eq.(\[int\]) is simply omitted). We have also obtained very precise values (statistical estimates) of ${{\cal Z}}$ for several low-ranked groups, estimates which were sufficiently precise to decide between differing analytical conjectures. The basic strength of the numerical approach is however to allow the computation of a wide range of observables (Wilson loops, eigenvalue distributions), and much work remains to be done.
The integrals in eq.(\[int\]) resemble partition functions in statistical physics. Our initial hope was to reduce eq.(\[int\]) to a standard form, most simply by the transformation $${{\cal Z}}^{{{\cal N}}}_{D,G} = \int \prod_{\mu,A}
\frac{d X_{\mu}^{A}}{\sqrt{2 \pi}}
e^{- \frac{ X_{\mu}^{A^2}}{2\sigma^2}}
\left[
\frac{
{{\cal F}}( \left\{ X_{\mu}^{A} \right\} )
} { e^{- \sum \frac{ X_{\mu}^{A^2}}{2\sigma^2 }}
} \right]
\label{gaussian},$$ where ${{\cal F}}( \left\{ X_{\mu}^{A} \right\} )$ is the integrand in the second line of eq.(\[int\]). In this form, the integral can (in principle) be computed directly using Monte Carlo methods. To do so, it would suffice to generate Gaussian distributed random numbers $X_{\mu}^{A}$, and to average the term $[\;\;]$ in eq.(\[gaussian\]) over this distribution. The straightforward approach is thwarted by the fact that the integrals eq.(\[gaussian\]) - and, equivalently, eq.(\[int\]) - only barely converge, if at all.
The reason for this bad convergence lies in the existence of “valleys" in the action in eq.(\[int\]). For example, any configuration of mutually commuting $X_{\mu}$ ($[X_{\mu},X_{\nu}]=0
\; \forall \mu, \nu$) gives rise to a subspace of matrices with vanishing action, which stretches out to infinity, and leads to a large contribution to ${{\cal Z}}$. There is presently no mathematical proof that these singularities are integrable (cf. [@nishi] [@ikkt2] for perturbative results).
Very importantly, integrals may exist, without being computable by straightforward Monte Carlo methods. This distinction between existence and (Monte Carlo) computability is so crucial for Yang-Mills integrals that we present them in the next section in the simplified context of a $1-$dimensional integral.
Existence & Computability {#Existence }
==========================
Consider the integral $$I(\alpha ) = \int_0^1 dx \mu(x) x^{-\alpha}
\label{1-d-ex}$$ with a constant weight function $\mu(x)=1$, which we introduce for later convenience. In this toy problem, the singularity at $x=0$ plays the role of a valley, as discussed before, in the more complex Yang-Mills integral.
We may compute the integral eq.(\[1-d-ex\]) by the Monte Carlo method in the following way: as the weight function is constant ($\mu(x)=1$), we pick $t$ uniformly distributed points $x_t$ with $0 \le x_t \le 1$ and compute
$$I \sim S_t = 1/t \sum_{i=1}^t x_i^{-\alpha},
\label{partial}$$
where $t=1,2\ldots $ is the Monte Carlo time. A typical outcome for the partial sums $S_t$ during a Monte Carlo calculation for $\alpha =0.9$ is shown in figure \[partialsum0.9\]. The calculation is seemingly correct, as standard error analysis gives a result $I(\alpha =0.9) = 6.13 \pm 0.46$, without emitting any warnings! Carrying on the simulation for much longer times, we would every so often generate an extremely small $x_t$, which in one step would hike up the partial sum, and change the error estimate. Repeatedly, we would get tricked into accepting “stabilized values” of the integral, which would probably still not correspond to the true value $I(\alpha =0.9)=10$!
Clearly, there is a problem with the computability of the integral, which can be traced back to its infinite variance. Calling ${{\cal O}}= x^{-\alpha}$, the variance is given by $$Var= \int
dx \mu(x) {{\cal O}}(x)^2 - [\int dx \mu(x) {{\cal O}}(x)]^2.$$ The error in the Monte Carlo evaluation eq.(\[partial\]) behaves like $\sqrt{Var/t}$, and, for $\alpha \ge 0.5$, is infinite. This situation is virtually impossible to diagnose from within the simulation itself.
We have developed a highly efficient tool to numerically check for (absolute) convergence of integrals. The idea (translated to the case of the present toy problem) is to perform Markov chain random walk simulation with a stationary distribution $\mu'(x)=\mu(x)
x^{-\alpha}$ and $\mu''(x)=\mu(x) x^{-2 \alpha}$. to check for existence of the integral and finiteness of the variance, respectively. In an effort to be completely explicit, this means to choose a small displacement interval $\delta_t$, uniformly distributed between $+\epsilon$ and $-\epsilon$, and to go from $x_t$ to $x_{t+1}$ according to the following probability table
$$x_{t+1} =
\left\{
\begin{array}{cc}
x_{t} + \delta_{t}& \mbox{ w/ probability} \\
& \mbox{min}(1,\mu'(x_{t+1})/\mu(x_t)) \\
x_{t} & \mbox{else} \\
\end{array} \right.
\label{chain}.$$
(cf. [@Intro]). During these simulations (which are neither used nor useful to compute the integral eq.(\[1-d-ex\]) itself), we are exclusively interested in finding out whether the Markov chain eq.(\[chain\]) gets stuck. If so, it has become attracted by a point $x_0$ with $$\int_{x_0}^{x_0+\epsilon} dx \mu'(x) = \infty$$ i. e. a non-integrable singularity. In figures \[supertool0.9\] and \[supertool1.8\] , we show $x_t$ for Markov chains with stationary distributions $\mu'(x)$ and $\mu''(x)$, respectively. Figure \[supertool1.8\], in particular, implies that the variance of the integral eq.(\[1-d-ex\]) is infinite so that the result of fig. 1 cannot be trusted, while figure \[supertool0.9\] assures us that the integral exists.
The method can be easily adapted to multidimensional integrals by monitoring an auto-correlation function rather than the position $x_t$,
In our applications, the method has been successful much beyond our initial expectations. Besides its “consulting” role within the Monte Carlo framework (as explained in the caption of figures \[supertool0.9\] and \[supertool1.8\]), we have used it extensively to establish the existence conditions for bosonic and susy Yang-Mills integrals, which have not been obtained analytically beyond the 1-loop level. We have also adopted the method to obtain important information on the asymptotic behavior of integrals.
We conclude the discussion of our toy problem by showing how, after all, the integral eq.(\[1-d-ex\]) can be computed by Monte Carlo methods. Consider first $$Q(\alpha_2,\alpha_1) = \frac{\int_0^1 x^{-\alpha_2 } dx}
{\int_0^1 x^{-\alpha_1 } dx}
= \frac{\int_0^1
\overbrace{ x^{-\alpha_1 }}^{measure}
\overbrace{ x^{\alpha_1 -\alpha_2 }}^{operator}
dx}
{\int_0^1 \underbrace{ x^{-\alpha_1 }}_{measure} dx}
\label{meas_op}$$ According to the discussion in section 3, $Q(\alpha_2,\alpha_1)$ can be computed from random numbers distributed as $\mu(x)=x^{-\alpha_1} $ as long as $$2 \alpha_2 - \alpha_1 < 1.
\label{varbound}$$
It is easy to see that all of the pairs ($\alpha_1,\alpha_2$) in table 1 satisfy the bound of eq.(\[varbound\]), and the Monte Carlo data for $Q(\alpha_2, \alpha_1)$ can thus be trusted, just as the final result $$\int_0^1 dx \;\;x^{-0.9} = \prod Q = 9.98 \pm 0.16.$$
“Measurement” = “Comparison” {#Measurement}
============================
After these preliminary steps, we finally confront the Monte Carlo measurement of the Yang-Mills integrals. In this context, we recall from our basic physics training the heading of this section. Translated to the context of a Monte Carlo calculation, the measure/compare equivalence means that the integral eq.(\[int\]) has always to be written as $${{\cal Z}}^{{{\cal N}}}_{D,G} = \int \prod_{A,\mu}
\frac{d X_{\mu}^{A}}{\sqrt{2 \pi}} \mu(\{X_{\mu}^{A} \})
\left\{\frac{{{\cal F}}(\{X_{\mu}^{A}\}) }{\mu(\{X_{\mu}^{A} \}) } \right\}.
\label{meas_comp}$$ In the $\{ \;\;\}$ in eq.(\[meas\_comp\]), we [*compare*]{} ${{\cal F}}$ to the measure, which we are free to choose (but which we have to be able to integrate analytically). As mentioned before, the Gaussians of eq.(\[gaussian\]) are too different from ${{\cal F}}$ to work. A straightforward generalization of the approach eq.(\[meas\_op\]) was found to be wanting: the mismatch between ${{\cal F}}$ and $\mu$ could only be smoothed with a very large number of steps $(\alpha_1,\alpha_2)$ in eq.(\[meas\_op\]).
A much better approach has come from the observation that ${{\cal F}}$ can be [*compactified*]{} onto the surface of a hypersphere, because both the action and the Pfaffian are homogeneous functions of the radius $R=\sqrt{\sum X_{\mu}^{A}}$, which can therefore be integrated out. Introducing polar coordinates $R, \Omega$ and noting $\tilde{{{\cal F}}}= \int_0^{\infty} dR R^{d-1} {{\cal F}}(\Omega,R)$, we arrive at the ultimate formulation of the integral $${{\cal Z}}^{{{\cal N}}}_{D,G} = \int d\Omega \tilde{{{\cal F}}}(\Omega).
\label{hyper}$$ This means that the integrand $ \tilde{{{\cal F}}}$ is compared to the constant function on the surface of a hypersphere in dimension $d=dim(G) {{\cal N}}$ .
The integral eq.(\[hyper\]) can still not be evaluated directly, so that the strategy of eq.(\[meas\_op\]) has to be used. Here, we simply compute a few ratios of the integrals $\int d\Omega \left[
\tilde{{{\cal F}}}(\Omega) \right]^{\alpha}$ for different values $0 <
\alpha < 1$. In this case, of course, pairs $(\alpha_2,\alpha_1)$ are tested by the qualitative Monte Carlo algorithm, as analytical convergence conditions in the spirit of eq.(\[varbound\]) are lacking. After having expended an extraordinary amount of rigor on these very difficult integrals, we nevertheless obtain well-controlled predictions, to be surveyed below.
Synopsis {#Synopsis}
========
The methods presented in the previous sections were used to compute a number of results which are fully discussed in [@kns], [@ks1], [@ks2], [@ks3]. For complementary Monte Carlo studies, using somewhat different techniques, see [@nishi], [@aabhn]. To give an indication of the scope and the quality of the data, we present here our recent calculations for gauge groups other than $SU(N)$, as well as an intriguing qualitative result concerning the asymptotics of the eigenvalue distributions.
The first example concerns the evaluation of the integrals for the gauge groups $SO(N), Sp(2N)$ and $G_2$. These calculations can be connected to other theoretical work essentially by dividing ${{\cal Z}}$ by the volume ${{\cal F}}_G$ of the group $G$. In this way, we arrive at a numerical value for the bulk contribution to the quantum-mechanical Witten index, which is given by $${\rm ind}_0^D(G)=
\frac{1}{{{\cal F}}_G} {{\cal Z}}^{{{\cal N}}}_{D,G}.
\label{bind2}$$
In table 3 we list our Monte Carlo results for this bulk index, obtained by the methods explained above, for groups up to rank three. We furthermore compare these data to analytic predictions from the generalization of the deformation method of Moore et al. [@mns] to these groups [@ks3]. Note the excellent precision ($2\%$ statistical error) for groups up to $SO(7)$, where the integral eq.(\[int\]) lies in $84$ dimensions. Intriguingly, both our numerical and analytical results are at variance with a previous conjecture [@kasm] for non-unitary groups. In the special case of $SO(7)$, e.g., ref. [@kasm] obtains the fraction $15/128$ which is incompatible with our data.
Let us mention that at present the calculations for $D=4$ and $D=6$ are considerably simpler than the case $D=10$, because the Pfaffian can be reduced to a determinant for $D=4,6$ [@kns]. In $D=10$, this possibility does not exist generically (for an exception for $SU(3)$ cf. [@kns]). We have now developed new methods to compute Pfaffians which should allow computations for $D=10$ in the near future. It is possible if tedious to work out the predictions of the BRST deformation technique for ind$^{D=10}_0(G)$ [*cf*]{} [@indten], which again differ from the conjectures of [@kasm]. It would be interesting to check the results of [@indten] by our Monte Carlo methods.
A further strength of the Monte Carlo approach is to allow the calculation of quantities other than just the integral ${{\cal Z}}$. We briefly review as a second illustration of the here advocated approach the study of the correlation functions $< {{\rm Tr}\,}X_{\mu}^k\} >$, where $X_\mu$ is an arbitrary single matrix. This correlation function allows to infer the eigenvalue distribution of the matrices. Indeed, denoting the normalized eigenvalue density of individual matrices by $\rho(\lambda)$, one has $$< {{\rm Tr}\,}X_{\mu}^k\} > =
\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} d \lambda~\rho(\lambda)~\lambda^k.
\label{corr}$$ Here the calculation was immediately feasible also for $D=10$ case, since we only needed to test for absolute convergence, i.e. it suffices to consider a simplified measure obtained from the absolute value of the original measure: $$\mu'(\left\{X_{\mu}^A\right\} ) = {{\rm Tr}\,}X_{\mu}^k~
\Big| {{\cal F}}( \{ X_{\nu}^k \} ) \Big|.
\label{absolute}$$ This is algorithmically far more efficient, because now the problem may again be reduced to the computation of the square of a Pfaffian, which is readily available, avoiding the calculation of the Pfaffian itself.
The final result for the asymptotic eigenvalue densities as $\lambda
\rightarrow \infty$ supersymmetric systems in $D=4,6,10$, for the supersymmetric system with gauge groups SU$(N)$, is $$\mathbf{
\rho^{\rm SUSY}_D(\lambda) \sim \left\{ \begin{array}{cc} \lambda^{-3}
& \qquad D=4 \\ \lambda^{-7} & \qquad D=6 \\ \lambda^{-15} &
\qquad D=10 \end{array} \right. }.
\label{power}$$ These laws were obtained by applying the above Markov chain random walk tool to the measure eq.(\[absolute\]), i.e. we established divergence of eq.(\[corr\]) iff $k \geq 2,6,14$ (respectively for $D=4,6,10$), leading to eq.(\[power\]). Note that these power laws are independent of $N$. They demonstrate that the present matrix models are very different from the classic Wigner-type models. It would be interesting to obtain the generalization of eq.(\[power\]) to other gauge groups.
This work was supported in part by the EU under Contract FMRX-CT96-0012.
[99]{} W. Krauth, H. Nicolai and M. Staudacher, [*Monte Carlo Approach to M-Theory*]{}, Phys. Lett. B431 (1998) 31, [hep-th/9803117]{}. P. Yi, [*Witten Index and Threshold Bound States of D-Branes*]{}, Nucl. Phys. B505 (1997) 307, [hep-th/9704098]{}; S. Sethi and M. Stern, [*D-Brane Bound State Redux*]{}, Commun. Math. Phys. 194 (1998) 675, [hep-th/9705046]{}. A.V. Smilga, [*Witten Index Calculation in Supersymmetric Gauge Theory*]{}, Yad. Fiz. 42 (1985) 728, Nucl. Phys. B266 (1986) 45; A.V. Smilga, [*Calculation of the Witten Index in Extended Supersymmetric Yang-Mills Theory*]{}, (in Russian) Yad. Fiz. 43 (1986) 215. G. Moore, N. Nekrasov and S. Shatashvili, [*D-particle bound states and generalized instantons*]{}, Commun. Math. Phys. 209 (2000) 77, [hep-th/9803265]{}. M. B. Green and M. Gutperle, [*D-Particle Bound States and the D-Instanton Measure*]{}, JHEP 9801 (1998) 005, [hep-th/9711107]{}. W. Krauth and M. Staudacher, [*Finite Yang-Mills Integrals*]{}, Phys. Lett. B435 (1998) 350, [hep-th/9804199]{}. W. Krauth and M. Staudacher, [*Eigenvalue Distributions in Yang-Mills Integrals*]{}, Phys. Lett. B453 (1999) 253, [hep-th/9902113]{}. W. Krauth and M. Staudacher, [*Yang-Mills Integrals for Orthogonal, Symplectic and Exceptional Groups*]{}, Nucl. Phys. B584 (2000) 641 [hep-th/0004076]{}. T. Hotta, J. Nishimura and A. Tsuchiya, [*Dynamical Aspects of Large $N$ Reduced Models*]{}, Nucl. Phys. B545 (1999) 543, [hep-th/9811220 ]{} H. Aoki, S. Iso, H. Kawai, Y. Kitazawa and T. Tada, [*Space-Time Structures from*]{} IIB [*Matrix Model*]{}, Prog. Theor. Phys. 99 (1998) 713, [hep-th/9802085]{}. J. Ambj[ø]{}rn, K.N. Anagnostopoulos, W. Bietenholz, T. Hotta and J. Nishimura, [*Large $N$ Dynamics of Dimensionally Reduced 4D SU$(N)$ Super Yang-Mills Theory*]{}, JHEP 0007 (2000) 013, [hep-th/0003208]{}; [*Monte Carlo Studies of the IIB Matrix Model at large $N$*]{}, JHEP 0007 (2000) 011, [hep-th/0005147]{}. V.G. Kac and A.V. Smilga, [*Normalized Vacuum States in ${{\cal N}}=4$ Supersymmetric Yang-Mills Quantum Mechanics with any gauge group*]{}, Nucl. Phys. B571 (2000) 515 [hep-th/9908096]{}. M. Staudacher, [*Bulk Witten Indices and the Number of Normalizable Ground States in Supersymmetric Quantum Mechanics of Orthogonal, Symplectic and Exceptional Groups*]{}, Phys. Lett. B488 (2000) 194, [hep-th/0006234]{}. W. Krauth, [*Introduction To Monte Carlo Algorithms*]{}, in [*Advances in Computer Simulation*]{}, J. Kertesz and I. Kondor, eds, Lecture Notes in Physics (Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1998), [cond-mat/9612186]{}.
[^1]: Talk presented by W. Krauth
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Magnetic properties of Mn-doped GaAs are re-investigated within a realistic multiband description of the host valence bands. We explicitely demonstrate that the recent Monte Carlo (MC) simulations performed on a large scale supercomputer suffer from severe shortcomings. Indeed, it is shown, using identical parameters that (i) the calculated Zeeman-splitting largely underestimates that obtained from first principle studies, (ii) the couplings exhibit strong RKKY oscillations, (iii) the stability region for ferromagnetism is much narrower than obtained previously and (iv) the calculated Curie temperatures appear to be at least one order of magnitudes smaller. We show that the proposed choice of physical parameters cannot describe the physics in (Ga,Mn)As.'
author:
- Stefan Barthel
- Gerd Czycholl
- Georges Bouzerar
date: 'May 5, 2011'
title: 'Origins of shortcomings in recent realistic multiband Monte-Carlo studies for Ga$_{1-x}$Mn$_{x}$As'
---
Introduction
============
In the recent years, dilute magnetic semiconductors (DMS) have risen a lot of interest because of their possible use for spintronic devices [@RevModPhys.76.323] (e.g. a spin-polarized light-emitting diode, etc.). A key goal is the achievement of a Curie temperature T$_C$ well above room temperature and a proper theoretical description of the involved physics was mainly controversial. From the theoretical point of view there are mainly two different kinds of approaches, (i) realistic bandstructure model studies ($\textbf{k}\!\!\cdot\!\!\textbf{p}$, Kohn-Luttinger, empirical tight-binding) [@RevModPhys.78.809] and (ii) sophisticated material specific ab-initio based (LSDA, SIC-LDA, ...) calculations [@RevModPhys.82.1633]. Note that the prediction of a large T$_C\approx700$ K in GaMnN [@Dietl11022000], has triggered a considerable amount of both experimental and theoretical work. Later it has been demonstrated that this huge T$_C$ results from several drastic approximations namely (1) perturbative treatment, (2) mean-field (MF) and (3) virtual crystal approximation for disorder [@PhysRevLett.93.137202; @0295-5075-69-5-812]. Recently it was shown that the essential properties of DMS can already be described within a single-band model [@0295-5075-92-4-47006; @1367-2630-13-2-023002]. Therefore a model with a realistic bandstructure and a non-perturbative coupling between carriers and magnetic impurities should provide a powerful tool to study both transport and magnetic properties in the wide family of DMS.
Recently such a study was performed for the case of GaMnAs using large scale Monte-Carlo (MC) simulations [@popescu_crossover_2007; @yildirim_large-scale_2007; @moreo_multi-orbital_2007]. Although a MC approach can be considered as essentially exact, the study of dilute magnetic systems of classical spins coupled to quantum carriers should be done in a very careful way. Our intent is to discuss and compare our calculations based on a two step-approach (TSA) to the MC simulations of Ref.[@yildirim_large-scale_2007]. As it will be shown several crucial features are incorrect in Ref.[@yildirim_large-scale_2007] and explanations will be provided.
Model
=====
We start from the following V-J model Hamiltonian $$\hat{H} = \sum_{ij,\alpha\beta,\sigma}t_{ij}^{\alpha\beta}
\hat{c}_{i\alpha\sigma}^{\dagger}\hat{c}_{j\beta\sigma}
+ J_{pd}\sum_{i}p_i\hat{\bf{S}}_i\hat{\bf{s}}_i
+ V\sum_{i,\alpha,\sigma}p_i\hat{n}_{i\alpha\sigma}.
\label{eq:hamiltonian}$$ The first term provides a realistic multiband description of the host valence bands. Here $\hat{c}_{i\alpha\sigma}^{\dagger}$ $(\hat{c}_{i\alpha\sigma})$ is the creation (annihilation) operator of a carrier with spin $\sigma$ at lattice site i. $\alpha, \beta$ denote the three different p-orbitals. The hopping matrix elements $t_{ij}^{\alpha\beta}$ are restricted to nearest neighbor sites and are determined from known Luttinger parameters $\gamma_i$ [@PhysRev.102.1030]. We used $\gamma_{1,2,3}=\{6.85,2.1,2.9\}$ as used in Ref.[@yildirim_large-scale_2007] for GaAs. The second term corresponds to the interaction between itinerant carrier spins $\hat{\bf{s}}_i$ and localized impurity spins $\hat{\bf{S}}_i$ (S = 5/2 for Mn$^{2+}$). J$_{pd}$ is the local p-d coupling. The last term (on-site impurity potential scattering term) will be neglected (V = 0) as done in Ref.[@yildirim_large-scale_2007]. The relevance of the on-site term will be discussed in what follows. The parameter $p_i$ takes the values $p_i=1$ if the site i is an impurity site otherwise $p_i=0$. Now the general procedure is as follows: First we calculate the total spectrum of the Hamiltonian defined in Eq.($\ref{eq:hamiltonian}$) for a given set of disorder configurations assuming the Mn$^{2+}$ impurity spins to be fully polarized. Then the Mn-Mn effective exchange couplings $J_{ij}$ (see Ref.[@Lichtenstein198765; @katsnelson_first-principles_2000] for details) between two impurities located at $\textbf{r}_i$ and $\textbf{r}_j$ are obtained by the relation: $$J_{ij}=\frac{1}{4\pi S^2}\mathfrak{Im}\int\limits_{-\infty}^{\infty}f(\omega)
\mathrm{Tr}_{\alpha}\{\hat{\Sigma}_{i}\hat{G}_{ij}^{\uparrow}(\omega)
\hat{\Sigma}_{j}\hat{G}_{ji}^{\downarrow}(\omega)\}\mathrm{d}\omega.
\label{eq:couplings}$$ Note that Eq.(\[eq:couplings\]) depends on the impurity concentration $x$ and on the hole density p. In our model the self-energy reduces to $\hat{\Sigma}_{i}$ = J$_{pd}$S$\cdot\mathrm{\hat{1}}$ and $\hat{G}^{\sigma}_{ij}(\omega)$ is the Green’s function of the system while the trace is taken with respect to the orbitals. $f(\omega)={\left( e^{\beta(\omega-E_{F})}+1\right)}^{-1}$ is the Fermi function and E$_{F}$ is the Fermi energy. Finally the disordered Heisenberg model, $$\hat{H} = -\sum_{i\neq j}J_{ij}p_ip_j\hat{\bf{S}}_i\cdot\hat{\bf{S}}_j,
\label{eq:heisenberg}$$ defined with the effective exchange couplings of Eq.(\[eq:couplings\]) is solved within the self-consistent local random phase approximation (SC-LRPA). This method [@0295-5075-69-5-812; @PhysRevB.81.172406; @0295-5075-92-4-47006] has been proven to be a reliable tool to calculate e.g. Curie temperatures, the magnon excitation spectrum and optical conductivity. The TSA was able to reproduce both ab-initio results and experimental data.
Results
=======
For a fixed Mn impurity concentration of $x=0.085$ in Ga$_{1-x}$Mn$_{x}$As the density of states (DOS) is shown in FIG. \[fig:1\]. for different values of the effective p-d coupling strength J$_{pd}$S.
![\[fig:1\]Empirical tight-binding (ETBM) density of states for Ga$_{1-x}$Mn$_{x}$As for $x=0.085$ and different values of J$_{pd}$S. The dashed lines indicate the chemical potentials for $T = 0$ K corresponding to the hole density p = 0.75$x$.](fig_1)
These results are in perfect agreement with Ref.[@yildirim_large-scale_2007]. The DOS is almost unchanged compared to that of the pure system for J$_{pd}$S $\le3$ eV. This already gives a first indication/hint that this range of parameters corresponds to the perturbative RKKY regime, this will be confirmed in what follows. Let us proceed further by calculating the Zeeman splitting $\Delta E_v(x)=E^{\uparrow}_{max}-E^{\downarrow}_{max}$ ($E^{\sigma}_{max}$ is the largest eigenvalue in the corresponding $\sigma$ sector) as a function of the Mn concentration. It is depicted in FIG. \[fig:2\]. together with available ab-initio results.
![\[fig:2\]Zeeman splitting $\Delta E_v(x)$ as a function of the Mn concentration $x$ for Ga$_{1-x}$Mn$_{x}$As calculated within LSDA \[i\][@kudrnovsky_private] \[ii\][@wierzbowska_different_2004] and within the V-J model.](fig_2)
For J$_{pd}$S = 1.2 eV $\Delta E_v$ is found to be in perfect agreement with the mean-field expression $\Delta E_v^{MF}(x)=x$J$_{pd}$S, the accordance is still reasonable for J$_{pd}$S = 3 eV. Remark that, it is now widely accepted that J$_{pd}$ $\approx$ 1.2 eV in Mn-doped GaAs [@PhysRevB.58.R4211; @Bhattacharjee199917]. Thus the realistic value of J$_{pd}$S should be 3 eV since S = 5/2 for Mn$^{2+}$. However in Ref.[@yildirim_large-scale_2007] J$_{pd}$S = 1.2 eV was used, which is almost three times smaller than the realistic value [@PhysRevLett.100.229701; @PhysRevLett.100.229702]. From FIG. \[fig:2\]. one can clearly see that for both J$_{pd}$S = $\{1.2,3\}$ eV the calculated Zeeman-splitting largely underestimates that obtained from first-principle studies [@wierzbowska_different_2004; @kudrnovsky_private]. For example, for $x=0.05$, one finds $\Delta E_v=0.06$ and 0.2 eV for J$_{pd}$ = 1.2 eV and 3 eV respectively, in contrast to 0.65 eV obtained from LSDA calculations. Thus, even the correct value of J$_{pd}$S does not lead to an agreement with first-principle results. In addition, experimental studies [@PhysRevLett.18.443; @PhysRevB.55.6938; @Yakunin2004947; @PhysRevLett.92.216806; @springerlink:10.1007/s10948-005-2144-x] and ab-initio LSDA calculations [@wierzbowska_different_2004] indicate the existence of an acceptor level or bound hybridized Mn pd-state at $E_b \approx 112.4$ meV above the valence band. This impurity state is absent for both values of J$_{pd}$S = $\{1.2,3\}$ eV in the limit of $x\rightarrow 0$. In order to recover the correct Zeeman-splitting and impurity acceptor level energy using J$_{pd}$S = 3 eV, one has to include a finite additional impurity potential scattering term V (see Eq.(\[eq:hamiltonian\])) [@me]. Within a single-band model this term has been shown to be a crucial ingredient to understand magnetism and transport properties in III-V compounds [@0295-5075-92-4-47006; @1367-2630-13-2-023002]. Hence, our conclusion contradicts that of Ref.[@popescu_crossover_2007], that a finite V is irrelevant. Let us now discuss the nature of the magnetic couplings obtained within our multiband model. The Mn-Mn exchange couplings $J_{ij}$ are calculated according to Eq.(\[eq:couplings\]). In comparison to the MC studies of Ref.[@yildirim_large-scale_2007] our calculations are carried out for much larger systems (2048 lattice sites vs. 256) and the average over the disorder is performed over up to 800 vs. about 5 configurations in the MC simulations. Thus we expect our results to have much less finite size effects and reliable statistics. For different values of J$_{pd}$S, $\bar{J}(R)\cdot R^3$ as a function of $R$ is shown in FIG. \[fig:3\]., where $\bar{J}(R) = \langle{J_{ij}}\rangle_{dis}$ and $R=\vert\textbf{r}_j-\textbf{r}_i\vert$. Our results show clearly a major difference in the range, magnitude and nature of the effective exchange couplings. For small values of J$_{pd}$S=$\{1.2, 3\}$ eV $\bar{J}(R)$ exhibits undamped long range RKKY oscillations. Hence, the couplings obtained for these values of J$_{pd}$ are inconsistent with those calculated from first principle studies for which RKKY oscillations are absent (see Ref.[@RevModPhys.82.1633]). This disagreement indicates that either the choice of parameters used to describe the physics of GaMnAs is incorrect or the model itself is inappropriate. In contrast, in the strong coupling regime J$_{pd}$S = $\{8,16\}$ eV, the exchange integrals appear to be of short-range ferromagnetic type. This regime can be seen as a precursor of the double-exchange regime, J$_{pd}$S = $\infty$. Both the RKKY and exponentially damped nature of the exchange couplings can be clearly seen in FIG. \[fig:4\]. Note that for J$_{pd}$S $\le$ 3 eV the Hamiltonian actually describes the physics of II-VI Mn-doped systems as, e.g. or . Thus, for J$_{pd}$S $\le$ 3 eV long-range ferromagnetic order is unlikely [@PhysRevB.73.024411], because of high frustration. Instead one would expect a spin glass phase.
![\[fig:3\]Mean effective exchange couplings $\bar{J}(R)\cdot R^3$ as a function of distance $R$ ($a$ is the lattice constant) for several values of J$_{pd}$S and p = 0.75$x$ using $x = 0.085$. Please note the oscillating RKKY nature of the couplings for J$_{pd}$S = $\{1.2, 3\}$ eV in contrast to the short-range ferromagnetic couplings for J$_{pd}$S = $\{8,16\}$ eV.](fig_3)
![\[fig:4\]Mean effective exchange couplings $\bar{J}(R)\cdot R^3$/($\bar{J}_3\cdot R_3^3)$ as a function of distance $R$ for several values of J$_{pd}$S and p=0.75$x$ using $x = 0.085$ in the \[110\] direction.](fig_4)
Finally, in FIG. \[fig:5\]. we present the calculated Curie temperatures T$_C$ obtained by diagonalizing the Heisenberg Hamiltonian Eq.(\[eq:heisenberg\]) within the SC-LRPA using different hole densities. For comparison both T$_C^{MC}$ (from Ref.[@yildirim_large-scale_2007]) and the mean-field virtual-crystal value (MF-VCA) T$_C^{MF}$ are shown. If we first focus on the largest hole density, p = 0.75$x$, we observe that T$_C^{MC}$ is surprisingly larger than T$_C^{MF}$. This is in contrast to the expectation that the MF value should overestimate the real critical temperature. Even in the region of small J$_{pd}$S ($\le$ 3eV), the MF value is zero whilst the MC value is always finite and relatively large. E.g. for J$_{pd}$S = 3 eV the MC value is about 500 K. Therefore one can question the reliability of the present MC calculations. On the other hand, the SC-LRPA T$_C$ is always much smaller than the MF values for the whole parameter range of J$_{pd}$S. Ferromagnetism is possible only for sufficiently large values of J$_{pd}$S. We find that the critical value is about 5 eV for p = 0.75$x$ and about 2 eV for p = 0.3$x$. Our calculated T$_C$ are approximately one order of magnitude smaller than those obtained from MC simulations. For example for J$_{pd}$S = 12 eV we have obtained 400 K within SC-LRPA whilst the MC simulations value is 2300 K. Note that for lower carrier density the critical temperatures are smaller but the ferromagnetism already appears for smaller values of J$_{pd}$S. This is expected since the effect of disorder is stronger at lower carrier concentration and RKKY oscillations will be suppressed for smaller values of J$_{pd}$S. Additionally, at lower density the period of the RKKY oscillations is larger thus the frustration effects weaken when carrier concentration is reduced. Let us now explain the origin of the disagreement between our calculations and the MC simulations. The system considered in the MC study consists of only 256 lattice sites with typically only 20 localized spins and about 15 carriers/holes in the whole cluster. In addition the statistical average was carried out over about five configurations of disorder only. As it was already pointed out in Ref.[@1367-2630-12-5-053042], the T$_C$ is strongly size dependent and huge fluctuations of the critical temperatures distribution were observed for such small system sizes. For J$_{pd}$S $\le$ 4 eV, the smallness of the cluster used in the MC study does not resolve the asymptotic RKKY tail for J$_{pd}$S = 1.2 eV leading to finite and large Curie temperatures. In the large coupling regime, J$_{pd}$S $\ge$ 8 eV the T$_C^{MC}$ overestimates the real critical temperatures both due to insufficient statistical sampling and finite size effects. On the other hand, it is clear, that these essential numerical requirements are difficult to fulfill within standard MC calculations. At last, one should underline, crucial differences between the two-step approach and MC simulations concerning the way T$_C$ is determined. Within SC-LRPA T$_C$ is directly calculated from a semi-analytical expression whilst in the present MC study it is extracted from the temperature variation of the magnetization curve. A more accurate way should be to use Binder cumulant in order to avoid additional errors, for the cost of significant computing time and memory needed for the finite size analysis. On the other hand, the SC-LRPA, allows the use of very large systems, typically of the order of $4\cdot(30)^3$ thus containing about 10$^4$ impurities.
![\[fig:5\]Calculated Curie temperature T$_C$ for Ga$_{1-x}$Mn$_{x}$As with $x = 0.085$ using the V-J model in connection with V = 0. The SC-LRPA calculations were done with a system of 4$\cdot$(22)$^3$ sites (3600 impurities) and the average was performed over 100 disorder configurations.](fig_5)
Conclusion
==========
In this work we have studied the magnetic properties of Ga$_{1-x}$Mn$_{x}$As including a realistic bandstructure of the host material. We have demonstrated that the parameters used in Ref.[@yildirim_large-scale_2007], namely J$_{pd}$S = 1.2 eV and V = 0, cannot describe the magnetic properties in GaMnAs. The appearent agreement pointed out by those authors results from several levels of “approximations”. Indeed, the direct comparison between our two-step approach and the recent MC simulations revealed several shortcomings. The MC study suffers from a) finite size effects, b) an insufficient statistical sampling and c) a less accurate and approximate procedure for the determination of the Curie temperature. It has been shown, that the critical temperatures T$_C^{MC}$ are largely overestimated for these reasons and even larger than mean-field values. We remark, that though the MC approach is essentially exact, the study of dilute magnetic systems has numerical requirements hard to fulfill by standard MC techniques. Furthermore we point out the necessity of including a finite V (impurity potential scattering term) in the multiband V-J model in order to describe the ferromagnetism in (Ga,Mn)As properly.
[29]{}ifxundefined \[1\][ ifx[\#1]{} ]{}ifnum \[1\][ \#1firstoftwo secondoftwo ]{}ifx \[1\][ \#1firstoftwo secondoftwo ]{}““\#1””@noop \[0\][secondoftwo]{}sanitize@url \[0\][‘\
12‘\$12 ‘&12‘\#12‘12‘\_12‘%12]{}@startlink\[1\]@endlink\[0\]@bib@innerbibempty [****, ()](\doibase
10.1103/RevModPhys.76.323) [****, ()](\doibase
10.1103/RevModPhys.78.809) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/RevModPhys.82.1633) [****, ()](\doibase
10.1126/science.287.5455.1019) [****, ()](\doibase
10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.137202) [****, ()](http://stacks.iop.org/0295-5075/69/i=5/a=812) [****, ()](http://stacks.iop.org/0295-5075/92/i=4/a=47006) [****, ()](http://stacks.iop.org/1367-2630/13/i=2/a=023002) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.76.085206) [****, ()](\doibase
10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.057207) [ ()](http://arxiv.org/abs/0710.0577) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRev.102.1030) [****, ()](\doibase DOI: 10.1016/0304-8853(87)90721-9) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.61.8906) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.81.172406) @noop [ ]{} [****, ()](\doibase
10.1103/PhysRevB.70.235209) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.58.R4211) [****, ()](\doibase DOI: 10.1016/S0038-1098(99)00438-X) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.229701) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.229702) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.18.443) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.55.6938) [****, ()](\doibase DOI:
10.1016/j.physe.2003.11.168) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.216806) [****, ()](http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10948-005-2144-x) @noop [ ()]{} [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.73.024411) [****, ()](http://stacks.iop.org/1367-2630/12/i=5/a=053042)
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Iterative probabilistic inference, popularly dubbed the soft-iterative paradigm, has found great use in a wide range of communication applications, including turbo decoding and turbo equalization. The classic approach of analyzing the iterative approach inevitably use the statistical and information-theoretical tools that bear ensemble-average flavors. This paper consider the per-block error rate performance, and analyzes it using nonlinear dynamical theory. By modeling the iterative processor as a nonlinear dynamical system, we report a universal “Z-crease phenomenon:” the zig-zag or up-and-down fluctuation – rather than the monotonic decrease – of the per-block errors, as the number of iteration increases. Using the turbo decoder as an example, we also report several interesting motion phenomenons which were not previously reported, and which appear to correspond well with the notion of “pseudo codewords” and “stopping/trapping sets.” We further propose a heuristic stopping criterion to control Z-crease and identify the best iteration. Our stopping criterion is most useful for controlling the worst-case per-block errors, and helps to significantly reduce the average-iteration numbers.'
author:
- |
Jing Li (Tiffany) and Kai Xie\
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA, 18015, US\
Emails: {jingli, kax205}@ece.lehigh.edu
title: 'Iterative Decoding and Turbo Equalization: The Z-Crease Phenomenon[^1]'
---
Introduction {#sec:introduction}
============
The discovery of turbo codes and the re-discovery of low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes have, over the night, closed the theory-practice gap of the Shannon capacity limit on additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN) channels. They have also revolutionized the coding research with a new paradigm of [*iterative probabilistic inference*]{}, commonly dubbed the [*soft-iterative*]{} paradigm. Since their success with turbo codes and LDPC codes, the soft-iterative paradigm has become a vital tool in widespread applications in communication and signal processing. A complex communication system comprised of layers of functional blocks that were previously individually or sequentially tackled, can now use a “soft-iterative” treatment, close in spirit to that of the turbo or LDPC decoder, to achieve quality performance with manageable complexity. Celebrated applications include, for example, iterative demodulation and decoding, turbo equalization (also known as iterative decoding and equalization), and multi-user detection, and iterative sensing and decision fusion for sensor networks.
The significance and wide popularity of the soft-iterative algorithm has caused a considerable amount of study on its behavior, performance and convergence. Present models and methodologies for analyzing estimation and decoding methods may be roughly grouped into the following categories:
1). The most straight-forward way to evaluate the performance of an estimation/detection/decoding method, be it soft-iterative or otherwise, is through Monte Carlo simulations. The result is very accurate, but the simulation is usually lengthy, tedious, and not scaling well. Additionally, simulations do not shed much insight into why the performance is so and how the performance might be improved. 2). Classic analytical methods come from the perspectives of maximum likelihood (ML), maximum [*a posteriori*]{} (MAP) probability, or minimum square error (MSE). They inevitably assume that the subject method is optimal and always deciding on the candidate that has the largest probability, maximum likelihood ratio, or the minimal Hamming/Euclidean distance to what’s been observed. They produce useful performance bounds, but may present a non-negligible gap to the true performance of the practical, iterative estimator at hand. 3). Powerful iterative analytical methods, notably the [*density evolution*]{} (DE) [@bib:DE] and the [*extrinsic information transfer*]{} (EXIT) charts [@bib:EXIT], were developed in the last decade. These methods faithfully capture the iterative trajectory of many estimators/decoders, and have unveiled several fundamental and intriguing properties of the system (e.g. the “convergence property” and the “area property”) [@bib:EXIT]. However, several underlying assumptions thereof, including the ergodicity assumption, the neighborhood independence assumption and the Gausianity assumption, make them suitable mostly for evaluating the [*asymptotic*]{} behavior (i.e. infinite block size). Many real systems have limited lengths of a few hundred to a few thousand (bits), and the accuracy and usefulness of these methods can become limited in such cases.
4). To tackle the hard problem of iterative analysis for short-length signal sequence, researchers have also developed several interesting concepts and ideas, including [*pseudo codewords*]{} [@bib:pseudo], [*stopping sets*]{} and [*trapping sets*]{} [@bib:stopping] [@bib:trapping]. They boast some of the most accurate performance predictions at short lengths. The drawback, however, is that efficient and systematic ways to identify and quantify these metrics are not readily existent, and hence, one may have to rely on computer-aided search of some type, causing daunting complexity.
The majority of the existing methods, as summarized above, largely stem from a statistical and/or information theoretical root. They have significantly advanced the field, but are also confronted with challenges and limitations, as they try to use statistical metrics and tools that are based on ensemble averages (such as mean, variance, entropy, mutual information) to predict and control the iterative process of a large-dimension, highly-dynamical, and apparently-random signal sequence.
The notion that iterative probabilistic inference algorithms can be viewed as complex dynamical systems [@bib:Richardson; @first; @dynamical; @analysis; @for; @turbo]-[@bib:He; @dynamic; @analysis; @for; @Turbo; @product; @code] presents an interesting departure from the existing ensemble-average based methods, and brings up new ways of evaluating the soft-iterative algorithm on individual blocks. Generally speaking, the performance of a system should be assessed in the [*average*]{} sense, such as the bit error rate (BER) averaged over hundreds of thousands of blocks. At the same time, however, it also makes sense to evaluate the [*per-block*]{} performance, namely, the number (or the percentage) of errors in individual blocks. Per-block error rate reflects error bursts and/or the worst-case situation, and can be of interest in several applications. For example, in multimedia transmission, a modest number of bit blip errors in an image may cause only a minor quality degradation that is hard to perceive by human eyes, whereas excessive errors will cause the image to be badly distorted and unusable. In magnetic recording systems, a Reed Solomon (RS) outer code is generally employed after the channel-coded partial-response (PR) channel, to clear up the residual errors left by the equalizer/decoder. It does not really matter that every block has errors (after the equalizer/decoder); as long as the per-block error rate is within the error correction capability of the RS wrap, zero-error is achievable for the entire system. Hence, the specific issue we investigate here is how the per-block performance improves with the number of iterations.
Common wisdom has it that more iterations can not hurt, i.e., a larger number of iterations may not necessarily lead to (worthy or noticeable) performance gains, but it cannot degrade the performance either. This apparent truth, as verified by the numerous studies reported on the bit error rate (BER) simulations, density evolution (DE) analysis, and extrinsic information transfer (EXIT) charts, holds in the context of [*average*]{} performance. In terms of the per-block performance, however, our studies reveal that it is not only possible, but also quite likely, for an individual block to encounter an “fluctuating” decoding state, such that the number of errors in that block keeps bouncing up and down (rather than monotonically decreasing) with the iterations. What this phenomenon, thereafter referred to as the [*Z-crease*]{} phenomenon, implies in practice is that a larger number of iterations are not always beneficial, and that the right timing may play a more important role. If the decoder stops at an unlucky iteration, it may actually generate far more errors than if it stopped several iterations earlier.
It is worth noting that Z-crease is not special; it is actually a [*universal*]{} phenomenon that vastly exists in iterative decoding and estimation systems. We have examined a variety of different systems, including low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes with message-passing decoding, turbo codes with turbo decoding, product accumulate (PA) codes with iterative PA decoding [@bib:PAcodes], and convolutionally-coded inter-symbol interference (ISI) channel with turbo equalization. In all of these systems, we have observed the Z-crease phenomenon.
To study the per-block system behavior and reveal the Z-crease phenomenon, our approach is to treat the iterative estimation/decoding system a high-dimensional nonlinear dynamical system parameterized by a set of parameters, to further transform it to a one-dimensional state space with a single parameter, and examine the time evolution of the states at specific signal-to-noise ratios (SNR). In this paper, we take a popular turbo code as an example, and report here the observation of a wide range of phenomena characteristic to nonlinear dynamical systems, including several new phenomena not reported previously.
Modeling Turbo Decoder as Nonlinear Dynamical System
====================================================
A communication or signal processing system generally consists of many processing blocks inter-connected in parallel, in serial, or in hybrid, each fulfilling a specific task. Since the solution space of an “integrated” process is the Kronecker product of all the constituent solution spaces, to launch an overall optimal solution usually induces prohibitive complexity. A more feasible solution is to apply iterative algorithms, which allow constituent sub-units to perform local process and to iterative exchange and refine processed “messages”, thus achieving a solution considerably better than that from sequential processing with a manageable complexity.
Iterative algorithms are by nature probabilistic inference based, where the “messages” to be processed and communicated represent the reliability or confidence level of a digital decision, commonly formulated as [*log-likelihood ratios (LLR)*]{}; but they can also be modeled as (nonlinear) dynamical systems. To help model all the variants of iterative algorithms in a universal mathematical formulation, we have summarized some the properties assumed to be features of these algorithms: (i) An iterative algorithm is a dynamical system with a large number of dimensions, possibly depending on many parameters, and distances along trajectories increase (decrease) polynomially, sub-polynomially or exponentially. (ii) It is formed by two or more units interacting with each other; each unit responds to messages received from the others in a nonlinear manner. (iii) The system is in general hierarchical: a message may be treated in several different levels (units) before reaching the center of action. (iv) The system in its evolution may be adaptive, i.e. with memory. (v) Local interactions may have global effect: they may produce considerable global change in the system over the time, e.g. the “wave effect” in the decoding of an irregular LDPC code.
We start by evaluating the turbo decoder, which is useful in its own right[^2], and whose information theoretical analysis has reached a good level of maturity. A typical rate-1/3 turbo code, depicted in Fig. \[figure:1turbo\], is formed of two constituent recursive systematic convolutional (RSC) codes, concatenated in parallel through a pseudo-random interleaver. It encodes a block of $k$ binary bits ${\bf a}_0$ into a codeword of $3k$ binary bits, $[{\bf a}_0, {\bf a}_1,{\bf a}_2]$. The decoder operates much like the turbo engine in an automobile, in which two sub-decoders perform soft-in soft-out decoding, and iteratively exchange and refine LLR messages ${\bf m}_0$ corresponding to ${\bf a}_0$. Let $[{\bf z}_0, {\bf z}_1, {\bf z}_2]$ be the noise, induced by the physical channel or transmitter/receiver circuitry, and let ${\bf s}_i={\bf a}_i+{\bf z}_i$ be the noisy observation available at the decoder. Exploiting the geometric uniformity of the codeword space of a turbo code (or any practical ECC), we can model the turbo decoder as a discrete-time dynamical system in constant evolution: $$\begin{aligned}
{\bf m}_0^{<n+1>}&={f}_1({\bf s}_0, {\bf s}_2; {\bf m}_0^{<n>} )=
{f}_1({\bf z}_0, {\bf z}_2; {\bf m}_0^{<n>} ), \ \ \ \label{eqn:1}\\
{\bf m}_0^{<n+2>}&={f}_2({\bf s}_0,{\bf s}_1; {\bf m}_0^{<n+1>})=
{f}_2({\bf z}_0, {\bf z}_1; {\bf m}_0^{<n+1>} ), \label{eqn:2}\end{aligned}$$ where the superscript $n$ denotes the number of half iterations, ${\bf z}_0$, ${\bf z}_1$ and ${\bf z}_2$ are the parameters of the dynamical system, and ${f}_1$ and ${f}_2$ are nonlinear functions describing the constituent RSC sub-decoders, reflecting in general an implementation of the Bahl-Cocke-Jelinek-Raviv (BCJR) decoding algorithm, the soft Viterbi algorithm (SOVA), or their variations.
When $k$ takes on a value of a few thousand or larger, as in a practical scenario, this $k$-dimensional $3k$-parametrized nonlinear dynamical system becomes too complex to characterize or visualize. To make the problem tractable, we propose to “project” these dimensions to one or a few “critical” ones. Borrowing insight developed from conventional decoder analysis and after performing a careful evaluation, we propose to project the $3k$ parameters into a single parameter, the (approximated) signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), $\gamma=\frac{3k}{2R}/|| \,[{\bf z}_0,{\bf z}_1,{\bf z}_2]\, ||^2$, (where $R=1/3$ is the code rate), and to project the $k$ dimensions of the state space into one dimension, the mean magnitude of LLRs, $x_0^{<n>}={\bf E}[|m_i|]$ where $m_i\in {\bf m}_0^{<n>}$. The nonlinear dynamical system remains in constant evolution in the $k$-dimensional space with $3k$ parameters (as a real turbo decoder does), but characterizing the system using reduced dimensions drastically simplifies the analysis, enabling a better visualization and understanding of the further behavior.
{width="2.2in"}
\[figure:1turbo\]
Analyzing Turbo Decoder Using Nonlinear Dynamical Theory
========================================================
Phase Trajectories and Nonlinear Dynamical Behavior
---------------------------------------------------
Consider noise samples represented by $[{\bf z}_0, {\bf z}_1, {\bf z}_2] = [z_1, z_2, . . . , z_{3k}]$. Different vectors of noise samples are said to have the same noise realization, if they have the same fixed ratios between consecutive sample values, $z_1/z_2$, $z_2/z_3$, $\cdots$, $z_{3k-1}/z_{3k}$. Thus for a given noise realization, the noise vector ${\bf z}_{0,1,2}$ is completely determined by the (approximated) SNR $\gamma$. In general, $k$ should be chosen sufficiently large to make $\gamma$ a close approximation of the true channel SNR.
Extensive simulations are performed in our preliminary study. A whole range of phenomena known to occur in nonlinear dynamical systems, including fixed points, bifurcations, oscillatory behavior, period-doubling, limited cycles, chaos and transient chaos, are observed in the iterative decoding process as $\gamma$ increases (Fig. \[fig:2a\]–\[fig:2i\]). Some of these phenomena were noted in previous studies [@bib:agrawal1] [@bib:Vardy; @nonlinear; @dynamical; @analysis], but we report interesting new discoveries. For each motion type, we provide two pictures: a wave picture illustrating the change of mean magnitude of LLRs $\mathbf{E(|m_u|)}$ and the minimum magnitude of LLRs $\min(\mathbf{|m_u|})$ (y-axis) as a function of the number of half iterations (x-axis), and a trajectory picture presenting the phase trajectory from one half iteration to the next. In some cases, we also present a third picture of a zoomed-in trajectory after 500 half iterations
![ $\gamma=0.778151$ db, indecisive fixed point. (Left: wave picture; Right: trajectory picture.)[]{data-label="fig:2a"}](CISS_fig/0p6type1.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"} ![ $\gamma=0.778151$ db, indecisive fixed point. (Left: wave picture; Right: trajectory picture.)[]{data-label="fig:2a"}](CISS_fig/0p6type2full.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"}
The iterative process inevitably starts with and ends at a fixed point. The former, occurring at an asymptotically low SNR (such as $\gamma \le 0.778151$ db in our experiment, Fig. \[fig:2a\]), is termed an [*indecisive fixed point*]{}, and is associated with an unacceptably high error probability ($22\%$ in our experiment). The latter, occurring at an asymptotically high SNR (e.g., $\gamma \ge 1.113943$ db, Fig. \[fig:2i\]), denotes a successful decoding convergence to a zero-error [*unequivocal fixed point*]{}.
![$\gamma=0.902829$ db, periodical fixed point losing stability.[]{data-label="fig:2d"}](CISS_fig/0p7type1.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"} ![$\gamma=0.902829$ db, periodical fixed point losing stability.[]{data-label="fig:2d"}](CISS_fig/0p7type2full.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"}
\[fig:2b\]
![$\gamma=0.902829$ db, periodical fixed point losing stability.[]{data-label="fig:2d"}](CISS_fig/0p72type1.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"} ![$\gamma=0.902829$ db, periodical fixed point losing stability.[]{data-label="fig:2d"}](CISS_fig/0p72type2full.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"}
![$\gamma=0.902829$ db, periodical fixed point losing stability.[]{data-label="fig:2d"}](CISS_fig/0p72type2part.eps){width="1.8in"}
![$\gamma=0.902829$ db, periodical fixed point losing stability.[]{data-label="fig:2d"}](CISS_fig/0p79952type1.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"} ![$\gamma=0.902829$ db, periodical fixed point losing stability.[]{data-label="fig:2d"}](CISS_fig/0p79952type2full.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"}
![$\gamma=0.902829$ db, periodical fixed point losing stability.[]{data-label="fig:2d"}](CISS_fig/0p79952type2part.eps){width="1.8in"}
![$\gamma=0.929419$ db, chaos.[]{data-label="fig:2g"}](CISS_fig/0p835type1.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"} ![$\gamma=0.929419$ db, chaos.[]{data-label="fig:2g"}](CISS_fig/0p835type2full.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"}
![$\gamma=0.929419$ db, chaos.[]{data-label="fig:2g"}](CISS_fig/0p835type2part.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"}\
![$\gamma=0.929419$ db, chaos.[]{data-label="fig:2g"}](CISS_fig/0p837type1.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"} ![$\gamma=0.929419$ db, chaos.[]{data-label="fig:2g"}](CISS_fig/0p837type2full.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"}
![$\gamma=0.929419$ db, chaos.[]{data-label="fig:2g"}](CISS_fig/0p837type2part.eps){width="1.8in"}
![$\gamma=0.929419$ db, chaos.[]{data-label="fig:2g"}](CISS_fig/0p85type1.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"} ![$\gamma=0.929419$ db, chaos.[]{data-label="fig:2g"}](CISS_fig/0p85type2full.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"}
Between the two asymptotic ends are a myriad spectrum of bifurcations, some of which correspond well to the ostensible concepts and phenomena from the information theory, and others appear foreign and await an indepth study. As $\gamma$ increases from $0.778151$ to $0.845098$ db (Fig. \[fig:2b\], the system remains trapped to an indecisive fixed point, but the long convergence time indicates the stability of the indecisive fixed point begins to break down. At SNR of $\gamma=0.857332$ db, the indecisive fixed point undergoes a flip bifurcation and a stable [*periodical fixed point*]{} with period of 5 is formed (Fig. \[fig:2c\]). Further increasing $\gamma$ to $0.902829$ db leads to an increased period from 5 to 10, showing the [*period-doubling*]{} phenomenon (Fig. \[fig:2d\]). A closer inspection, shown in the zoomed-in trajectory picture, indicates that the motion is not exactly repetitive, but follows an approximate periodic orbit. As been verified in the experiment here (as well as other complex systems), the period will continue to double without bound as $\gamma$ increases. The “discrete” orbit eventually becomes continuous at $\gamma=0.921682$ db, presenting a [*limited cycle*]{} or [*limited ring*]{} – a closed curve homeomorphic to a circle (Fig. \[fig:2e\]).
As SNR further increases, the limited ring loses its stability, and converges ones again to an [*indecisive fixed point*]{} at $\gamma=0.922725$ db (Fig. \[fig:2f\]). This is rather surprising and is the first time that this type of indecisive fixed points has been observed for turbo decoders. Unlike the fixed points at both asymptotic ends, here the phase trajectory oscillates with diminishing amplitude and it takes longer to converge.
![$\gamma=1.002166$ db, periodic fixed point.[]{data-label="fig:2j"}](CISS_fig/0p982271_1.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"} ![$\gamma=1.002166$ db, periodic fixed point.[]{data-label="fig:2j"}](CISS_fig/0p982271_2.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"}
![$\gamma=1.002166$ db, periodic fixed point.[]{data-label="fig:2j"}](CISS_fig/0p982271_3.eps){width="1.8in"}
![$\gamma=1.002166$ db, periodic fixed point.[]{data-label="fig:2j"}](CISS_fig/para0p991226_1.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"} ![$\gamma=1.002166$ db, periodic fixed point.[]{data-label="fig:2j"}](CISS_fig/para0p991226_2.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"}
![$\gamma=1.002166$ db, periodic fixed point.[]{data-label="fig:2j"}](CISS_fig/para1p002166_1.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"} ![$\gamma=1.002166$ db, periodic fixed point.[]{data-label="fig:2j"}](CISS_fig/para1p002166_2.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"}
![$\gamma=1.002166$ db, periodic fixed point.[]{data-label="fig:2j"}](CISS_fig/para1p002166_3.eps){width="1.8in"}
![$\gamma=1.113943$ db, unequivocal fixed point.[]{data-label="fig:2l"}](CISS_fig/para1p004321_1.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"} ![$\gamma=1.113943$ db, unequivocal fixed point.[]{data-label="fig:2l"}](CISS_fig/para1p004321_2.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"}
![$\gamma=1.113943$ db, unequivocal fixed point.[]{data-label="fig:2l"}](CISS_fig/1p3type1.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"} ![$\gamma=1.113943$ db, unequivocal fixed point.[]{data-label="fig:2l"}](CISS_fig/1p3type2full.eps "fig:"){width="1.8in"}
Next at $\gamma=0.929419$ db, the fixed point undergoes Neimark-Sacker bifurcation through which the phase trajectory goes into an invariant set and, after a transient period, becomes [*chaos*]{} (Fig. \[fig:2g\]). The previous limited studies have suggested that after chaos will be transient chaos and then the convergence to an unequivocal fixed point [@bib:agrawal1]. It is intriguing indeed to report there actually exist a rich variety of motion types between chaos and the asymptotic unequivocal fixed point. They include: a [*quasi-periodic fixed point*]{} at $\gamma=0.982271$ db (Fig. \[fig:2h\]), [*transient chaos*]{} at $\gamma=0.991226$ db (Fig. \[fig:2i\]), a [*periodic fixed point*]{} at $\gamma=1.002166$ db (Fig. \[fig:2j\]), another [*transient chaos*]{} with a short transient lifetime at $\gamma=1.00432$ db (Fig. \[fig:2k\]), and eventually the zero-error [*unequivocal fixed point*]{} (Fig. \[fig:2l\]).
Analysis and Simulations
------------------------
Repeated tests on a large sample of random noise realizations show that although different realizations produce different bifurcation diagrams, the entire SNR range nonexclusively falls apart into three regions: a low-SNR region corresponding to stable indecisive fixed points, a transition region known in the communication jargon as the [*waterfall region*]{} in which bifurcations occur, and a high-SNR region corresponding to stable unequivocal fixed points. It can be proven that (1) for an iterative estimator/decoder that is probabilistic inference based, given any noise realization ${\bf z}$ and positive number $\delta$, there exists an SNR threshold $\gamma_1({\bf z},\delta)$, such that for any SNR $<\gamma_1({\bf z}, \delta)$, the iterative algorithm converges, with a probability greater than $1-\delta$, to a unique and stable indecisive fixed point; (2) likewise, there exists an SNR threshold $\gamma_2({\bf z},\delta)$, such that for any SNR $>\gamma_2({\bf z}, \delta)$, the iterative estimator/decoder starting with an unbiased initialization converges, with a probability greater than $1-\delta$, to a stable unequivocal fixed point that corresponds to zero decoding errors.
Also of interest is the rich variety of fixed points we observed in the waterfall region, none of which were reported previously. These fixed points behave much like chaotic (sensitive) non-hyperbolic attractors. (Chaos is a special class of aperiodic, nonlinear dynamical phenomenon, and is characterized by a prominent feature of “sensitivity to initial conditions.” This feature, commonly known as the “butter-fly effect”, states that a small perturbation to the initial state would lead to huge and drastically different changes later on.) In comparison, the fixed points at the two extreme ends of SNR are hyperbolic attractors, where distances along trajectories decrease exponentially in complementary dimensions in the ambient space. These newly observed fixed points, some or all of which may or may not occur depending sensitively on the specific noise realization, are usually associated with a few detection errors. They appear to provide support, from the dynamical system perspectives, for the information theoretic conjecture that there exists one or more pseudo codewords in the vicinity of a correct codeword (i.e. a few bits of Hamming distance away) [@bib:pseudo]. They may also correspond well to the coding concept of [*stopping set*]{} and [*trapping set*]{}, which characterize an high-SNR undesirable convergence in the BSC (binary symmetric channel) decoding model and the Gaussian decoding model, respectively [@bib:stopping; @bib:trapping].
It is particularly worth noting that in almost all the motion stages, the mean and the minimum magnitude of LLRs fluctuate in a rather notable manner as the number of iteration increases (see the wave pictures). Since the mean magnitude of LLR is shown to relate fairly well with the percentage of errors occurred in each frame [@bib:ruiyuanHu], it is therefore reasonable to predict that the per-block error number will also fluctuate with iterations. For example, for a short block of 1024 bits, we have observed that the number of errors in a particularly block can easily vary between 80 and 120, in a “quasi-periodic” Z-crease manner. In other words, it is highly likely that an early lucky iteration may save both complexity and $1/3$ less of erroneous bits than a longer, unlucky iteration.
Since where the decoder stops also makes a difference in per-block performance, questions arise as how to stop at the right iteration, and how much benefit there is. We propose the following rule of thumb to detect Z-crease:
i\) The minimum magnitude of LLR, $\min(| {\bf m_u}|)$, is a very accurate indicator of whether or not the iterative decoder has successfully converged to the unequivocal attractor (i.e. the correct codeword). In a correct convergence (i.e. when the attractor is the unequivocal fixed point or the unequivocal chaos attractor), the minimum magnitude and the mean magnitude of LLR will both increases with iterations. Otherwise, the iterative process is trapped in some local minimum (which corresponds to the indecisive fixed point, the quasi-periodical cycles, and the indecisive chaos). In such as case, the average magnitude of LLR ${\bf E}(| {\bf m_u}|)$ may continue to increase with iterations at a decent pace, but the minimum magnitude $\min(| {\bf m_u}|)$ will remain at a very low value, sending a clear signal of unsuccessful convergence. It is thus convenient to set a threshold for ${\bf E}(| {\bf m_u}|)$ to indicate decoding success.
ii\) The Z-crease is most prominent (with large error fluctuation) in the quasi-periodical cycle and the indecisive chaos stages. Hence, it is beneficial to detect Z-crease phenomenon as early as possible and to terminate decoding at the earliest “best” iteration. Since the Z-crease of the bit errors is almost always accompanied with a Z-crease of ${\bf E}(| {\bf m_u}|)$, we suggest using ${\bf E}(| {\bf m_u}|)$ to detect the Z-crease of errors. Here is a simple but rather effective method: Each local maximum point of ${\bf E}(|{\bf m_u}|)$ is taken as a [*candidate point*]{}, which is like the “local optimal point”. We predict that Z-crease is occurring when the ${\bf E}(| {\bf m_u}|)$ value of any one candidate point is lower than the ${\bf E}(| {\bf m_u}|)$ value of its previous candidate point.
Following these observations, we also propose a heuristic stopping criterion and suggest performing iterative decoding in the follow manner: The iterative decoder keeps track of $\min(| {\bf m_u}^{(n)}|)$ and ${\bf E}(| {\bf m_u}|^{(n)})$, and terminate when any one of the following conditions happens:
1. When $\min(| {\bf m_u}^{(n)}|)$ increases above a threshold.
2. When ${\bf E}(| {\bf m_u}|)$ of any one candidate point is lower than ${\bf E}(| {\bf m_u}|)$ of the previous candidate point.
If the decoder stops at condition 1), the current bit decisions and the current iteration are considered as our “best shots.” If the decoder stops at condition 2), then we suggest the decoder trace back to the previous candidate point and use the bit decisions of that iteration as the final decision. Otherwise, the decoder will proceed to reach the maximum iteration cap without voluntary stop.
It should be noted that previous researchers have also used the mean magnitude of LLR for early stopping purpose [@bib:MM], but it was used in a different way that did not recognize the Z-crease phenomenon. To the best of our knowledge, the minimum magnitude of LLR has not been exploited previously. Our stopping criterion here is most useful in improving the worst-case per-block performance, but not so much for the average performance (averaged over lots of blocks). It can also cut down the iteration number by $50\%$ or even larger (especially at low $\gamma$s or when the specific frame encounters lucky deep distortion), without sacrificing the average performance.
Conclusion {#sec:conclusion}
==========
We report the Z-crease phenomenon in soft-iterative decoding systems, and use the theory of nonlinear dynamics to justify its existence and generality. We show that while the average system error rate performance in general improves (or, does not deteriorate) with iterations, for individual frames, more iterations may actually do harm to the decoding decisions. Analyzing the dynamical behavior of the system, we further propose a simple stopping criterion based on the minimum magnitude and the mean magnitude of LLR to detect successful convergence and determine the right iteration to stop.
[99]{}
S.-Y. Chung, R. Urbanke and T. J. Richardson, “Analysis of sum-product decoding of low-density parity-check codes using a Gaussian approximation,” [*IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory*]{}, vol. 47, pp. 657-670, Feb. 2001.
A. Ashikhmin, G. Kramer, and S. ten Brink, “Extrinsic information transfer functions: model and erasure channel properties,” [*IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory*]{}, pp. 2657-2673, Nov. 2004.
T. J. Richardson, “The geometry of turbo decoding dynamics,” [*IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory,*]{} vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 9-23, Jan. 2000.
L. Duan and B. Rimoldi, “The iterative turbo decoding algorithm has fixed points,” [*IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory,*]{} vol. 47, no. 7, pp. 2993-C2995, Nov. 2001.
D. Agrawal and A. Vardy, “The turbo decoding algorithm and its phase trajectories,” [*IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory,*]{} pp. 699-722, Feb. 2001.
L. Kocarev, F. Lehmann, G. M. Maggio, B. Scanavino, Z. Tasev, and A. Vardy, “Nonlinear dynamics of iterative decoding systems: analysis and applications,” [*IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory*]{}, pp. 166-1384, April 2006.
Y. He, F. C. M. Lau and C. K. Tse, “Study of bifurcation behavior of two-dimensional turbo product code decoders,” [*Chaos, Solitons and Fractals,*]{} vol. 36, pp. 500-511, 2008
J. Li, X-H You, and J. Li, “Early stopping for LDPC decoding: convergence of mean magnitude (CMM),” [*IEEE Commun. Letters*]{}, pp. 667-559, Sept. 2006
R. Koetter, and P. O. Vontobel “Graph-covers and iterative decoding of finite length codes,” [*Proc. 3rd Intl. Symp. Turbo Codes*]{}, 2003
J. Li, K. Narayanan, and K. Georghiades, “Product accumulate codes: a class of codes with near-capacity performance and low decoding complexity,” [*IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory*]{}, pp. 31-46, Jan 2004
A. Orlitsky, K. Viswanathan, and J. Zhang, “Stopping set distribution of LDPC ensembles,” [*IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory*]{}, pp. 929-953, March 2005
C. Di, D. Proietti, I. Telatar, T. Richardson, and R. Urbanke, “Finite length analysis of low-density parity-check codes,” [*IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory,*]{} pp 1570-1579, June 2002.
R. Hu and J. Li, “Exploiting Slepian-Wolf codes in wireless user cooperation,” [*Proc. IEEE Sig. Processing Advances in Wireless Commun. (SPAWC)*]{}, pp. 275-279, June 2005
[^1]: Li’s work is supported by the US National Science Foundation under the Grants No. CCF-0928092, CMMI-0829888 and OCI-1122027.
[^2]: Turbo codes are in a number of standards, including the 3rd Generation Cellular Networks and Digital Video Broadcasting (DVB).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We phenomenologically study whether partonic collisions responsible for the growth of hadron-hadron cross sections at high energy can be ascribed to instanton-induced processes. Although non-perturbative in nature, these interactions occur at the semi-hard scale $Q\sim 1-2$ GeV, and should therefore be described using information from deep inelastic leptonic scattering on the partonic constituents in nucleons, pions, and photons. After considering shadowing corrections in nucleon-nucleon scattering, we fix a free instanton tail suppression parameter and determine the effective quark-quark cross section. The resulting contributions to $NN$, $\pi N$, $\gamma N$, and $\gamma\gamma$ cross sections all $increase$ with energy differently, but in reasonable agreement with experimental data. We then proceed to an estimate of the number of such processes present in high energy Au-Au collisions at RHIC, finding that the amount of entropy produced by instanton/sphaleron events matches the observed amount.'
author:
- 'G. W. Carter'
- 'D. M. Ostrovsky'
- 'E. V. Shuryak'
title: |
Instanton-induced Semi-hard Parton Interactions\
and Phenomenology of High Energy Hadron Collisions
---
Introduction
============
The theoretical description of high energy hadronic processes began in the 1960’s, when Regge-based phenomenology was developed to describe energy dependence of interaction amplitudes. A special role has been played by the so-called [*Pomeron*]{}, the leading Regge pole with vacuum quantum numbers. It was first believed that its intercept, $\alpha(t=0)$, was unity, corresponding to asymptotically constant cross sections and satisfying the Pomeranchuck theorem, $\sigma_{pp}-\sigma_{\bar p p} \ge 0$. However, it was discovered in the late 1970’s that the cross sections grow slowly with $s$, rendering the [*supercritical Pomeron*]{} with the intercept above 1, with the precise value [@DL] $$\alpha(t=0)-1=\Delta\approx 0.08 \,.$$ The discovery at HERA of much stronger growth with energy in hard processes, with an effective power of about $0.5$, has led to a proposed separation of the former “soft” and new “hard” Pomerons, each with different parameters and different physics [@two_pomerons], the latter presumably described by BFKL resummation of perturbative QCD which indeed leads to a power of such magnitude [@BFKL].
In this paper we will not discuss the issue of energy dependence of hard processes, focusing rather on the original “soft” Pomeron. We put “soft” in quotation marks here because we do not entirely agree with this terminology. It is now clear that the Pomeron itself is a small object, with its size represented by the slope of its trajectory, $\alpha'(t=0) \approx 1/(4 \, {\rm GeV}^2)$. The scale involved, $0.1$ fm, is much smaller than hadronic radii, and so the Pomeron exchanges should in fact be treated on the level of individual partons, appropriately defined at the intermediate momentum scale of 1-2 GeV. For lack of a better standard term, we will refer to it as the [*semi-hard*]{} scale.
More precisely, we will not consider the nature of the soft Pomeron in full either. The leading Regge pole, if it exists, is the analog of a single bound state appearing in the $t$-channel as a result of rather different interactions[^1]. Although the existence of such a pole is an appealing possibility, no general principles demand that it occur in QCD.
We will follow the recent tendency of splitting the amplitude into two parts, the [*constant*]{} and [*growing*]{} contributions to the cross section. While the former part is believed to be related to color exchanges between partons, which lead to multiple hadron production via string breaking [@LN], the latter is related to rarer processes resulting in “prompt” production of additional gluons, quarks, or hadrons. Below we will also try to disentangle these two components using the available data, and focus on the nature of the $growing$ part of hadronic cross sections.
The theoretical explanation of any process which takes place at the semi-hard scale is notoriously difficult – which is not surprising, since both the pQCD and low energy hadronic descriptions fail at this scale. There are basically three distinct approaches:
\(i) [*Minijet-based models*]{} use familiar formulae from pQCD [@minijets]. They are well-tested in the domain of hard jets, but their application at the semi-hard scale is a drastic extrapolation. All of these models assume the existence of a non-perturbative momentum cutoff, $p_{cutoff}$, in order to render pQCD results finite. This cutoff is left unexplained, treated as a purely phenomenological parameter, and all results depend greatly on its value.
\(ii) [*Instanton-based*]{} dynamics, to be discussed below, have only recently been applied to high-energy scattering [@SZ; @KKL; @NSZ] and use insights obtained a decade ago in electroweak theory [@weakinst]. Particularly relevant for this work are the first two references, in which the growing part of the hadron-hadron cross sections is ascribed to multi-gluon production via instantons.
\(iii) The [*Color Glass Condensate*]{}, a classical Weitzecker-Williams field of gluons carried by interacting hadrons, can be excited to produce prompt gluons [@KV]. This is another example of a weakly-coupled system involving non-perturbative gauge field configurations.
The instanton approach, (ii), qualitatively relates the properties of the Pomeron to other non-perturbative phenomena at low energies [@NSZ] and to the static properties of the QCD vacuum (for a review and original references see [@SS_98]), providing useful constraints on parameters. First, the “soft” Pomeron’s compactness follows from the small average instanton size, $\rho\sim 1/3$ fm. Second, a natural explanation of the smallness of the intercept $\Delta$ (alternatively, the effective quark-quark cross section, as explained below) arises in that it is proportional to the “instanton diluteness parameter” of the QCD vacuum, $\kappa = n\rho^4 \sim 0.01$. Furthermore, unlike in pQCD, at the classical level the “odderon” does not appear, since each instanton field belongs to an SU(2) subgroup of the SU(3) color group and therefore cannot discern between quarks and antiquarks.
The smallness of the instanton-induced amplitudes does not imply an extra penalty for the production of [*multiple*]{} prompt gluons and quarks. On the contrary, such processes dominate quasielastic (and other few-body) parton scattering. Instanton-induced processes furthermore lead to the creation of sphaleron-like gluomagnetic clusters which decay into many partons. Thus instanton effects can be expected to overshadow perturbative amplitudes of sufficiently high order and contribute substantially to the prompt entropy in heavy ion collisions.
The aim of this work is not to debate the theoretical issues, but to try to devise a phenomenological model capable of connecting many pieces of information about high energy collisions. Therefore, in judging the approaches to semi-hard dynamics mentioned above, we are most interested in their ability to explain the observed phenomena. To date, there is no direct evidence which empirically supports one over the other. While it is not possible to observe mini-jets, the CGC, or sphalerons directly, one might discern between these two mechanisms by comparing their predictions for particle production with data. This would require correlation analysis, which goes far beyond the current paper.
The goal of this paper is rather more modest. We analyze available hadron-hadron data and find a description of semi-hard interactions which involves prompt production via instantons. We phenomenologically fix the parameter left uncertain in Ref. [@NSZ], an instanton tail cutoff, and find the effective quark-quark cross section. With this in hand, we compute cross sections for various hadron-hadron scattering processes and then consider heavy ion collisions, making rough predictions but using no additional parameters.
Shadowing in hadron-hadron collisions
======================================
If all hadronic processes are dominated by a common Pomeron pole applied at the [*hadronic*]{} level, multiple factorization relations such as $$\sigma_{NN}\sigma_{\gamma\gamma}=\left.\sigma_{\gamma N}\right.^2$$ are expected to hold. This implies identical energy dependence for all reactions, $\sigma\sim s^{\Delta(0)}$, with a universal Pomeron intercept and independent Pomeron coupling constants for photons and nucleons. However, this relation is not confirmed by the data. In particular, recent HERA measurements of the $\gamma\gamma$ cross section have shown a more rapid growth with energy than that seen in $pp$ collisions. In this section show that this feature follows naturally from different parton composition, by applying the idea of universal cross sections at the [*partonic*]{} level.
At moderate energies, $\sqrt{s}\sim 100$ GeV, the growing part of the cross section is small enough so that the simple logarithmic expression $$\sigma_{hh'}(s)= \sigma_{hh'} + X_{hh'}\ln(s)$$ fits the data quite well. (For definiteness we will use values recently fitted by the Particle Data Group 2000 [@pdg].)
Although the second term is small compared to the first, $$X_{hh'} << \sigma_{hh'},$$ one should not assume that the measured $X_{hh'}$ is merely the sum of all cross sections involving prompt production. Even small partonic cross sections are affected by the screening induced by the much larger quasi-elastic processes comprising $\sigma_{hh'}$. This is especially clear in the impact parameter plane, discussed by Kopeliovich [*et al.*]{} [@KPPP]. Since the nucleon center is nearly black, additional processes cannot change the total cross section. Therefore, the naive sum of all inelastic processes is always [*larger*]{} than the values present in empirical fits.
In the impact parameter space representation the total cross section is the integral over the “blackness” factor: $$\sigma_{tot}(s)=2\int d^2b\, \Gamma(b,s).
\label{blackness}$$ In the eikonal approximation, blackness is usually represented in the form $$\Gamma(b,s)=1-e^{-\chi(b,s)},$$ where the quantity in the exponent is related to the absorption, $\Im A_p(q,s)$, at the “parton Born level” (where the subscript $p$ refers to a parton, quark, or gluon). Specifically, the phase shift function is written $$\chi(b,s)=\frac{1}{s}\int \frac{d^2q}{(2\pi)}{{\rm e}}^{iq\cdot b}\,\Im A_p(q,s).$$ Unitarity is enforced with such a form, in the sense that an increasing cross section leads to complete blackness, $\Gamma(b,s)\rightarrow 1$.
The next general step is to separate the relatively large and $s$-independent quasi-elastic contribution to $\chi(b,s)$ from the relatively small prompt production part, as $$\chi(b,s)=\chi_0(b)+\chi_1(b,s).$$ After this is done, one expands to first order in $\chi_1(b,s)$ and again separates the growing and constant parts of the cross section, $$\label{sigma_tot}
\sigma_{tot}(s)=2\int d^2b \,
\left[ \left( 1-e^{-\chi_0(b)} \right) + \chi_1(b,s)e^{-\chi_0(b)} \right].$$ A naive additive formula is recovered for small $\chi_0(b)$, but this is in fact not appropriate. As we will see, corrections to the second term due to the $\exp[-\chi_0(b)]$ factor are typically at the 50% level. This correction is larger in $pp$ than in $\gamma\gamma$ or $\pi\pi$ collisions, explaining the apparent differences between the cross sections.
Determining Partonic Content at the Semi-Hard Scale
===================================================
Before going into model-dependent studies of shadowing, let us first address the partonic composition of different hadrons.
Comparing global fits to hard processes from the literature, one finds that despite the impressive (and ever-increasing) accuracy of DIS and Drell-Yan data, there is not yet truly quantitative data on gluons at the semi-hard scale we need. The reason for this is generic, in that gluonic densities are derived from perturbative DGLAP evolution, which naturally becomes less accurate as we approach its limits. It is even difficult to determine if the density of semi-hard gluons increases or decreases at small $x$. Fortunately, for our present purposes we can avoid discussing asymptotically large energies, restricting ourselves to sub-TeV domain and including only partons with Feynman $x>x_{min}= 0.01$. The corresponding number of “relevant partons” for the nucleon, pion, and photon are summarized below in Table \[tab\_parts\]. The references given in the table are revised GRV parton distributions evaluated at next-to-leading order (NLO), taken at the scale of $Q^2 = 1$ GeV, which are then integrated over interval $x = [0.01,1.0]$.
[c]{} [Proton, with NLO structure functions from Ref. [@GRV_N]]{}\
$N_g$ = 4.10\
Valence $N_u$ = 1.70\
Valence $N_d$ = 0.84\
Sea $N_{u+d}$ = 1.16\
\
$N_g$ = 3.1\
Valence $N_{u+\bar{d}}$ = 1.8\
Sea $N_{u+d}$ = 0.48\
\
$N_g$ = 1.9 $\alpha$\
$N_u = N_{\bar{u}}$ = 0.87 $\alpha$\
$N_d = N_{\bar{d}}$ = 0.30 $\alpha$\
In principle, with more accurate parametrizations, we might try to test parton additivity by separately extracting, from the data of the [*growing*]{} part of hadronic cross section, the contributions of $qq$, $qg$, and $gg$ to semi-hard processes. This was attempted, but with the accuracy at hand the differences between taking quarks and gluons is negligible. We are therefore forced to make a model-dependent assumption about their relative magnitude.
Perturbatively, prompt production processes occur during the collision of two “wee” (or Weitzecker-Williams) gluons which accompany the large-$x$ partons. In the instanton approach this should not necessarily be the case, since the amplitudes for absorption of various numbers of wee gluons are comparable and thus there is no suppression by the coupling constant. One might try completely resumming the Euclidean Wilson loops, as in Refs. [@SZ; @NSZ]. We will simply take the lowest order scaling relation as derived in the next section and take the effective number of partons to be $N_q + 2 N_g$, where $N_q$ and $N_g$ are the numbers of quarks and gluons, respectively, taken from Table \[tab\_parts\]. This leaves us with only one unknown: the growing part of the $qq$ cross section.
Combining the parton content with this simple recipe, one obtains the ratios of cross sections which may be compared to the coefficients of $\ln(s)$ extracted from experiment. The results, summarized in Table \[tab\_ratios\], are reasonable, but cannot be taken as precise since shadowing corrections have not been considered here.
[ccccc]{} & Ratio & Computed & PDG [@pdg] &\
\
& $ \frac{1}{\alpha} \frac{X_{\gamma N}}{X_{N N}} $ & 0.50 & 0.43 &\
& $ \frac{X_{\pi N}}{X_{N N}} $ & 0.73 & 0.63 &\
& $ \frac{1}{\alpha} \frac{X_{\gamma N}}{X_{\pi N}}$ & 0.69 & 0.68 &\
& $ \frac{1}{\alpha^2} \frac{X_{\gamma \gamma}}{X_{N N}}$ & 0.25 & 0.16 &\
Parton scattering in the Instanton Field
========================================
Multiple parton scattering through an instanton field can be computed either by evaluating Wilson lines in Euclidean space [@NSZ] or using perturbative rules in Minkowski space. Relating these two approaches to all orders is non-trivial. In this paper we use the former method, analytically continuing Wilson lines from Minkowski to Euclidean space as detailed in Ref. [@Meg] This method maintains diagram-by-diagram correspondence and allows one to calculate scattering amplitudes involving both quarks and gluons.
The Wilson line in an instanton field $A_\mu^a$ is given by $$W=P\exp\left(ig\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} d\tau A^a_\mu(E\tau+r)p^\mu T^a\right),$$ where $r$ is distance of Wilson path from the center of instanton and $T^a$ lies in fundamental representation for quarks and adjoint representation for gluons. Before analytically continuing to Euclidean space let us introduce small regulatory mass $m$ such that $p^2=m^2$. Analytic continuation is then performed respecting this condition. After an obvious change of variables one finds $$W=P\exp\left(ig\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} dx A^a_\mu(x+r)
\frac{p^\mu}{E} T^a\right).$$ Integrating, for the quark line we have $$W_{AB}=\cos\left(\alpha\frac{m}{E}\right)\delta_{AB}+
i\frac{E}{m}\sin\left(\alpha\frac{m}{E}\right)n^a\tau^a_{AB},$$ where $n^a=\eta^{a\mu\nu}(p_\mu/E)(r_\nu/|r|)$ and $\alpha=\pi(1-r/\sqrt{r^2+\rho^2})$. In the high energy limit, $m/E\rightarrow 0$ leads to $$W_{AB}=\delta_{AB}+i\alpha n^a\tau^a_{AB}.$$ For gluons we similarly have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Wq}
W_{ab}&=&\cos\left(2\alpha\frac{m}{E}\right)\delta_{ab}
+\frac{E}{m}\sin\left(2\alpha\frac{m}{E}\right)n^c{\varepsilon}_{abc}\nonumber\\
&&+\left(\frac{E}{m}\right)^2
\left(\cos\left(2\alpha\frac{m}{E}\right)-1\right)n_a n_b\,,\end{aligned}$$ and in the high energy limit, $$\label{Wg}
W_{ab}=\delta_{ab}+2n^c{\varepsilon}_{cab}\alpha-2n_a n_b\alpha^2\,.$$
Diagrammatical interpretation of these results is straightforward. In high energy (eikonal) limit only single gluon exchange contributes to the quark-instanton interaction, whereas single and double exchanges survive in gluon-instanton interaction.
Comparing results of Eq. (\[Wq\]) to Ref. [@NSZ], one notices that the only difference is the change $\sin(\alpha)\rightarrow\alpha$. The calculational techniques of Ref. [@NSZ] can therefore be used, except for a modification of the instanton-induced form factor as explained below.
As for gluon scattering, it is a general property of high energy cross sections in the instanton field that the number of normal vectors (the $n_a$) in the cross section corresponds to the moment of relative instanton-antiinstanton rotation and is in turn proportional to $\sqrt{\alpha_s}$ [@NSZ]. Thus, the third term in the r.h.s. of Eq. (\[Wg\]) is subleading to the order $\alpha_s^2$ (there is no interference between the symmetric and antisymmetric terms). Such corrections are beyond the present accuracy and will be ignored. Consequently, after performing some straightforward algebra, we find that gluon scattering is governed by a form factor simply twice that for quarks, meaning that for the purpose of phenomenology we can consider hadrons as consisting of $N_q+2N_g$ “effective quarks”.
Fixing Partonic Cross Sections
==============================
We now proceed with a model-dependent analysis of the problem. As explained in Section II, we assume that $\chi_1(b,s) \ll 1$ (to be justified with numerics [*a posteriori*]{}) and write the blackness factor of Eq. (\[blackness\]) as $$\Gamma=\Gamma_0+\Gamma_1 \,,$$ in which $$\Gamma_0 = 1 - e^{-\chi_0(b)}
\, , \quad
\Gamma_1 = \chi_1(b,s) e^{-\chi_0(b)} \,.$$ Fourier transforming to a momentum representation, the rising contribution to the cross section can be written as $$\chi_1(q,s)_{ij}=\frac{\rho^2}{4}F_{ij}(q)\Delta(q)\ln(s)\,,
\label{rising}$$ for two hadrons of types $i$ and $j$ explicitly. where $F_{ij}(q)$ is the hadronic form factor of H[ü]{}fner and Povh [@HP], and is factorizable as $$F_{ij}(q)=F_i(q)F_j(q) \,,$$ where the single-hadron form factors are of geometric monopole or dipole form for mesons or baryons, respectively. Explicitly, it is the parametrization $$F_i(q)=\left(1+\frac{q^2R_i^2}{6n_i}\right)^{-n_i},
\label{hpfax}$$ with $n=2$ for protons and $n=1$ for mesons. The radii, phenomenologically fit to CERN and Fermilab data, are $R_p=0.77$ fm and $R_\pi=0.64$ fm.
The function $\Delta(q)$ in Eq. (\[rising\]) characterizes the processes responsible for prompt production and the growing cross section. The overall normalization is chosen so that taking $F(q)=1$ results in a growing component of $\pi \rho^2 \Delta(0)\ln(s)$, as in Ref. [@NSZ].
We now consider the instanton model, in the context of which $\Delta(q)$ was calculated in Ref. [@NSZ], and found to be $$\Delta(q)=\kappa\frac{16}{15}\frac{1}{(2\pi)^8}
\int d^2q_1 d^2q_2 \, H(q_1,q_2;q) \,.
\label{delta1}$$ The instanton diluteness parameter, $\kappa$, appears linearly and $H(q_1,q_2;q)$ is the instanton-induced interaction kernel. The double integral over the kernel may be written as $$\int \frac{d^2q_1}{(2\pi)^2}
\frac{d^2q_2}{(2\pi)^2} \, H(q_1,q_2;q) =
\left( \int d^2b \, e^{-iq\cdot b} J(b)^2 \right)^2,
\label{kernel}$$ where $J(b)$, the Fourier transform of the instanton-induced form factor, is $$\begin{aligned}
J(b)&=&\frac{2\pi b}{\rho^2}\int_0^\infty dx \, \frac{1}{\sqrt{x^2+b^2}}
\left(1-\sqrt{\frac{x^2+b^2}{x^2+b^2+\rho^2}}\right)\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{\pi b}{\rho^2}\ln\left(1+\frac{\rho^2}{b^2}\right),\label{aff}\end{aligned}$$ in which $\rho$ is the average instanton size.
For large $b$, $J(b)\sim 1/b$, and thus the form factor is logarithmically divergent. A finite result can be obtained through phenomenological deformation of the instanton profile. We thus replace Eq. (\[aff\]) with the deformed instanton form factor, $$J(b)=\frac{\pi b}{\rho^2}\ln\left(1+\frac{\rho^2}{b^2}\right)\,e^{-cb/\rho} \,.
\label{deformed}$$ The constant $c$ is a free parameter, to be fitted to the total proton-proton cross section. Combining Eqs. (\[delta1\]), (\[kernel\]), and (\[deformed\]), we obtain $$\Delta(q) = \frac{\kappa}{15\rho^4}
\left( \int d^2b \, {b^2
\left[\ln\left(1+\frac{\rho^2}{b^2}\right)\right]^2 e^{-2cb/\rho-iq\cdot b}}
\right)^2$$
Combining all factors into Eq. (\[rising\]), we have the final phase shift function $$\begin{aligned}
&&\chi_1(q,s)_{ij} = \nonumber\\
&&\,\,\frac{\rho^2}{4}(N_q+2N_g)_i(N_q+2N_g)_j F_i(q) F_j(q)\Delta(q) \ln(s)\,.\end{aligned}$$ with constituent numbers $N_\alpha$ taken from Table \[tab\_parts\].
We must next consider shadowing corrections to $\chi_1(q,s)$. Again, following Ref. [@HP], we use $$\label{chi0}
\chi_0(q)=\frac{\lambda_0}{4\pi}R_1^2R_2^2F_{12}(q) \,,$$ where $\lambda_0=0.52$ GeV$^2$ is a universal inverse area for hadronic collisions. Finally, we use the standard instanton parameters of $\kappa=0.01$ and $\rho=0.3$ fm [@Shu_82].
We fix the deformation parameter $c$ by fitting our model’s prediction for the rising part of the $pp$ cross section to the experimentally observed one, $X_{pp}=0.174\,{\rm fm^{2}}$ [@pdg]. This requires $c=0.327$. We are now able to calculate the rising parts of total cross sections for other hadrons, and our precitions for $p\pi$, $p\gamma$, and $\gamma\gamma$ are given in Table \[tab\_cs\]. We find reasonable agreement between these numbers and the data, having fixed only one free parameter, $c$.
-------------------- ---------------------- ----------------------
Calculated PDG [@pdg]
$X_{p\pi}$ 0.132 0.111
$X_{p\gamma}$ $5.65\times 10^{-4}$ $5.51\times 10^{-4}$
$X_{\gamma\gamma}$ $1.72\times 10^{-6}$ $1.45\times 10^{-6}$
-------------------- ---------------------- ----------------------
: Coefficients $X_{ij} = d\sigma^{tot}_{ij}/d\ln(s)$ in fm$^2$ for different hadronic constituents.[]{data-label="tab_cs"}
The $\Gamma(b,s)$ dependence on $b$, which determines the differential cross section, is shown in Fig. \[fig:dG\]. Following Ref. [@KPPP], we have plotted[^2] $$\delta(b) = \frac{ d\,\ln\Gamma }{d\,\ln s} \,.$$ The experimental points are a parametrization fit done by Kopeliovich [*et al*]{}. with ISR [@isr] and CERN UA4 [@sps] data. While our model captures the overall systematics of the curve extracted from experiment, it is clearly lacking at large $b$, suggesting that we have overestimated the instanton tail contribution.
Heavy Ion Collisions
====================
We may now extend our analysis to estimate the number of sphaleron-type clusters produced from excited instantons in heavy ion collisions. This issue has already been discussed by one of us [@Shu_AA], and we now return to it with more definite knowledge of the parameters involved.
For symmetric, central $AA$ collisions of two nuclei we use the simplest model, one of two spheres with homogeneously distributed partons. The total parton number is $AN_q$, with $N_q\approx 12$ being the number of “effective quarks” (quarks number plus twice gluons number) per nucleon[^3].
The total number of $qq$ collisions in this case is easily obtained from the following geometric integral: $$\begin{aligned}
N_{coll} &=& 8\pi\sigma_{qq} n_q^2\int_0^R dr_t r_t \left(R^2-rt^2\right)
\nonumber\\
&=& 3^{4/3} 2^{-5/3} \pi \sigma_{qq} n_q^2 \left({A N_q \over \pi n_q}
\right)^{4/3},\end{aligned}$$ where the quark density is determined by the nuclear density to be $n_q = N_q\times 0.16$ fm$^{-3}$.
With $A=197$ (gold) and the value for the quark-quark cross section extracted above, $\sigma_{qq}=1.69\times 10^{-3}$ fm$^2$, we have the following production rate per unit rapidity of sphaleron-like clusters: $$\frac{dN_{coll}}{dy} \approx 76.5 \,,$$ a number somewhat smaller than estimated in Ref. [@Shu_AA].
Each cluster will in turn decay into a number of quarks and gluons. Simply scaling of the couplings from the studies of sphaleron decay in electroweak theory leads to about 3.5 gluons per cluster, with 0-6 quarks (up to a complete set of light quark-antiquark pairs, $\bar u u \bar d d \bar s s$). As an average we tentatively take 3.5 gluons and 2.5 quarks, the latter obtained by applying a factor of one half for the suppression of strange quarks and another one half to account for the possibly change in Chern-Simons number. This yields an average of six partons per cluster, or in central $AuAu$ collisions at RHIC about $76.5\times 6=460$ partons per rapidity from sphaleron production. This is roughly [*one half*]{} the maximal possible value, $dN_{partons}/dy\sim dN_{hadrons}/dy\sim
1000$, inferred experimentally from the final entropy limitations.
This result is in good agreement with phenomenological studies of the energy and impact-parameter dependence of multiplicity [@KN], which have deduced that the contribution to multiplicity which scales as the number of parton collisions generates about half of the total, when calculated from the standard Glauber model and using the experimental nuclear density distribution for a gold nucleus. In this picture, the $\sim 500$ hadrons per unit rapidity are then a result of prompt production from QCD sphalerons.
The competing mini-jet picture, in which the products come from hadronization of two mini-jets, can also explain this number. However, in the minijet scenario this hadronization occurs later and one must confront problems such as the origin of strong collective effects, jet quenching, and the pronounced ellipticity at large $p_t$ observed at RHIC.
Summary and Discussion
======================
The objective of this paper was to evaluate the magnitude of the parton-parton cross sections which lead to prompt production and contribute to the growth of hadronic cross sections involving protons, pions, and photons. We have demonstrated that, at the semi-hard scale of $Q^2 \sim 1$ GeV, it is vital to accurately estimate the partonic content of each scattered particle. Furthermore, it was shown that a significant part of these effects are hidden by screening or quasi-elastic color exchange processes, [*i.e.*]{} the constant part of the cross sections.
The main assumption was that partons act additively (or, more precisely, multiplicatively), thereby ignoring transverse correlations which might reduce the cross sections. The nonperturbative dynamics were computed in the instanton model, taking formulae derived in Ref. [@NSZ].
Our main result is a surprisingly small prompt production component in parton-parton cross sections, reported in the Table \[tab\_cs\], on the order of $$\sigma_{qq} \sim 10^{-3}\, {\rm fm}^2\,.$$ Naive geometric cross sections are 300 times larger, and thus an explanation of this much smaller number is necessary.
In terms of the instanton picture, the diluteness of the instanton ensemble, $n\rho^4\sim 10^{-2}$, is in fact insufficiently small. An additional suppression thus seems to be needed. Following Ref. [@NSZ], rather than changing the phenomenologically sound parameters of the instanton ensemble, we instead turned to instanton tail suppression through an [*ad hoc*]{} exponential factor of $exp\left(-M\vert x\vert\right)$. The results imply a rather large $M$ of about 500 MeV[^4].
We have shown that with this small cross section one can reasonably describe hadronic data – the energy dependence as a function of impact parameter and the growing parts of $NN$, $\pi N$, $\gamma
N$, and $\gamma\gamma$ cross sections – and roughly estimate the amount of entropy produced in high energy $AuAu$ collisions at RHIC. In the future we plan to make this scenario much more quantitative by not only calculating the average parton numbers from sphaleron decay, but also their momentum spectra, quark/gluon ratios, and more.
We thank I. Zahed for useful discussions. This work was partially supported by US-DOE grants DE-FG02-88ER40388 and DE-FG03-97ER4014.
[99]{}
A. Donnachie and P. V. Landshoff, Nucl. Phys. B [**244**]{}, 322 (1984); Nucl. Phys. B [**267**]{}, 690 (1986); Z. Phys. C [**61**]{}, 139 (1994). A. Donnachie and P. V. Landshoff, Phys. Lett. B [**437**]{}, 408 (1998). E. Kuraev, L. Lipatov, and V. Fadin, Sov. Phys. JETP [**45**]{}, 199 (1977); I. Balitsky and L. Lipatov, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. [**28**]{}, 822 (1978); L. Lipatov, Sov. Phys. JETP [**63**]{}, 904 (1986).
D. E. Groom [*et al.*]{} \[Particle Data Group Collaboration\], Eur. Phys. J. C [**15**]{}, 1 (2000). J. P. Blaizot and A. H. Mueller, Nucl. Phys. [**B289**]{}, 847 (1987); K. Kajantie, P. V. Landshoff, and J. Lindfors, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**59**]{}, 2527 (1987); X.-N. Wang and M. Gyulassy, Phys. Rev. D [**44**]{}, 3501 (1991). E. Shuryak and I. Zahed, Phys. Rev. D [**62**]{}, 085014 (2000). D. E. Kharzeev, Y. V. Kovchegov and E. Levin, hep-ph/0007182.
M. A. Nowak, E. V. Shuryak, and I. Zahed, hep-ph/0012232. A. Ringwald, Nucl. Phys. B [**330**]{}, 1 (1990); O. Espinosa, Nucl. Phys. B [**343**]{}, 310 (1990); V. V. Khoze and A. Ringwald, Phys. Lett. [**B259**]{}, 106 (1991); V. I. Zakharov, Nucl. Phys. B [**353**]{}, 683 (1991); M. Maggiore and M. Shifman, Phys. Rev. D [**46**]{}, 3550 (1992); and for a review see M. P. Mattis, Phys. Rept. [**214**]{}, 159 (1992). A. Krasnitz, Y. Nara, and R. Venugopalan, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**87**]{}, 192302 (2001). T. Schäfer and E. V. Shuryak, Rev. Mod. Phys. [**70**]{}, 323 (1998), and references therein. F. Low, Phys. Rev. [**D12**]{}, 163 (1975); S. Nussinov, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**34**]{}, 1286 (1975).
B. Z. Kopeliovich, I. K. Potashnikova, B. Povh, and E. Predazzi, Phys. Rev. D [**63**]{}, 054001 (2001). M. Gluck, E. Reya, and A. Vogt, Eur. Phys. J. C [**5**]{}, 461 (1998). M. Gluck, E. Reya, and I. Schienbein, Eur. Phys. J. C [**10**]{}, 313 (1999). M. Gluck, E. Reya, and I. Schienbein, Phys. Rev. D [**60**]{}, 054019 (1999) \[Erratum-ibid. D [**62**]{}, 019902 (1999)\]. E. Meggiolaro Eur. Phys.J. C4, 101 (1998)
J. Hüfner and B. Povh, Phys. Rev. D [**46**]{}, 990 (1992). E. V. Shuryak, Nucl. Phys. B [**203**]{}, 93, 116, 140 (1982). E. V. Shuryak, Phys. Lett. B [**515**]{}, 359 (2001). U. Amaldi and K. R. Schubert, Nucl. Phys. B [**166**]{}, 301 (1980). R. Battiston [*et al.*]{} \[UA4 Collaboration\], Phys. Lett. B [**127**]{}, 472 (1983); M. Bozzo [*et al.*]{} \[UA4 Collaboration\], Phys. Lett. B [**147**]{}, 385 (1984); D. Bernard [*et al.*]{} \[UA4 Collaboration\], Phys. Lett. B [**198**]{}, 583 (1987); G. Arnison [*et al.*]{} \[UA1 Collaboration\], Phys. Lett. B [**128**]{}, 336 (1983). D. Kharzeev and M. Nardi, Phys. Lett. B [**507**]{}, 121 (2001). D. Diakonov and V. Y. Petrov, Nucl. Phys. B [**245**]{}, 259 (1984).
[^1]: Similar to the $J/\psi$, a definite charmonium state which appears as a result of interplay between both perturbative and confining potentials.
[^2]: In Ref. [@KPPP] this was defined as $\Delta(b)$; here we use alternative notation to avoid confusion with our quantity $\Delta(q)$ as defined in Ref. [@NSZ].
[^3]: Of course, the clustering of partons into “constituent quarks” and nucleons increases the number of collisions, but we will ignore such correlations for now.
[^4]: Incidentally, this is close to the mass suggested on the basis of the mutual instanton repulsion [@DP].
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Incomplete cusp edges model the behavior of the Weil-Petersson metric on the compactified Riemann moduli space near the interior of a divisor. Assuming such a space is Witt, we construct a fundamental solution to the heat equation, and using a precise description of its asymptotic behavior at the singular set, we prove that the Hodge-Laplacian on differential forms is essentially self-adjoint, with discrete spectrum satisfying Weyl asymptotics. We go on to prove bounds on the growth of $L^2$-harmonic forms at the singular set and to prove a Hodge theorem, namely that the space of $L^2$-harmonic forms is naturally isomorphic to the middle-perversity intersection cohomology. Moreover, we develop an asymptotic expansion for the heat trace near $t = 0$.'
address:
- 'Department of Mathematics, Johns Hopkins University'
- Mathematisches Institut der LMU München
author:
- 'Jesse Gell-Redman'
- Jan Swoboda
title: 'Spectral and Hodge theory of ‘Witt’ incomplete cusp edge spaces'
---
Introduction
============
On a compact manifold $M$ with boundary ${\partial}M$ which is the total space of a fiber bundle $$\label{eq:boundary-fibration}
Z \hookrightarrow {\partial}M {\xrightarrow{\phantom{x} \pi \phantom{x}}} Y,$$ with $Z, Y$ closed manifolds, an *incomplete cusp edge metric* $g_{ice}$ is, roughly speaking, a smooth Riemannian metric on the interior of $M$ which near the boundary takes the form $$\label{eq:fake-incomplete-cusp-edge}
g_{ice} = dx^2 + x^{2k} g_Z + \pi^* g_Y + {\widetilde{g}}, \qquad k > 1,$$ where $g_Y$ is a metric on the base $Y$, $g_Z$ is positive definite restricted to the fibers, $x$ is the distance to the boundary (to first order), and ${\widetilde{g}}$ is a higher order term. Thus near the boundary $(M, g_{ice})$ is a bundle of geometric horns over a smooth Riemannian manifold $Y$. When $k = 3$, such metrics model the singular behavior of the Weil-Petersson metric on the moduli space of Riemann surfaces, as we discuss below.
In this paper, we study the Hodge-Laplacian $$\label{eq:Hodge-Laplacian}
\Delta := \Delta^{g_{ice}} = d \delta + \delta d$$ acting on differential forms. Our first result shows that under conditions which contain the main examples of interest, one need not impose ‘ideal boundary conditions’ at ${\partial}M$ in order to obtain a self-adjoint operator.
\[thm:essentiallyselfadjoint\] Let $(M, g_{ice})$ be an incomplete cusp edge manifold that is ‘Witt’, meaning that either $\dim Z = f$ is odd or $$\label{eq:witt}
H^{f/2}(Z) = \{0\}.$$ Assume furthermore that $g_{ice}$ satisfies below and that the parameter $k$ in satisfies $$\label{eq:k_3}
k \ge 3.$$ Then the Hodge-Laplacian $\Delta^{g_{ice}}$ acting on differential forms is essentially self-adjoint and has discrete spectrum.
Thus, by the spectral theorem [@taylor:vol2], there exists an orthonormal basis of $L^2(\Omega^p(M))$ of eigenforms $\Delta^{g_{ice}} \alpha_{j,p} = \lambda^2_{j,p} \alpha_{j,p}$. We also prove that the distribution of eigenvalues satisfies “Weyl asymptotics,” concretely, for fixed degree $p$ $$\label{eq:weyl-asymptotics}
\# \{ j \mid \lambda^2_{j, p} < \lambda^2 \} = c_n \operatorname{Vol}(M, g_{ice}) \lambda^n +
o(\lambda^n) \mbox{ as } \lambda \to \infty.$$ See \[sec:spectral-theory\] for the proofs of Theorem \[thm:essentiallyselfadjoint\] and of the asymptotic formula in .
Having established these fundamental properties of the Hodge-Laplacian on such spaces, we turn to the next natural topic: Hodge Theory. Here the object of study is “Hodge cohomology”, or the space of $L^2$ harmonic forms, $$\label{eq:hodge-cohomology}
\mathcal{H}^p_{L^2}(M, g_{ice}) = {\left\{ \alpha \in L^2(\Omega^p(M), g_{ice}) \mid
d\alpha = 0 = \delta \alpha \right\} },$$ and one phrasing of the Hodge theory problem is to find a parametrization for $\mathcal{H}^*_{L^2}(M, g_{ice})$ in terms of a topological invariant. As described in [@HHM2004], in analogous settings the relevant topological space for Hodge theoretic statements is not the manifold $M$, but the stratified space $X$ obtained by collapsing the fibration at the boundary over the base, $$\label{eq:collapsed-manifold}
X := M / \{ p \sim q \mid p, q \in {\partial}M \mbox{ and } \pi(p) = \pi(q)\}.$$ In \[sec:hodge-theory\] we will prove the following.
\[thm:hodge\] For a cusp edge space $(M, g_{ice})$ whose link $Z$ satisfies the Witt condition , there is a natural isomorphism $$\label{eq:Hodge-isomorphism-general}
\mathcal{H}^*_{L^2}(M, g_{ice}) \simeq I\!H_{{\overline{{\mathfrak{m}}}}}(X),$$ where $I\!H_{{\overline{{\mathfrak{m}}}}}$ is the middle perversity intersection cohomology of $X$. Furthermore, differential forms $\gamma \in \mathcal{H}^*_{L^2}(M, g_{ice})$ admit asymptotic expansions at the boundary of $M.$
Moreover, if $Z \simeq \mathbb{S}^{f}$, the sphere of dimension $f$, then $X$ is homeomorphic to a differentiable manifold and the isomorphism becomes $$\label{eq:Hodge-isomorphism}
\mathcal{H}^*_{L^2}(M, g_{ice}) \simeq H^*_{dR}(X),$$ where the latter is the de Rham cohomology of $X$.
We recall the relevant facts about intersection cohomology, originally defined by Goresky and MacPherson in [@GM1980; @GM1983], in Section \[sec:hodge-theory\] below. The equivalence in will follow using the arguments from Hunsicker and Rochon’s recent work [@HR2012] on iterated fibered cusp edge metrics (which are *complete*, non-compact Riemannian manifolds). To elaborate on the asymptotic expansion for $L^2$-harmonic forms $\gamma$, we will show in Lemma \[thm:phg-kernel\] below that in fact $$\mathcal{H}^*_{L^2}(M, g_{ice}) = {\left\{ \alpha \in L^2(\Omega^p(M), g_{ice}) \mid
\Delta^{g_{ice}} \alpha = 0 \right\} },$$ (that the former is included into the latter is obvious), and we show that elements in the $L^2$ kernel of $\Delta^{g_{ice}}$ have expansions at ${\partial}M$ analogous to Taylor expansions but with non-integer powers, a statement which can be be interpreted as a sort of elliptic regularity at the boundary of $M.$
One application of these results, and to putative further work we describe below, is to the analysis on the Riemann moduli spaces $\mathcal M_{\gamma,\ell}$ of Riemann surfaces of genus $\gamma \geq 0$ with $\ell\geq0$ marked points. These spaces carry a natural $L^2$ metric, the Weil-Petersson metric $g_{WP}$, which near the interior of a divisor is an incomplete cusp edge metric with $k=3$. In general divisors may intersect with normal crossings, but in at least two cases only one divisor is present.
\[thm:moduli-space\] Let $\mathcal{M}_{1, 1}$ (also known as the moduli space of elliptic curves) and $\mathcal{M}_{0, 4}$ be the spaces of, respectively, once punctured Riemann surfaces of genus $1$ and $4$ times punctured Riemann surfaces of genus zero, modulo conformal diffeomorphism. Then the Hodge-Laplacian $\Delta^{g_{WP}}$ on differential forms is essentially self-adjoint on $L^2$ with core domain $C^{\infty}_{c, orb}$ (see Section \[thm:heatkernel\]) with discrete spectrum and Weyl asymptotics, and if ${\overline{\mathcal{M}}}_{1,1}$ and ${\overline{\mathcal{M}}}_{0,4}$ denote the Deligne-Mumford compactifications (see e.g. [@Harris-Morrison; @Wolpert-WP-geometry]). Then the de Rham cohomology spaces $H_{dR}({\overline{\mathcal{M}}}_{1,1})$ are naturally isomorphic to $\mathcal{H}^*_{L^2}({\overline{\mathcal{M}}}_{1,1}, g_{WP})$, and the same holds for ${\overline{\mathcal{M}}}_{0, 4}$.
We discuss the proof at the end of Section \[sec:hodge-theory\], though this is really a direct application of our results together with the recent work on the structure of the Weil-Petersson metric near a divisor in [@MS2015] and [@MZ2015].
This article is partly motivated by Ji, Mazzeo, Müller, and Vasy’s work [@JMMV2014] on the spectral theory of the (scalar) Laplace-Beltrami operator on the Riemann moduli spaces $\mathcal M_{g}$, for which it was shown by methods different from ours that it is essentially self-adjoint and its eigenvalues satisfy a Weyl asymptotic formula. Here they analyze incomplete cusp edge spaces with normal crossings, and find in particular that the value $k = 3$ in is critical; indeed *for values $k < 3$ one does not expect self-adjointness*. It would be interesting (though more complex) to find a parametrization of the space of closed extensions of incomplete cusp edge Laplacians with $k < 3$, which is expected to be infinite dimensional, e.g. by [@ALMPII].
In contrast with [@JMMV2014], since our eventual goal is Hodge and index theory on moduli space, our main technical contribution is the construction and detailed description of the heat kernel $H = \exp(- t \Delta^{g_{{\mathrm{ice}}}})$. Indeed, our approach to establishing Theorem \[thm:essentiallyselfadjoint\] (which justifies the use of the word ‘the’ in the previous sentence) and Theorem \[thm:hodge\], is to develop in Theorem \[thm:heatkernel\] below a precise understanding of the behavior of a fundamental solution to the heat equation, which we only conclude is *the* heat kernel after using it to prove Theorem \[thm:essentiallyselfadjoint\]; we establish asymptotic expressions for it at the singular set, uniformly down to time $t = 0$, obtaining in particular in Corollary \[thm:heat-trace\], an asymptotic formula for its trace (which has potential applications to index theory, since our method for analyzing $\Delta^{g_{{\mathrm{ice}}}}$ may be used for other natural elliptic differential operators on these spaces as well) and fine mapping properties of $\Delta^{g_{{\mathrm{ice}}}}$ which allow us to analyze its kernel, i.e.harmonic forms. This is all described in detail in Section \[sec:proofs\].
Essential self-adjointness of a differential operator $P$ is typically a statement about the decay of $L^2$ sections $u$ for which $P u \in
L^2$. (Here the derivative is taken in the distributional sense.) The set of such sections is denoted $$\label{eq:Dmax}
\mathcal{D}_{\max} := \mathcal{D}_{\max}(\Delta^{g_{ice}}) = {\left\{ u \in L^2 \mid P u \in
L^2 \right\} }.$$ This is the largest subset of $L^2$ which is a closed subspace in the graph norm $\| u \|_\Gamma = \| u \|_{L^2} + \| P u \|_{L^2}$. On the other hand, the smallest such closed extension from the domain $C^\infty_c(M)$ is the closure, i.e. the minimal domain $$\label{eq:Dmin}
\mathcal{D}_{\min} := \mathcal{D}_{\min}(\Delta^{g_{ice}}) = {\left\{ u \in L^2 \mid
\exists u_k \in C^\infty_c(M) \mbox{ with }\lim_{k \to \infty} \|
u_k - u \|_\Gamma = 0 \right\} }.$$ The essential self-adjointness statement in Theorem \[thm:essentiallyselfadjoint\] says that the smallest closed extension is equal to the largest, i.e. that $$\label{eq:Dmax=Dmin}
\mathcal{D}_{\max} = \mathcal{D}_{\min},$$ and therefore there is exactly one closed extension. On the other hand, $\mathcal{D}_{\max}$ is dual to $\mathcal{D}_{\min}$ with respect to $L^2$ and thus if holds then $P$ with core domain $C^\infty_c(M)$ has exactly one closed extension, which we denote by $\mathcal{D} = \mathcal{D}_{\min} = \mathcal{D}_{\max}$ and $(P, \mathcal{D})$ is a self-adjoint, unbounded operator on $L^2$. Equation is a statement about decay in the sense that to prove it we will show that a differential form $\alpha \in \mathcal{D}_{\max}$ decays fast enough near ${\partial}M$ that it can be approximated in the graph norm by compactly supported smooth forms. This we do using the heat kernel.
Recall that the heat kernel $H$ is a section of the form bundle $\Pi \colon \operatorname{End}(\Lambda) {\longrightarrow}M^\circ \times
M^\circ \times [0, \infty)$, where $M^\circ$ is the interior of $M$ and $\operatorname{End}(\Lambda)$ is the vector bundle whose fiber over $(p, q,
t)$ is $\operatorname{End}(\Lambda^*_q(M) ; \Lambda^*_p(M))$, smooth on the interior $M^\circ \times M^\circ \times [0, \infty)_t$, which solves $$\label{eq:fundamental-solution}
({\partial}_t + \Delta^{g_{ice}}) H = 0 \mbox{ and } H_t {\longrightarrow}\operatorname{Id}, \mbox{strongly as } t
\downarrow 0.$$ For a compactly supported smooth differential form $\alpha$, the differential form $$\beta(\omega, t) := \int_M
H(w, {\widetilde{w}}, t)\alpha({\widetilde{w}}) \operatorname{dVol}_{g_{ice}}({\widetilde{w}})$$ solves the heat equation $({\partial}_t + \Delta^{g_{ice}}) \beta = 0$ with initial data $\beta
\rvert_{t = 0} = \alpha$. One consequence of our precise description of $H$ in Theorem \[thm:heatkernel\] below will be the following.
\[thm:heatkernelmap\] On a Witt incomplete cusp edge space $(M, g_{ice})$ with metric satisfying the assumptions in below together with , there exists a fundamental solution to the heat equation $H_{t} = H(w, {\widetilde{w}}, t)$ in the sense of such that for $t>0$ $$\label{eq:heat-mapsto-Dmin}
H_{t} \colon L^{2}(M; \Omega^{*}(M)) {\longrightarrow}\mathcal{D}_{\min},$$ and such that $H_{t}$ and ${\partial}_{t} H_{t}$ are bounded, self-adjoint operators on $L^{2}$.
Theorem \[thm:heatkernelmap\] implies the essential self-adjointness statement; indeed the fundamental solution $H_t$ directly gives a sequence (indeed a path) of sections on $\mathcal{D}_{\min}$ which approaches a given form in $\mathcal{D}_{\max}$. Namely, $$\label{eq:obvious-approximation}
\alpha \in \mathcal{D}_{\max} \implies H_t \alpha \to \alpha \mbox{
in } \mathcal{D}_{\min} \mbox{ as } t \downarrow 0.$$ As we see now, the proof of this is straightforward functional analysis given the conclusions of Theorem \[thm:heatkernelmap\].
The proof has nothing to do with the fine structure of incomplete cusp edge spaces, it depends only on the soft properties of the fundamental solution $H$ in Theorem \[thm:heatkernelmap\]. To emphasize this, let $(M,
g)$ be any Riemannian manifold and $P$ a differential operator of order $2$ acting on sections of a vector bundle $E$ with hermitian metric $G$, such that $P$ is symmetric on $L^{2}(M; E)$. For $t > 0$, let $H_{t}$ be a smooth section of $\operatorname{End}(E) \to M
\times M$ which depends smoothly on $t$ and satisfies $$\label{eq:1}
({\partial}_{t} + P) H_{t} = 0 \quad \mbox{ and } \quad \lim_{t \to 0} H_{t} = \operatorname{Id},$$ where the latter limit holds in the strong topology on $L^{2}$, and furthermore such that $H_t$ and ${\partial}_t H_t$ are self-adjoint on $L^2$.
Let $u \in \mathcal{D}_{\max}(P)$, i.e. $u \in L^{2}, Pu \in
L^{2}$. We will show that $u \in \mathcal{D}_{\min}(P)$ as well, and thus $\mathcal{D}_{\min} = \mathcal{D}_{\max}$. Indeed, we will show that $$\label{eq:realdeal}
H_{t} u \to u \mbox{ in } \mathcal{D}_{\max}, \quad \mbox{i.e.\
that } H_{t}u \to u
\mbox{ and } P H_{t} u \to P u \mbox{ in } L^{2}.$$ This suffices to prove that $u \in \mathcal{D}_{\min}$ since $H_{t}u
\in \mathcal{D}_{\min}$ by assumption and $\mathcal{D}_{\min}$ is a closed subspace of $\mathcal{D}_{\max}$ in the graph norm. To prove , we note first that $H_{t}u \to u$ in $L^{2}$ trivially since $H_{t} \to \operatorname{Id}$ in the strong topology on $L^{2}$. Also note that since $u \in \mathcal{D}_{\max}$, $Pu \in
L^{2}$, so $H_{t} Pu \to Pu $ in $L^{2}$ also. Of course, this is not what we want; we want $P H_{t} u \to Pu$, but in fact we claim that $$\label{eq:heat-kernel-commutes}
u \in \mathcal{D}_{\max} \implies P H_{t} u = H_{t} P u,$$ which will establish .
It remains to prove . Note that for $u \in \mathcal{D}_{\max}$ and $v \in L^{2}$, then ${\langle}H_{t} P u , v {\rangle}_{L^2} = {\langle}P u , H_{t} v
{\rangle}_{L^2}$ by self-adjointness of $H_t$ on $L^2$, while ${\langle}P u , H_{t} v
{\rangle}_{L^2} = {\langle}u , P H_{t} v
{\rangle}_{L^2}$. Indeed, the adjoint domain of $\mathcal{D}_{\min}$ is $\mathcal{D}_{\max}$, so for any $f \in \mathcal{D}_{\min}, g \in
\mathcal{D}_{\max}$, ${\langle}P f, g {\rangle}_{L^2} = {\langle}f, Pg {\rangle}_{L^2}$. But, then since $PH_t = - {\partial}_t H_t$ we see that ${\langle}H_{t} P u , v
{\rangle}_{L^2} = - {\langle}u , {\partial}_t H_t v {\rangle}_{L^2}$. But ${\partial}_t H_t$ is self-adjoint on $L^2$ so ${\langle}u , {\partial}_t H_t v
{\rangle}_{L^2} = {\langle}{\partial}_t H_t u , v {\rangle}_{L^2} = - {\langle}P H_t
u , v {\rangle}_{L^2}$, and thus ${\langle}H_{t} P u , v
{\rangle}_{L^2} = {\langle}P H_{t} u , v
{\rangle}_{L^2}$ for all $u \in \mathcal{D}_{\max}, v \in L^2$, i.e. holds.
The central vehicle for the construction of the heat kernel is the construction of a manifold with corners ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}$ via iterated radial blow up of the natural domain of the heat kernel, namely the space $M \times M \times [0, \infty)_t$; thus the interiors of these two spaces are diffeomorphic, and the blowup process furnishes a ‘blowdown’ map $$\label{eq:singularmodelblowdown}
\beta \colon {M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}{\longrightarrow}M \times M \times [0, \infty)_{t},$$ which encodes deeper information about the relationship between the various boundary hypersurfaces (codimension one boundary faces) of ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}$ and those of $M \times M \times [0, \infty)_t$. The upshot is that the heat kernel $H$, which lives a priori on the latter space, pulls back via $\beta$ to be “nice” (precisely to be polyhomogeneous, see Appendix \[sec:mwc\]) on ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}$. In fact, in Section \[sec:heat-kernel\] *we will construct a parametrix $K$ for the heat equation directly on ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}$*. To obtain the actual heat kernel $H$ we use a Neumann series argument to iterate away the error.
The latter process builds on what is now a substantial body of work on analysis (in particular the structure of heat kernels) on singular and non-compact Riemannian spaces, going back at least to the work of Cheeger on manifolds with conical singularities [@C1979; @C1980; @C1983]. Our approach here is more closely related to Melrose’s geometric microlocal analysis on asymptotically cylindrical manifolds [@tapsit] (a non-compact example) and Mooers’ paper [@Mooers-Edith] on manifolds with conical singularities (an incomplete, singular example). The general procedure, which one sees in both the parabolic and elliptic settings, is to express the relevant differential operator as an element in the universal enveloping algebra of a Lie algebra of vector fields, and to ‘resolve’ this Lie algebra via radial blowup of the underlying space.
Two papers closely related to our work are, first, Mazzeo-Vertman [@MV2012], in which the authors study analytic torsion on incomplete edge spaces, which are the $k = 1$ case of incomplete cusp edges. (They analyze the behavior of elliptic operators which have the same type of degeneracy in their principal symbols near the singular set as the Laplacian, so a weider class than considered here.) Their analysis involves a heat kernel construction using blowup analysis, which is slightly simpler in their context as the resolved double space has one less blow up (and thus the triple space is much simpler). One substantial difference between the incomplete edge and incomplete cusp edge cases is that in the incomplete edge case the space of self-adjoint extensions is substantially more subtle. In particular, a Witt space (this is a topological condition and has nothing to do with the value of $k$) that is incomplete edge may have infinitely many self-adjoint extensions if the family of induced operators on the fibers have small non-zero eigenvalues [@ALMPII]; on incomplete cusp edge spaces the small non-zero fiber eigenvalues do not contribute. On the other hand, one expects that the zero mode in the fiber (the space of fiber harmonic forms) makes a simlar contribution in both the cusp and cone cases, in particular that an incomplete cusp edge space which is not Witt will have an infinite dimensional space of closed extensions on which ‘Cheeger ideal boundary conditions’ must be imposed to make the operator self-adjoint, as is the case in [@ALMPII].
A second closely related work is Grieser-Hunsicker [@Grieser-Hunsicker], which uses also inhomogeneous radial blowups, in this case to construct a Green’s function for elliptic operators on a certain class of complete Riemannian manifolds (called ‘$\phi$-manifolds’) which require similar analysis. There are many other related works in a similar vein including, just to name a few, Albin-Rochon [@Albin-Rochon], Brüning-Seeley [@Brunin-Seeley], Gil-Krainer-Mendoza [@Gil-Krainer-Mendoza], Lesch [@L1997], Schultze [@Schulze], and Grieser’s notes on parametrix constructions for heat kernels [@Grieser-notes]. For analysis of moduli space, to give just a sample recent work, we refer the reader to the papers of Liu-Sun-Yao, for example [@Liu-Sun-Yau-goodness; @Liu-Sun-Yao-New-results].
Incomplete cusp edge differential geometry {#sec:differential-geometry}
==========================================
As described above we work on a smooth manifold with boundary $M$ whose boundary is the total space of a fiber bundle with base $Y$ and typical fiber $Z$. (Again, we assume that $Y, Z$ are both compact and without boundary.) We fix once and for all a boundary defining function $x$, meaning a function $x \in C^{\infty}(M)$ with $\{ x = 0 \} = {\partial}M$ and $dx$ non-vanishing on ${\partial}M$, and thereby fix (after possibly scaling $x$ by a constant) a tubular neighborhood of the boundary, $$\label{eq:tubular}
\mathcal{U} \simeq {\partial}M \times [0, 1)_x.$$ Note that near each point $q$ on the boundary, there is a neighborhood $V$ in $\partial M$ of $y = \pi(q)$ ($\pi$ is the projection onto the base) such that $\pi^{-1}(V) \simeq V \times Z$, where $\simeq$ denotes diffeomorphism. Below, we will say that we work ‘locally over the base’ when we fix our attention on a neighborhood of $q$ in $M$ of the form $\pi^{-1}(V) \times [0, 1)_x$. If one chooses local coordinates $y$ on the base and $z$ on $\pi^{-1}(q) \simeq Z$, then $$\label{eq:local-coords-near-boundary}
(x, y, z) \mbox{ form a coordinate chart on $M$ in a neighborhood of $q$.}$$ Let $$\label{eq:f-and-b}
f:= \dim Z, \quad b:= \dim Y.$$
In the space $X$ defined by collapsing the fibers $Z$ over the boundary (see ), the image of ${\partial}M$ via the projection $\pi \colon M {\longrightarrow}X$ defines a subset $\pi({\partial}M)$, which can be identified with $Y$, and $\pi({\partial}M)$ forms the unique singular stratum of the stratified space $X$. (See, for instance [@ALMPI] or [@DLR2011], among many others, for a discussion of stratified spaces.) In the case $Z \simeq \mathbb{S}^f$ a sphere, $X$ is homeomorphic to a manifold. In general, given $p \in
\pi({\partial}M)$, there is a basis of open sets at $p$ consisting of *canonical neighborhoods* homeomorphic to $$\label{eq:canon-neighb}
V \times C_\delta(Z),$$ where $V$ is an open subset of $Y$ containing $p$ and $$C_\delta(Z) = [0, \delta) \times Z / {\left\{ 0 \right\} } \times Z.$$
Differential form bundles and the Hodge-Laplacian
-------------------------------------------------
We will consider differential forms and vector fields which are of approximately unit size with respect to Riemannian metrics of the type in . These are the incomplete cusp edge forms, which are sections of the incomplete cusp edge form bundle, ${{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}(M)$, whose smooth sections are generated locally over the base by the forms $$\label{eq:ice-forms}
dx, \qquad dy_{i}\quad (i=1,\ldots,b=\dim Y), \qquad x^{k} dz_{\alpha}\quad (\alpha=1,\ldots,f=\dim Z).$$ Locally over the base, we have the isomorphism $$\label{eq:ice-decomp}
{{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}(M) = \Lambda^{*}(Y) \wedge x^{k \operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}\Lambda^{*}(Z) \oplus dx \wedge
\Lambda^{*}(Y) \wedge x^{k \operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}\Lambda^{*}(Z),$$ where $\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}$ is a multiplication operator on $\Lambda^{*}(Z)$ which takes a form $\alpha$ of degree $q$ to $q \alpha$. Note that with respect to this decomposition, if $\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}$ is the operator acting on $\Lambda^{\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}(Y)$ by multipliction by $\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}$, the exterior derivative $d$ acts as $$\label{eq:exterior-derivative}
d=\begin{pmatrix}d^Y+ (-1)^{q_Y} x^{-k}d^Z&0\\
\partial_x+kx^{-1}\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}&-d^Y-(-1)^{q_Y} x^{-k}d^Z\end{pmatrix}.$$
Moreover, we will use the space of vector fields which are locally $C^\infty(M)$ linear combinations of the vector fields $$\label{eq:ice-fields}
{\partial}_x, \quad {\partial}_{y_{i}}, \quad x^{-k} {\partial}_{z_{\alpha}}.$$ These vector fields are local sections of a bundle ${{}^{ice} T}(M)$ which is dual to ${{}^{ice}T^{*}}(M) = \Lambda^1_{ice}(M)$. We denote sections of ${{}^{ice} T}(M)$ by $\mathcal{V}_{ice}$.
We consider metrics $g$ on $M$ which are sections of ${\operatorname{Sym}}^{0,2}({{}^{ice}T^{*}}(M))$, and which locally over the boundary take the form $$\label{eq:cuspedgemetric}
g =
{\left(}\begin{array}{ccc}
dx & dy^i & x^{k} dz^\alpha
\end{array}
{\right)}{\left(}{\left(}\begin{array}{ccc}
1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & (h_{ij}) & 0 \\
0 & 0 & ({\textbf{k}}_{\alpha \beta})
\end{array}
{\right)}+ O(x^k, g_0)
{\right)}{\left(}\begin{array}{c}
dx \\ dy^i \\ x^{k} dz^\alpha
\end{array}
{\right)},$$ with $h_{ij}$ and and ${\textbf{k}}_{\alpha \beta}$ independent of $x$. Here $O(x^k, g_0)$ refers to a $O(x^k)$ norm bound with respect to an exact incomplete cusp edge metric $g_0$ as in below, and furthermore we assume that the $O(x^k, g_0)$ term is *polyhomogeneous conormal*, a regularity assumption defined precisely in Section \[sec:mwc\] below, which roughly speaking means that the coefficients have an asymptotic expansion at $x = 0$ analogous to a Taylor expansion but with non-integer powers and with precise derivative bounds on the error terms. Metrics satisfying these assumptions are what we refer to henceforth as **incomplete cusp edge metrics**. (Note that the assumptions on $g$ are stronger than merely assuming that $g \in {\operatorname{Sym}}^{0,2}({{}^{ice}T^{*}}(M))$, as the latter space contains e.g. $x (x^k dz \otimes_{sym} dx)$, which does not obey the error bound.)
As is shown in [@MS2015] (see the introduction for further discussion) with previous results for example in [@Wolpert-WP-geometry; @Yamada] the Weil-Petersson metric on moduli space takes the form near the interior of a divisor and satisfies the polyhomogeneity assumption.
As an example of such a metric, one can take an *exact* incomplete cusp edge metric, constructed as follows. Let $h_{1} \in
{\operatorname{Sym}}^{0, 2}(y)$ be a metric on the base, and $h = \pi^{*}h_{1}$ its $x$-independent pullback via the projection $\pi \colon {\partial}M
{\longrightarrow}Y$ extended to our tubular neighborhood $\mathcal{U} \simeq {\partial}M
\times [0, 1)_x$ in the obvious way. The tensor ${\textbf{k}}$ we take to be the pullback to $\mathcal{U}$ of a tensor on ${\partial}M$ which by abuse of notation we write as ${\textbf{k}}\in Sym^{0,2}({\partial}M)$, having the property that ${\textbf{k}}$ restricted to any fiber is positive definite. The metric $g_0 = dx^2 + h +
x^{2k} {\textbf{k}}$ is an exact incomplete cusp edge metric. Note that in coordinates $(x, y, z)$ such a metric takes the form $$\label{eq:exact-cuspedgemetric}
g_0 =
{\left(}\begin{array}{ccc}
dx & dy^i & x^{k} dz^\alpha
\end{array}
{\right)}{\left(}\begin{array}{ccc}
1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & (h_{ij}) & x^k ({\textbf{k}}_{i\alpha}) \\
0 & x^k ({\textbf{k}}_{\alpha i}) & {\textbf{k}}_{\alpha \beta}
\end{array}
{\right)}{\left(}\begin{array}{c}
dx \\ dy^i \\ x^{k} dz^\alpha
\end{array}
{\right)}.$$ Thus an incomplete cusp edge metric diffes from an exact one by a polyhomogeneous error of order $O(x^k)$ in norm and can therefore be taken to correspond uniquely to an exact cusp edge metric.
Note that an exact incomplete cusp edge metric (and thus an incomplete cusp metric) gives rise, locally over the boundary to well defined notions of the operators $d_Y$, $d_Z$, the Hodge star operators $\star_Y$ and $\star_Z$, obtained by allowing $\star_{(Y,h)}$ the Hodge star associated with $(Y,
h)$, the Riemannian structure on the base $Y$, to act on the $\Lambda^*(Y)$ factors in the decomposition and $\star_{(Z, {\textbf{k}})}$, the $y$-dependent Riemannian structure induced on the fibers, on the $x^{k\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}\Lambda^*(Z)$ factors. (So, for example, $\star_Z x^k dz_\alpha = x^{(f - 1) k} \star_Z dz_\alpha$.) Thus, we may also define unambiguously (still locally over the boundary) the Hodge-de Rham operators $\eth_Y$ and $\eth_Z$. Indeed, a homogeneous differential form $\alpha$, in the coordinates $(x, y, z)$ can be written $\alpha = (f(x, y, z) dy^I) \wedge
x^{kp}dz^A(\wedge dx) = \pm(f(x, y, z) x^{kp}dz^A) \wedge dy^I
(\wedge dx)$, where $I$ and $A$ are multi-indices and $|I|$, resp.$|A|$, is their order. One can act via $\eth_Y = d_Y + (-1)^{{b}(|I|-1)+1} \star_Y d_Y \star_Y$ on $f(x, y, z) dy^I$, where $\star_Y$ is the Hodge star operator of $(Y, h)$, and thus define $\eth_Y \alpha$, or act via $\eth_Z = d_Z + (-1)^{f (|A| -
1) + 1} \star_Z d_Z \star_Z$ on $f(x, y, z) x^{kp}dz^A$ where $\star_Z$ is the Hodge star operator of $(Z, {\textbf{k}})$, and thus define $\eth_Z \alpha$. Note that $\eth_Z$ is thus a *family* of operators on the fiber $Z$ parametrized by the base point $y$. The Hodge-de Rham operator can be decomposed locally over the boundary in terms of the base and fiber Hodge-de Rham operators according to the following proposition, which we prove in Section \[sec:proof-of-operator-decomps\] below.
\[thm:normaloperatordeRham\] Locally over the boundary (see below ), the Hodge-de Rham operator decomposes as $$\begin{split}
\label{eq:fulldeRham}
\eth &= \eth_0 + \delta_Z P_1 + P_2 \delta_Z
+ x^{k -1} E,
\end{split}$$ where $\eth_0$ acts on sections of ${{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}$ decomposed as in by $$\eth_0 = {\left(}\begin{array}{cc}
x^{-k} \eth^{Z} + \eth^{Y} & - {\partial}_{x} - k x^{-1} (f - \operatorname{\mathbf{N}}) \\
{\partial}_{x} + k x^{-1} \operatorname{\mathbf{N}}& - x^{-k}\eth^{Z} - \eth^{Y}
\end{array}
{\right)},$$ $\eth^{Z}$ depends on the base $Y$ parametrically, acts in only the fiber direction and only on the $\Lambda^{*}(Z)$ factor, and is equal to the Hodge-de Rham operator for the Riemannian manifold ${\textbf{k}}\rvert_{y}$, and where the $P_i$ are polyhomogeneous, bounded endomorphisms on ${{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}$, and $E$ is as in -.
To describe the term $E$, we say first it is a differential operator of order one which does not increase the order of blow up of polyhomogeneous distributions; in particular $$\label{eq:errors-in-operator1}
E( x^k \gamma) =
O(x^k),$$ for $\gamma$ a smooth, bounded section of ${{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}$. In fact, it is a ${{\mathrm b}}$-differential operators on ${\mathrm{ice}}$-forms with polyhomogeneous coefficients $$\label{eq:errors-in-operator2}
E \in {\mathrm{Diff}}^1_{{{\mathrm b}},\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}(M; {{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}).$$ Letting $\mathcal{V}_{{{\mathrm b}},\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}$ denote the polyhomogeneous vector fields tangent to the boundary ${\partial}M$, means that $E$ lies in the algebra of differential operators generated $\mathcal{V}_{{{\mathrm b}},\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}$. Concretely, it satisfies $$\label{eq:errors-in-operator3}
E = a x {\partial}_x + b^i {\partial}_{y^i} + c^{\alpha} {\partial}_{z^\alpha} + d,$$ for polyhomogeneous, bounded endomorphisms $a, b^i, c^\alpha, d$, and where repeated indices are summed over. In general, an element $Q \in
{\mathrm{Diff}}^m_{{{\mathrm b}},\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}(M; {{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}})$ also satisfies , and is given locally by polyhomogeneous linear combinations of $x {\partial}_x, {\partial}_y,
{\partial}_z$, i.e.$$Q = \sum_{i + |\alpha| + |\beta| \le m} a_{i,\alpha, \beta} (x {\partial}_x)^i
{\partial}_y^\alpha {\partial}_z^\beta,$$ where $a_{i, \alpha, \beta}$ is a polyhomogeneous bounded endomorphism of ${{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}$.
The Hodge-Laplacian $\Delta = \eth^2 = d \delta + \delta d$ can now be decomposed along the same lines.
\[thm:Hodge-Laplacian\] Locally over the base, $\Delta$ can be decomposed as follows $$\label{eq:Hodge-Laplacian-decomp}
\Delta = \Delta_0 + x^{-k}{\widetilde{P}} + x^{-1} {\widetilde{E}},$$ where $\Delta_0$ acts on forms decomposed as in by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Hodge-Laplacian-decomp1}
\begin{split}
\Delta_0 &= \operatorname{Id}_{2 \times 2} {\left(}- {\partial}_{x}^{2} - \frac{kf}{x}
{\partial}_{x} + \frac{1}{x^{2k}} \Delta^{Z,y} + \Delta^{Y} {\right)}\\ & \qquad
+ {\left(}\begin{array}{cc}
k\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}(1 - k(f - \operatorname{\mathbf{N}})) x^{-2} & - 2k x^{-k - 1} d^{Z} \\
- 2 k x^{-k - 1} \delta^{Z} & k(f - \operatorname{\mathbf{N}})(1 - k \operatorname{\mathbf{N}}) x^{-2}
\end{array} {\right)},
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ where $${\widetilde{P}} = \delta_Z Q_1 + d_Z Q_2 + Q_3 \delta_Z + Q_4 d_Z$$ and where the $Q_i\in {\mathrm{Diff}}^1_{{{{\mathrm b}},\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}}(M)$ and ${\widetilde{E}} \in {\mathrm{Diff}}^2_{{{{\mathrm b}},\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}}(M)$, as described below Proposition \[thm:normaloperatordeRham\].
Proof of Propositions \[thm:normaloperatordeRham\] and \[thm:Hodge-Laplacian\] {#sec:proof-of-operator-decomps}
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To prove Proposition \[thm:normaloperatordeRham\], we will compare the Hodge–de Rham operator for $g$ to that of the locally defined warped product metric $$\label{eq:local-product-metric}
g_p =
{\left(}\begin{array}{ccc}
dx & dy^i & x^{k} dz^\alpha
\end{array}
{\right)}{\left(}\begin{array}{ccc}
1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & (h_{ij}) & 0 \\
0 & 0 & ({\textbf{k}}_{\alpha \beta})
\end{array}
{\right)}{\left(}\begin{array}{c}
dx \\ dy^i \\ x^{k} dz^\alpha
\end{array}
{\right)}.$$ We compute the Hodge-de Rham operator for $g_p$ now. First of all, the Hodge star operator of $g_p$, $\star_p$, acts on forms decomposed as in as $$\label{eq:star-warped-produect}
\star_p =
{\left(}\begin{array}{cc}
0 & (-1)^{\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}(b - q_Y)} \star_Y \star_Z \\
(-1)^{q_Y + \operatorname{\mathbf{N}}(b - q_Y + 1)} \star_Y \star_Z & 0
\end{array}
{\right)},$$ where $q_Y$ denotes multiplication by the degree in $Y$ and $\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}$ denotes multiplication by the degree in $Z$, and $b = \dim Y$. Using , we see that the Hodge-de Rham operator for $g_p$ acting on $k$-forms, $\eth_p = d + (-1)^{k(n - k)}\star_p d \star_p$ satisfies . We now use this to prove the proposition.
A brief calculation shows that holds with $P_1=P_2=E=0$ for the warped product metric $g_{p}$, defined locally on $M$ in . Next, we claim that the general case follows from that of a warped product metric $g_{p}$. To see this, it suffices to show that if $\star_{p}$ continues to denote the Hodge star operator for $g_{p}$, then the pointwise norm $$\label{eq:19}
{\left \| \star_{p} - \star \right \|_{g} } \le C x^{k}.$$ Indeed, if this holds, then writing $$\label{eq:20}
\pm \delta = \star {\left(}dx \wedge {\partial}_{x} \oplus d_{Y} \oplus d_{Z} {\right)}\star,$$ we consider $\delta - \delta_{g_{p}}$, the latter being the dual of $d$ with respect to $d_{g_p}$, which is given by $\pm 1$ times $$\label{eq:21}
(\star dx \wedge {\partial}_{x} \star - \star_{p} dx \wedge {\partial}_{x} \star_{p})
\oplus (\star d_{Y} \star - \star_{p} d_{Y} \star_{p})\oplus( \star
d_{Z} \star - \star_{p} d_{Z} \star_{p}).$$ The operator $d_{Z}$, as an operator on sections of ${{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}$ satisfies $d_{Z} = \sum a_{i} {\partial}_{z_{i}}$ where $a_{i} $ are endomorphisms satisfying $a_{i} = O(x^{-k})$. (Proof: $d_{Z} \alpha = \sum_{\alpha}(x^{k}dz_{\alpha}) \wedge
x^{-k}{\partial}_{z_{\alpha}}\alpha$ and $x^{k} dz_{i}$ is a bounded endomorphism since $x^{k}dz_{i}$ has unit length.) By the same rationale, $dx
\wedge {\partial}_{x}$ and $d_{Y}$ are differential operators with bounded coefficients. By it follows that in the difference $$\begin{aligned}
\delta-\delta_p&=&\pm(\ast d \ast- \ast_p d \ast_p)\\
&=&\pm \delta d(\ast-\ast_p) \pm(\ast-\ast_p) d(\ast-\ast_p)\pm (\ast-\ast_p) d\ast\\
&=&\pm\delta\ast (\ast-\ast_p)\pm (\ast-\ast_p)d (\ast-\ast_p)\pm (\ast-\ast_p)\ast\delta\end{aligned}$$ the terms coming from $d_Y$ and ${\partial}_x$ derivatives have coefficients bounded to order $x^k$, while those coming from $d_Z$ have coefficients with bounded derivatives. Hence follows.
It remains to prove . First note that, under the assumptions above, if we let $g^{\otimes k,- \otimes l} = g \otimes \dots \otimes g
\otimes g^{-1} \otimes \dots \otimes g^{-1}$ denote the metric induced by $g$ on $TM^{\otimes k} \otimes T^{*}M^{\otimes l}$, and similarly for $g_{p}$, then $$\label{eq:23}
{\left \| g^{\otimes k,- \otimes l} - g_{p}^{\otimes k,- \otimes l} \right \|_{g} }
< C x^{k},$$ where the norm is the one induced by $g$ on the tensor powers. Indeed this is obvious for $l = 0$. Moreover, $g = g_{p} + O(x^{k})$ implies $g^{-1} = g_{p}^{-1} + O(x^{k})$, and follows. Now let $e_{i}$ be an oriented orthonormal basis of $1$-forms for $g$, and for $I = (i_{1}, \dots, i_{k})$ denoting an ordered subset of ${\left\{ 1, \dots, n \right\} }$, let $e_{I} =
e_{i_{1}} \wedge \dots \wedge e_{i_{k}}$ be the corresponding $k$-form. Then $\star e_{I} = e_{I^{c}}$ where $I^{c}$ denotes the complement of $I$ in ${\left\{ 1, \dots, n \right\} }$ such that $e_{I} \wedge
e_{I^{c}} $ is positive. Thus, we want to show that ${\left \| \star e_{I} -
\star_{p} e_{I} \right \|_{g} } < c x^{k}$. For two ordered multi-indices $I, J$, letting $\delta_{I,J} = 1$ if $I = J$ and zero otherwise, consider $$\label{eq:22}
\begin{split}
{\langle}\star_{p} e_{I}, e_{J} {\rangle}_{g_{p}} &= {\langle}{\langle}\star_{p} e_{I},
e_{J} {\rangle}_{g_{p}} \operatorname{dVol}_{g_{p}}, \operatorname{dVol}_{g_{p}} {\rangle}_{g_{p}} \\
&= {\langle}e_{I} \wedge e_{J}, \operatorname{dVol}_{g_{p}} {\rangle}_{g_{p}} \\
&= \pm \delta_{I^{c}, J}{\langle}\operatorname{dVol}_{g}, \operatorname{dVol}_{g_{p}} {\rangle}_{g_{p}} \\
&= \pm \delta_{I^{c}, J} (1 + O(x^{k})),
\end{split}$$ so since ${\langle}\star_{p} e_{I}, e_{J} {\rangle}_{g} = {\langle}\star_{p}
e_{I}, e_{J} {\rangle}_{g_{p}} + O(x^{k}) = \pm \delta_{I^{c}, J} (1 +
O(x^{k})) = {\langle}\star
e_{I}, e_{J} {\rangle}_{g} + O(x^{k}),$ the bound in holds.
To see that Proposition \[thm:Hodge-Laplacian\] holds, simply use $\Delta = \eth^* \eth$ together with Proposition \[thm:normaloperatordeRham\].
Fiber harmonic forms {#sec:fibharmforms}
--------------------
We now discuss forms which are approximately harmonic with respect to the family of metrics ${\textbf{k}}$ induced on the fibers $Z$ by an ${\mathrm{ice}}$-metric as in . We begin by working directly on the fiber bundle $\pi \colon {\partial}M {\longrightarrow}Y$ with a submersion metric, i.e. a metric $g^{\partial}= \pi^* h_1 + {\textbf{k}}$ (so $h_1$ is a Riemannian metric on $Y$ and ${\textbf{k}}$ is assumed only to be non-degenerate when restricted to the fibers). Then $\alpha \in
\Omega^q({\partial}M)$ is **fiber harmonic** if $\alpha \rvert_{\pi^{-1}(p)}$ is harmonic with respect to ${\textbf{k}}\rvert_{\pi^{-1}(p)}$ for every $p \in Y$, i.e. if it lies in the kernel of $\Delta^{Z_y, {\textbf{k}}_y}$. One can obtain fiber harmonic forms as follow. Let ${\widetilde{\alpha}} \in \Gamma(Y; \Omega^q_{fib})$, where $\Omega^q_{fib}$ is the bundle whose fiber over a point $p
\in Y$ is the space of $q$-forms on $\pi^{-1}(p)$. Since a metric $g^{\partial}$ is present, there is a natural way to extend such a ${\widetilde{\alpha}}$ to a differential form on ${\partial}M$; consider the space $H^q := L^2(\pi^*\Omega^q(Y)) \subset
L^2({\partial}M ; \Lambda^q)$ which is the $L^2$ closure of the space of differential forms pulled back from $Y$, and note that there is a unique differential form ${\widetilde{\alpha}}_V$ on ${\partial}M$ which is at every point orthogonal to $H^q$ and which pulls back to ${\widetilde{\alpha}}$ on each fiber. (This is analogous to being a horizontal vector field; vertical vector fields are defined in differential terms and the horizontal vector fields are defined with the metric. Indeed, being a vertical form here means being dual via the metric to a vertical vector field). Moreover, if ${\widetilde{\alpha}}$ is harmonic on each fiber, we claim that $\alpha := {\widetilde{\alpha}}_V$ is fiber harmonic. Namely, choosing a local trivialization of ${\partial}M$ near $p \in Y$ and coordinates $(y, z)$, for a family of $q$-forms ${\widetilde{\alpha}}$ on the fibers, the vertical extension satisfies $$\label{eq:vertical-local}
{\widetilde{\alpha}}_V = \sum_{|A| = q} a^A dz_A + \sum_{|I| + |B| = q, |I| > 1}
b^{I, B} dy_I \wedge dz_B,$$ with ${\widetilde{\alpha}} = \sum_{|A| = q} a^A dz_A$. Choosing another local trivialization$({\widetilde{y}}, {\widetilde{z}})$ we have $z = z({\widetilde{y}},
{\widetilde{z}}), y = {\widetilde{y}}$, $dz_i = ({\partial}z^i/{\partial}{\widetilde{z}}^j )d{\widetilde{z}}^j + f^i dy_i$. Thus the pullback of ${\widetilde{\alpha}}_V$ is the change of variables for differential forms on the fiber, on which $\Delta^{Z,y}$ acts invariantly, proving the claim.
Let $\ker(\Delta^Z)
{\longrightarrow}Y$ denote the bundle whose fiber above each $y$ is the kernel of $\Delta^{Z_y,
{\textbf{k}}_y}$. This bundle has a grading by the form degree, $$\mathcal{H}^q_{{\partial}} := \ker(\Delta^Z \colon \Omega^q(Z) {\longrightarrow}\Omega^q(Z)),$$ and by the above paragraph the vertical extensions of these forms also forms a vector bundle $\mathcal{H}^q_{{\partial},V} \subset \Lambda^q({\partial}M)$, the sections of which are fiber harmonic. We now define the **approximately fiber harmonic** differential forms $\mathcal{H}$ to be the direct sum of the spaces $$\label{eq:fiber-harmonic-space}
\mathcal{H} = \oplus_{q = 0}^f \mathcal{H}^q, \mbox{ where }
\mathcal{H}^q := \pi^*\Lambda(Y) \wedge x^{kq} \mathcal{H}^q_{{\partial}, V},$$ or, in words, the sections of $\mathcal{H}^q$ form the space of differential forms on $\mathcal{U} \simeq {\partial}M \times [0, 1)_x$ pulled back from $Y$ wedged with the vertical extentions of harmonic $q$-forms on the fibers, thought of as living on $\mathcal{U}$ and weighted by $x^{kq}$ (so as to make them unit size.)
The main point to note about sections of $\mathcal{H}$ in is that a form $\gamma \in \mathcal{H}$ satisfies that, locally over the base, we have $$\label{eq:8}
\Delta^{Z, y} \gamma = O(x^k),$$ where $\Delta^{Z, y}$ is the operator defined (again only locally over the base) in Proposition \[thm:Hodge-Laplacian\], and as usual the $O(x^k)$ bound is a pointwise norm bound. Indeed, this follows since by , under a change of local trivialization of the boundary fibration, we have $$\label{eq:local-trivialization-invariance}
x^k dz_i =
x^k ({\partial}z^i/{\partial}{\widetilde{z}}^j )d{\widetilde{z}}^j + O(x^k),$$ so $x^{kq}$ times $\gamma$ is $O(x^k)$ times the $q$-form part of the pullback to the fiber, together with the fact that the $q$-form part of the pullback is harmonic.
Below we will often work with forms which are merely polyhomogeneous (as opposed to smooth). These are sections $\gamma$ of $\mathcal{A}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}({{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}})$, defined rigorously in below. As described above, these have an expansion at $x = 0$ analogous to a Taylor expansion, but with non-interger and possibly also $\log^p(x)$ factors. In particular we will be forced by possibly only polyhomogeneous regularity of the metric to work in the larger space $x^{s_0} \mathcal{A}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}(\mathcal{H}^q)$ defined to be the subset of $\mathcal{A}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}({{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}})$ such that $$\label{eq:phg-appro-fib-harm}
x^{s_0} \mathcal{A}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}(\mathcal{H}^q) \subset x^{s_0} C^\infty(M ;
\mathcal{H}^q) \oplus O(x^{s_0 + k}).$$ This space contains, in particular, sections of $x^{s_0}
\mathcal{H}^q$, and also ${\mathrm{ice}}$-forms $\gamma$ which are polyhomogeneous and can be written as ${\widetilde{\gamma}} = x^{s_0} \gamma_0 +
O(x^{s_0 + k})$, where $\gamma_0 \in \mathcal{H}^q$, but moreover contains $x^{s_0} \gamma_1 + x^{s_0 + 1/2} \gamma_2 + O(x^{s_0 + k})$ for $\gamma_{i} \in
\mathcal{H}^q$ and indeed any polyhomogeneous ${\mathrm{ice}}$-form whose expansion terms not bounded in norm by $x^{s_0 + k}$ have fiber harmonic coefficients. Thus, $\gamma
\in x^{s_0} \mathcal{A}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}(\mathcal{H}^q)$ implies that locally over the base, $$\Delta^{Z, y} {\widetilde{\gamma}} = O(x^{s_0 + k}).\label{eq:fiber-harmonic-error-1}$$
It is in fact possible to define an operator $\Delta_{fib}$ on certain forms which is an invariant version of the locally defined $\Delta^{Z, y}$, for example on smooth sections of ${{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}(M)$, if one notices that a section $\alpha \in C^\infty(M ;
{{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}(M))$ defines, by restriction to the boundary, a smooth section of $\Lambda^* Y \otimes \Omega^*_{fib} {\longrightarrow}Y$. Indeed, this follows since and local computation produces a form on $Y$ with values in $\Omega^*(Z)$. Letting ${\widetilde{\alpha}}$ denote this section, one can then define $\alpha$ to be $\beta_1 = x^{k\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}(\Delta^{Z, y} {\widetilde{\alpha}})_V$, the vertical extension of the fiber-wise Laplacian applied to the $\Omega^*(Z)$ factor of ${\widetilde{\alpha}}$, and weighted by $x^{k\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}$ to make it a smooth section of ${{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}(M)$. Then $\beta_1 - \Delta^{Z, y} \alpha = O(x)$ locally over the base. One can in fact iterate this to find a section $\Delta_{fib} \alpha := \beta$ such that $\beta - \Delta^{Z, y} \alpha = O(x^k)$, since if $x
\alpha'$ is a smooth section then letting ${\widetilde{\alpha}}'$ denote its value (as an $\Omega^*(Z)$-valued form on $Y$) the ${\mathrm{ice}}$-form $\beta_2 = x \cdot x^{k\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}(\Delta^{Z, y} {\widetilde{\alpha}}')_V$, then $(\beta_1 + \beta_2) - \Delta^{Z, y} \alpha = O(x^2)$, and this can be iterated up to the error $O(x^k)$ (and since all steps introduce $O(x^k)$ errors, no better.) We will let $\Delta_{fib} \alpha = \beta$.
We will also need to ask when a, say, smooth ${\mathrm{ice}}$-form can be written as $\Delta_{fib}$ of another form, or equivalently, when, given a ${\mathrm{ice}}$-form $\alpha$, there exists a ${{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}$-form $\gamma$ such that locally over the base $\alpha - \Delta^{Z, y} \gamma = O(x^k)$. A related question is whether there is an invariant definition of projection onto the space of fiber harmonic forms. Indeed, given $\alpha$ a smooth section of ${{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}(M)$, again considering the $\Omega^*_{fib}$ valued form on $Y$, ${\widetilde{\alpha}}$, over the boundary, if $\Pi^y$ denotes the projection onto the kernel of $\Delta^{Z, y}$, we can consider $x^{k\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}(\Pi^{y} {\widetilde{\alpha}})$, and again can iterate this $k$-steps down the Taylor expansion of $\alpha$ to obtain a projection $\Pi^\mathcal{H}$ onto the fiber harmonic forms. In particular, if $\alpha \in x^{s_0} \mathcal{H}_{phg}$, the definition of $\Pi^{\mathcal{H}}$ can be extended to $$\label{eq:real-fiber-harmonic-projection}
\Pi_{\mathcal{H}} \colon x^{s_0}L^2({{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}) {\longrightarrow}x^{s_0}\mathcal{H}, \quad
\Pi_{\mathcal{H}} = \Pi_{\mathcal{H}}^{loc} + O(x^k),$$ where $\Pi^{loc}_{\mathcal{H}}$ is the projection onto $\ker(\Delta^{Z, y})$ defined locally over the base, so that, again locally over the base we have $$\label{eq:harmonic-projection}
\Pi^{\mathcal{H}} d^Z, \Pi^{\mathcal{H}} \delta^Z,
d^Z \Pi^{\mathcal{H}}, \delta^Z \Pi^{\mathcal{H}} \in x^k {\mathrm{Diff}_{{{\mathrm b}}}}^1(M),$$ and thus since $\Delta^{Z, y} = d^Z \delta^Z + \delta^Z d^Z$, $$\label{eq:harmonic-projection-2}
\Pi^{\mathcal{H}} \Delta^{Z, y} \Pi^{\mathcal{H}} \in x^{2k} {\mathrm{Diff}_{{{\mathrm b}}}}^1(M),$$ where ${\mathrm{Diff}_{{{\mathrm b}}}}^1$ is defined in . Moreover, it is straightforward to show that if $\alpha$ is a smooth section of $x^{s_0} ({{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}(M))$ then $$\label{eq:solvability}
\Pi^{\mathcal{H}} \alpha = O(x^{s_0 + k}) \implies \exists \gamma
\mbox{ such that } \Delta^{Z, y} \gamma - \alpha = O(x^{s_0 + k}),$$ this holding locally over the base, with the form $\gamma$ defined globally.
The heat kernel {#sec:heat-kernel}
===============
In this section we construct a manifold with corners ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}$ as in together with a fundamental solution to the heat equation which is a polyhomogeneous conormal distribution on ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}$ with prescribed leading order terms in its asymptotic expansions at the various faces (see Theorem \[thm:heatkernel\]). To do so, after the construction of ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}$, we perform a parametrix construction and then use this parametrix to obtain the fundamental solution itself via a Neumann series.
Heat double space {#sec:heat-double-space}
-----------------
The space ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}$ is obtained by performing three consecutive inhomogeneous radial blowups of $M \times M \times
[0, \infty)_t$. Such blowups create, from a given manifold with corners $X$ and some other data including a submanifold $N$, another manifold with corners $[X; N]_{inhom}$, which is diffeomorphic to the complement of $N_+(N)$. Here $N_+(N)$ denotes the inward-pointing normal bundle of $N$ which we think of as an open neighborhood of $N$ in $X$; thus $[X; N]_{inhom}$ is a manifold with corners with one more boundary hypersurface (bhs) than $X$. It comes together with a blowdown map $\beta \colon [X; N]_{inhom} {\longrightarrow}X$ which is a diffeomorphism of the interiors and satisfies that $C^\infty([X; N]_{inhom})$ contains $\beta^*
C^\infty(X)$ properly, i.e. there are functions which are not smooth on $X$ but nonetheless pull back to smooth functions on the blown up space.
In more detail, the submanifold $N$ is a ‘p-submanifold,’ meaning that there are local coordinates $(x, x', y,
y') \in (\mathbb{R}^+)^k_{(x, x')} \times \mathbb{R}^{n - k}_{(y,
y')}$ with $x \in (\mathbb{R}^+)^{p + 1}, y \in \mathbb{R}^q$ in which $N$ is defined (locally) by $x = 0, y = 0$. The space $[X, N]_{inhom}$ with homogeneities $x_0 \sim x_1^{\alpha_1} \sim
\dots \sim x_p^{\alpha_p} \sim y_1^{\beta_1} \sim \dots \sim
y_q^{\beta_q}$ with $\alpha_j, \beta_k \in \mathbb{N}$, $1 \le \alpha_1 \le
\dots \le \alpha_p$, $\beta_1 \le \dots \le \beta_q$ is a manifold with corners whose set of boundary hypersurfaces contains that of $X$ naturally, and $[X, N]_{inhom}$ has one new boundary hypersurface, which we call $\operatorname{nf}$ for ‘new face’. Assuming for the moment that $\alpha_p \ge \beta_q$ and also that $\alpha_p |
\alpha_j, \alpha_p | \beta_k$ for all $j, k$, the space $\mathcal{M}([X, N]_{inhom})$ is by definition the set $X
\setminus N \cup \Gamma$ where $\Gamma$ is the set of paths $\gamma(s)$ in $X$ with $\gamma(0) \in N$ satisfying that $x_p
= a_p(s) s$ for smooth non-vanishing $s$, and $x_j = a_j(s)
s^{\alpha_p/\alpha_j}, y_k = b_k(s) s^{\alpha_p/\beta_k}$ for smooth $a_j, b_k$, all other coordinates being smooth functions of $s$, modulo the equivalence relation $\gamma_1 \sim \gamma_2$ if the coordinate functions agree to order higher then the stated vanishing order (e.g. $x_j(\gamma_1(s)) - x_j(\gamma_2(s)) = O(s^{(\alpha_p/
\alpha_j) + 1})$. The space $X
\setminus N \cup \Gamma$ is naturally isomorphic to $X
\setminus N \cup N^+(N)$ and can be given a smooth structure so that the following polar coordinates are smooth and valid on a collar neighborhood of the introduced face $\operatorname{nf}$, $$\begin{split}
\rho_{\operatorname{nf}} &= (x_0 + x_1^{\alpha_1} + \dots + x_p^{\alpha_p} +
|y_1|^{\beta_1} + \dots + |y_q|^{\beta_q})^{1/\alpha_p}, \\
\phi_{\operatorname{nf}} &= (\frac{x_0}{\rho_{\operatorname{nf}}^{\alpha_p}},
\frac{x_1}{\rho_{\operatorname{nf}}^{\alpha_p/\alpha_1}}, \dots, \frac{y_q}{\rho_{\operatorname{nf}}^{\alpha_p/\beta_q}} ).
\end{split}$$ A full set of (polar) coordinates is then $(\rho_{\operatorname{nf}}, \phi_{\operatorname{nf}},
x', y')$
For a detailed definition of such spaces we refer to Melrose’s work [@damwc Chapter 5] which contains a more general construction which does not assume that one has in particular a fixed extension for the manifold $N$ away from the boundary, (whereas here we fix once and for all a boundary defining function $x$ as in , which will give all the desired extensions below). See also [@Grieser-Hunsicker; @Kottke-Melrose].
1. We first blow up the fiber diagonal in the corner. This is the subset of ${\partial}M \times {\partial}M
\times \{ 0 \} \subset M \times M \times
[0, \infty)_t$ consisting of points $(p, q, 0)$ with $\pi(p) = \pi(q)$ where $\pi$ is the projection of the fibration ${\partial}M$ onto its base. If local coordinates $(x, y, z)$ are chosen as above, this set can be written $$\label{eq:first-blowdown}
\mathcal{B}_0 := {\left\{ x = {\widetilde{x}} = t =
\operatorname{dist}_h(y,{\widetilde{y}}) = 0 \right\} },$$ where $\operatorname{dist}_h(\bullet, \bullet')$ is the distance function on the base $(Y, h)$. In fact, $\mathcal{B}_0$ is naturally isomorphic to $\operatorname{diag}_{{\textrm{fib}}}({\partial}M)
\times \{ 0 \}$ where $\operatorname{diag}_{\mbox{fib}}({\partial}M)$ is the “fiber diagonal,” i.e. the fiber product of ${\partial}M \times_{{\textrm{fib}}} {\partial}M$. We let $$\label{eq:firstmodel}
{M^2_{\operatorname{heat}, 1}}:= [M \times M \times [0, \infty)_{t} ; \mathcal{B}_0]_{inhom},$$ with $t \sim x^{2} \sim {\widetilde{x}}^{2} \sim |y - {\widetilde{y}}|^{2}$. To be precise, ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}, 1}}$ is the parabolic blowup in time of the set $\mathcal{B}_0$ as defined in [@tapsit Chapter 7]. In particular there is a blowdown map $\beta_1 \colon {M^2_{\operatorname{heat}, 1}}{\longrightarrow}M^2 \times [0, \infty)_t$, and polar coordinates on ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}, 1}}$ near $\beta_1^{-1}(\mathcal{B}_0)$ (once coordinates $y, z$ are chosen on ${\partial}M$) are given by $$\label{eq:polarfirstmodel}
\begin{split}
\rho &= {\left(}t + x^{2} + {\widetilde{x}}^{2} + |y - {\widetilde{y}}|^{2}{\right)}^{1/2}, \\
\phi &= {\left(}\frac{t}{\rho^{2}} , \frac{x}{\rho},
\frac{{\widetilde{x}}}{\rho}, \frac{y - {\widetilde{y}}}{\rho}{\right)}\\
&= (\phi_{t}, \phi_{x}, \phi_{{\widetilde{x}}}, \phi_{y}),
\mbox{ along with } {\widetilde{y}}, z, {\widetilde{z}}.
\end{split}$$ The set ${\left\{ \rho = 0 \right\} }$ is a boundary hypersurface on ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}, 1}}$ introduced by the blow up; we call it $\operatorname{ff_1}$; we will see that only the projection of the heat kernel onto the zero mode in $Z$ is relevant at the face $\operatorname{ff_1}$. Letting $s = x/{\widetilde{x}}$, the interior of $\operatorname{ff_1}$ is the total space of a fiber bundle over $Y \times (0, \infty)_s$, which is the fiber product ${\partial}M
\times_{{\textrm{fib}}} {\partial}M \times_{{\textrm{fib}}} TY \times
\mathbb{R}_{t'} $ where $t'$ is a rescaled time variable (see below). Indeed, the map from $\operatorname{ff_1}$ to the base $Y$ is simply $\beta_1 \rvert_{\operatorname{ff_1}}$
2. The preceding blow up does not resolve the term $\frac{t}{x^{2k}} \Delta^{Z,y}$ arising from . To accomplish this, we blow up the subset of $\operatorname{ff_1}$ defined in polar coordinates by $$\label{eq:second-blowdown}
\mathcal{B}_1 := {\left\{ \rho = 0, \phi_t =
\phi_y = 0, \phi_x = \phi_{{\widetilde{x}}} \right\} },$$ i.e. by $\rho = 0, \phi = (0, 1/\sqrt{2},
1/\sqrt{2}, 0)$, inhomogeneously so that near the new face, $\operatorname{ff}$, the function $t/x^{2k}$ is smooth, and furthermore so that $t {\partial}_x^2$ is non-degenerate, the latter condition being satisfied if $(x -
{\widetilde{x}}) / \sqrt{t}$ is smooth up to the interior of $\operatorname{ff}$. Near $\mathcal{B}_1$ we can use projective coordinates $$\label{eq:frontfront}
{\widetilde{x}}, \quad s = x/{\widetilde{x}} , \quad \eta = \frac{y -
{\widetilde{y}}}{{\widetilde{x}}}, \quad t' = t /
{\widetilde{x}}^{2},$$ along with ${\widetilde{y}}, z, {\widetilde{z}}$. Let $$\label{eq:secondmodel}
{M^2_{\operatorname{heat}, 2}}:= [{M^2_{\operatorname{heat}, 1}}; \operatorname{ff_1}\cap \
\mathcal{B}_1 ]_{inhom},$$ with $t' \sim |\eta|^2 \sim (s - 1)^2 \sim {\widetilde{x}}^{2(k - 1)}$, so we have polar coordinates near $\operatorname{ff}$ given by $$\label{eq:polarsecondnmodel}
\begin{split}
\overline{\rho} &= {\left(}(t/{\widetilde{x}}^2) + {\widetilde{x}}^{2(k - 1)} + (s - 1)^2
+ (|y - {\widetilde{y}}|/{\widetilde{x}})^{2} {\right)}^{1/2(k-1)}, \\
\overline{\phi} &:= (\overline{\phi}_{t},\overline{\phi}_{{\widetilde{x}}},
\overline{\psi}_{x}, \overline{\psi}_{y}) = {\left(}\frac{t}{{\widetilde{x}}^2\overline{\rho}^{2(k-1)}}, \frac{{\widetilde{x}}}{\overline{\rho}} ,
\frac{x - {\widetilde{x}}}{{\widetilde{x}}\overline{\rho}^{(k-1)}},
\frac{y - {\widetilde{y}}}{{\widetilde{x}}\overline{\rho}^{(k-1)}}
{\right)}\mbox{ along with }
{\widetilde{y}}, z, {\widetilde{z}}.
\end{split}$$ Let $$\label{eq:intermediate-blowdown-double}
\beta_{2} \colon
{M^2_{\operatorname{heat}, 2}}{\longrightarrow}M \times M \times [0,
\infty)_{t}$$ denote the blowdown map. Then, similar to the setup at $\operatorname{ff_1}$, if we define $\sigma = (x - {\widetilde{x}})/{\widetilde{x}}$, the interior of $\operatorname{ff}$ is a bundle over $Y \times \mathbb{R}_\sigma$ whose fiber over $p \in Y$ is isomorphic to $T_p Y \times Z^2
\times \mathbb{R}_{{\widetilde{T}}}$ for ${\widetilde{T}}$ the rescaled time variable below.
See Remark \[thm:explanation\] below for further discussion of the need for the two distinct blown up faces $\operatorname{ff}$ and $\operatorname{ff_1}$.
3. Finally, we blow up the time equals zero diagonal, $\mathcal{B}_2 := \operatorname{cl}(\beta_{2}(\operatorname{diag}(M^\circ) \times {\left\{ t = 0 \right\} }))$, where $\operatorname{cl}$ denotes the closure, parabolically in time. Note that $\mathcal{B}_2$ intersects the face $\operatorname{ff}$ at $\overline{\phi}= (1, 0 , 0, 0)$, so near the intersection, defining the functions $$\label{eq:projectivesecondmodle}
{\widetilde{x}}, \quad \sigma = \frac{s - 1}{{\widetilde{x}}^{k-1}} = \frac{x -
{\widetilde{x}}}{{\widetilde{x}}^{k}}, \quad {\widetilde{\eta}} = \frac{y -
{\widetilde{y}}}{{\widetilde{x}}^{k}}, \quad {\widetilde{T}} =
\frac{t'}{{\widetilde{x}}^{2(k-1)}} = \frac{t}{{\widetilde{x}}^{2k}},$$ we have the projective coordinates $$\label{eq:projectivefff}
\begin{split}
{\widetilde{x}}, {\widetilde{y}}, \sigma, {\widetilde{\eta}}, {\widetilde{T}}, z, {\widetilde{z}}.
\end{split}$$ The full heat space is $$\label{eq:4new}
{M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}= [{M^2_{\operatorname{heat}, 2}}; \mathcal{B}_2 ]_{inhom},$$ with ${\widetilde{T}} \sim \sigma^{2} \sim (z - {\widetilde{z}})^{2}$. The face $\operatorname{tf}$ introduced by the final blowup satisfies $$\label{eq:3}
\operatorname{tf}^{\circ} \simeq {{}^{ice} T}(M),$$ where ${{}^{ice} T}(M)$ is the incomplete cusp edge tangent bundle defined in . Concretely, in coordinates $(x, y, z)$ if we set $$\label{eq:coordsfftf}
\xi = \frac{x - {\widetilde{x}}}{\sqrt{t}},\quad \eta_{i} = \frac{y_{i} -
{\widetilde{y}}_{i}}{\sqrt{t}},\quad \zeta_{\alpha} = \frac{z_{\alpha} - {\widetilde{z}}_{\alpha}}{\sqrt{t}}
\ {\widetilde{x}}^{k},\quad \tau = \frac{\sqrt{t}}{{\widetilde{x}}^{k}},$$ then $(x, y, z, \xi, \eta, \zeta, \tau)$ (or $({\widetilde{x}}, {\widetilde{y}}, {\widetilde{z}}, \xi, \eta, \zeta, \tau)$) form local coordinates near the intersection of $\operatorname{tf}$ with $\operatorname{ff}$ and away from $t = 0$, and the association $\xi \mapsto {\partial}_{x}, \eta_{i} \mapsto {\partial}_{y_{i}},
\zeta_{\alpha} \mapsto x^{-k}{\partial}_{z_{\alpha}}$ induces the map.
In summary, we have constructed a manifold with corners ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}$, depicted in Figure \[fig:heat-double-space\], with a blowdown map $\beta$ as in , such that ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}$ has six total faces, three of them being the lifts of the standard faces $$\label{eq:names-of-faces}
\operatorname{lf}:=
\operatorname{cl}(\beta^{-1}(\{ x = 0 \}^{\circ})), \ \operatorname{rf}:= \operatorname{cl}(\beta^{-1}(\{ {\widetilde{x}} = 0 \}^{\circ})), \ \operatorname{tb}:= \operatorname{cl}(\beta^{-1}(\{
t = 0 \}^{\circ})),$$ and then the three faces $\operatorname{ff_1}, \operatorname{ff},$ and $\operatorname{tf}$ constructed (in that order) by radial blow up as described above. Denoting the set of the six boundary hypersurfaces by $\mathcal{M}({M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}) = \{ \operatorname{lf}, \operatorname{rf}, \operatorname{tb}, \operatorname{ff_1}, \operatorname{ff}, \operatorname{tf}\}$, and given $\bullet \in \mathcal{M}({M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}})$, below we will let $\rho_\bullet$ denote a boundary defining function for $\bullet$, so $\rho_\bullet \in C^\infty({M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}})$ satisfies that $\{\rho_\bullet = 0\} = \bullet$ and $d\rho_\bullet$ is non-vanishing on $\bullet$ and $\rho_\bullet \ge 0$. We can take $\rho_{\operatorname{ff}} = {\overline{\rho}}$ as in and $\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}} = \rho / \overline{\rho}$. Also note that $$\label{eq:a-bdf}
x = \rho_{\operatorname{lf}} \rho = \rho_{\operatorname{lf}} \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}}.$$
In Theorem \[thm:heatkernel\] we will show that the heat kernel lifts to be polyhomogeneous on ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}$.
Model operators
---------------
The blown up space ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}$ is useful in the construction of a parametrix for the heat equation in part because the operator ${\partial}_t +
\Delta$ (more specifically $t({\partial}_t + \Delta)$) behaves nicely at the three introduced boundary hypersurfaces $\operatorname{ff}, \operatorname{ff_1},$ and $\operatorname{tf}$; in particular, the first steps in the parametrix construction involve finding the right asymptotic behavior for the heat kernel so that the heat equation is satisfied *at least to leading order at* $\operatorname{ff}, \operatorname{ff_1}, $ and $\operatorname{tf}$.
Thus, we consider the operator $\Delta$ acting on the left spacial factor of $M
\times M \times [0, \infty)_t$, and the pullback $\beta^{*}(t ({\partial}_{t} + \Delta))$ to ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}$, and show that this restricts to an operator at $\operatorname{tf}$. To be precise, fix a point $p \in M$ and consider the fiber $\operatorname{tf}_{p} = \pi^{-1}(p)$ where $\pi \colon \operatorname{tf}{\longrightarrow}\operatorname{diag}_{M} = M$ is the projection onto the diagonal (or more concretely it is $\beta \rvert_{\operatorname{tf}}$). In the interior of $\operatorname{tf}$, i.e. away from the intersection with $\operatorname{ff}$, this is standard [@tapsit], so we concern ourselves only with an open neighborhood of the intersection of $\operatorname{tf}$ with $\operatorname{ff}$. Indeed, working locally over the base in both spacial factors, consider a subset of $\operatorname{tf}$ of the form $\{({\widetilde{x}}, {\widetilde{y}}, {\widetilde{z}}, \xi, \eta,
\zeta, \tau) : ({\widetilde{x}}, {\widetilde{y}}, {\widetilde{z}}) \in \mathcal{O}\}$. Now note $$\label{eq:tflaplace}
\sqrt{t} {\partial}_{x} = {\partial}_{\xi},\quad \sqrt{t} {\partial}_{y} = {\partial}_{\eta},\quad
\frac{\sqrt{t}}{x^{k}} {\partial}_{z} = {\partial}_{\zeta} + O(\tau),$$ and $$\label{eq:tftdt}
t{\partial}_{t} = \frac 12 {\left(}\tau {\partial}_{\tau} - R {\right)},$$ where $R = \xi {\partial}_{\xi} + \eta \cdot {\partial}_{\eta} + \zeta {\partial}_{\zeta}$ is the radial vector field on the fiber.
Letting $\pi_{L}, \pi_{R} \colon M \times M \times [0, \infty)_{t} {\longrightarrow}M$ denote the projections onto the left and right $M$ factors, and $\operatorname{End}{\longrightarrow}M \times M$ the endomorphism bundle, whose fiber at $(p, q) \in M^\circ \times M^\circ$ is $\operatorname{End}(\Lambda_{q}^{*}; \Lambda^{*}_{p})$, for $ t > 0$, the heat kernel *restricted to the interior* will be a smooth section of this bundle. To study the heat kernel at the boundary we use the incomplete cusp edge forms and the corresponding endomorphism bundle $\operatorname{End}({{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}})$ back to $M \times M \times [0, \infty)_{t}$ and then to ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}$ via the blowdown $\beta$. As usual, restricting to the spacial diagonal gives the ‘little endomorphism’ bundle $$\operatorname{End}({{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}) \rvert_{\operatorname{diag}(M)} \simeq \operatorname{end}({{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}})$$ where $\operatorname{end}({{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}) {\longrightarrow}M$ is the endomorphism bundle of the exterior algebra of $M$. The restriction to the time face, $\beta^{*}\operatorname{End}\rvert_{\operatorname{tf}}$, is isomorphic to the pullback of $\operatorname{end}(\Lambda^{*}_{p})$ to the tangent bundle of $M$ via the projection map.
Writing $w = (x, y, z), {\widetilde{w}} = ({\widetilde{x}}, {\widetilde{y}}, {\widetilde{z}})$, sections of $\beta^{*}\operatorname{End}$ near the fiber of $\operatorname{tf}$ over $p$ can be written $$\label{eq:10}
\alpha = \sum_{I, J} a_{IJ} dw_{I} \otimes {\partial}{\widetilde{w}}_{J},$$ where $I, J$ run over all multi-indices and ${\partial}{\widetilde{w}}_{J}$ is dual to $dw_{J}$, and here $a_{IJ} = a_{IJ}(w, {\widetilde{w}}, t)$. We claim that, writing sections of $\beta^{*}\operatorname{End}$ near $\operatorname{tf}$ as sections of $\beta^{*} \operatorname{End}\rvert_{\operatorname{tf}} \simeq \Lambda^{*}(M) \otimes \Lambda(M)$, $$\label{eq:tffull}
t({\partial}_{t} + \Delta) = (\frac 12 {\left(}\tau{\partial}_{\tau} - R {\right)}+
\sigma(\Delta))\otimes \operatorname{Id}+ O(\tau),$$ where $\sigma(\Delta)$ is a constant coefficient differential operator in the coordinates ${\Xi}= (\xi, \eta, \zeta)$ depending on the metric $g$ at $p = ({\widetilde{x}},{\widetilde{y}}, {\widetilde{z}})$, namely $$\label{eq:asdf}
\sigma(\Delta) = (d_{{\Xi}} + \star_{g(p)}^{-1} d_{{\Xi}} \star_{g(p)})^{2},$$ acting on differential forms on the vector space ${{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}_{p}(M)$ with metric $g(p)$. Indeed, let $w$ be geodesic normal coordinates. In the interior of $\operatorname{tf}$ away from $\operatorname{ff}$ we have coordinates ${\Xi}= (w - {\widetilde{w}})/\sqrt{t}, {\widetilde{w}},
\sqrt{t}$. Then $t({\partial}_{t} + \Delta) \alpha = (t({\partial}_{t} + \Delta) \sum_{I,
J} a_{IJ} dw_{I}) \otimes {\partial}{\widetilde{w}}_{J}$ and moreover $$\label{eq:interiortmodel}
\begin{split}
\star dw_{I} \otimes {\partial}{\widetilde{w}}_{J} &= (\star dw_{I}) \otimes
{\partial}{\widetilde{w}}_{J} \\
&= \pm dw_{I^{c}} \otimes {\partial}{\widetilde{w}}_{J} + O(w -
{\widetilde{w}}) \\
&= \pm (d{\widetilde{w}}_{I^{c}} + \sqrt{t}d{\Xi}_{I^{c}}) \otimes
{\partial}{\widetilde{w}}_{J} + O(\sqrt{t} {\Xi}) \\
&= (\star_{g(p)} d{\widetilde{w}}_{I}) \otimes {\partial}{\widetilde{w}}_{J} + O({\widetilde{t}}),
\end{split}$$ Similarly, letting the exterior derivative act on the left gives $d(a
dw_{I} \otimes {\partial}{\widetilde{w}}_{J}) = ({\partial}_{{\Xi}_{i}} a d{\widetilde{w}}_{i} \wedge
{\widetilde{w}}_{I} ) \otimes {\partial}{\widetilde{w}}_{J}.$
To motivate our construction of the heat kernel further, in a neighborhood of $\operatorname{tf}$ let $\gamma$ be a section of $\operatorname{End}$ with the property that $\gamma\rvert \operatorname{diag}_{M} = \operatorname{Id}$ on the form bundles, and consider the section of $\beta^{*}\operatorname{End}$ on ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}$ of the form $$\label{eq:ansatzbegins}
K(p, q, t) = \frac{1}{(2 \pi t)^{n/2}} e^{- G(p, q)/2t} \gamma,$$ such that $G(p, q)$ satisfies that $\beta^{*}(G(p,q)/t)
\rvert_{\operatorname{tf}} = {\left \| {\Xi}\right \|_{g} }^{2},$ that is, that $G(p, q)/t
$ restricts to the metric function on $\operatorname{tf}$. Such a form $\gamma$ and function $G$ can be constructed but we neither prove nor use this; we merely use it as motivation. It is straightforward to check that for any smooth compactly supported form $\alpha$ $$\label{eq:9}
\lim_{t \to 0} \int_{M} K(p, q, t) \alpha(q) \operatorname{dVol}_{q} =
(4\pi)^{-n/2} \int_{M} e^{-{\left \| {\Xi}\right \|_{g(p)} }^{2}/4} \alpha(p) \sqrt{g(p)}
|d{\Xi}| = \alpha(p),$$ and in fact the convergence takes place in $L^{2}$. (In fact, such an endomorphism $\gamma$ can be constructed easily by taking the identity map on ${{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}$ over $M$, pulling this back via $\beta$ to $\beta^{*} \operatorname{End}\rvert_{\operatorname{tf}}$ and extending off smoothly in a neighborhood. On each exterior algebra $\Lambda_{p}^{*}M$, the identity can be expressed in terms of a basis $e_{i}$ with dual basis $e^{*}_{i}$ as $\sum_{I} e_{I}
\otimes e^{*}_{I}$. In a neighborhood of $\operatorname{tf}\cap \operatorname{ff}$ we can take the basis $e_{i}$ to be $dx$, $dy_{i}$, $x^{k}dz_{\alpha}$, i.e. we can take the $e_{i}$ to be a basis of forms for ${{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}$ all the way down to $x = 0$.)
Working in the coordinates , since $t^{-n/2} = \tau^{-n}{\widetilde{x}}^{-nk}$, the Taylor expansion of the heat kernel at $\operatorname{tf}$ should take the form $$\label{eq:tf-expansion}
\frac{1}{(4\pi)^{n/2} {\widetilde{x}}^{kn} } \tau^{-n} \sum_{j = 0}^{\infty}
\tau^{j} b_{j},$$ where the $b_{j} = b_{j}({\widetilde{x}}, {\widetilde{y}}, {\widetilde{z}}, \xi, \eta, \zeta)$ are sections of $\beta^{*} \operatorname{End}$, which we again write in a neighborhood of $\operatorname{tf}\cap \operatorname{ff}$ as sections of ${\mbox{End}({{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}})}$ pulled back to the fibers of $\operatorname{tf}$. Writing each $b_{j}$ as a finite sum of terms of the form $$\label{eq:14}
\alpha \otimes g^{-1}\beta,$$ where $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are sections of ${{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}$ and $g^{-1}$ indicates taking the dual vector field, we see that by we have, $$\label{eq:12}
{\left(}(\frac n2 - \frac 12 R +
\sigma(\Delta)) \otimes \operatorname{Id}{\right)}b_0 = {\left(}(\frac n2 - \frac 12 R +
{\left(}\begin{array}{cc}
\Delta_{{\Xi}} & 0 \\
0 & \Delta_{{\Xi}}
\end{array}
{\right)})
\otimes \operatorname{Id}{\right)}b_0.$$ The only solution to this equation which gives the identity operator at $t = 0$ is $$\label{eq:15}
b_{0} = e^{- ||{\Xi}||^{2} / 4} \times \operatorname{Id}.$$
The procedure of solving for the remaining $b_{j}$ is standard [@tapsit Chapter 7]; letting the Laplacian act on this expansion we show that on each term $a_j$ it acts fiberwise like a constant coefficient, second order elliptic differential operator plus the radial vector field plus a constant corresponding to the order of the term in the expansion. We have the following
\[thm:tf-expansion\] There exist sections $b_j$ of $\mathcal{A}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}(\operatorname{End}\rvert_{\operatorname{tf}})$ satisfying $$b_j =
e^{- ||{\Xi}||^{2} / 4} {\widetilde{b}}_{j}({\widetilde{x}}, {\widetilde{y}}, {\widetilde{z}},\xi, \eta, \zeta)$$ where ${\widetilde{b}}_j$ is a polynomial in $\xi, \eta, \zeta$ and a polyhomogeneous section of $\operatorname{End}$ over $\operatorname{tf}$, such that for any distribution $H'$ in $\mathcal{A}^{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}(\operatorname{End})$ with asymptotic expansion near $\operatorname{tf}$ given by we have $$t({\partial}_t + \Delta) H' = O(\tau^\infty),$$ i.e. $t({\partial}_t + \Delta) H'$ vanishes to infinite order at the blown up $t = 0$ diagonal, and, moreover, the asymptotic sum of the $b_j$ exists and yields such an $H'$.
The existence of a distribution $H'$ as in Lemma \[thm:tf-expansion\] is only a first step in constructing a parametrix for the heat kernel. We will discuss the rest of the process in \[sec:parametrix-construction\].
A useful double check of the order of blow up of the heat kernel at $\operatorname{ff}$ is the following. Near $\operatorname{ff}\cap \operatorname{tf}$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
\delta(x - {\widetilde{x}}) \delta(z - {\widetilde{z}})
\delta(y - {\widetilde{y}}) &= \delta(\xi \tau
{\widetilde{x}}^{k}) \delta(\eta \tau {\widetilde{x}}^{k})
\delta(\zeta \tau)
\\
&= \frac{1}{\tau^{n} {\widetilde{x}}^{(n - f)k}}\delta(\xi ) \delta(\eta)\delta(\zeta).
\end{aligned}$$ Since $ \operatorname{Id} = \lim_{t \searrow 0}H \operatorname{dVol}_g \sim \lim_{t \searrow 0} H {\widetilde{x}}^{kf}
d{\widetilde{x}}d{\widetilde{y}}d{\widetilde{z}}$, we confirm that $H$ should have order $-nk$ at $\operatorname{ff}$. In fact, we can deduce more; considering ${\widetilde{x}}^{kn} H
\rvert_{\operatorname{ff}}$, on the interior of $\operatorname{ff}$ we can use coordinates in , we get that $$\label{eq:5}
\delta(x - {\widetilde{x}}) \delta(y - {\widetilde{y}}) \delta(z - {\widetilde{z}}) =
{\widetilde{x}}^{-(n - f)k} \delta(\sigma) \delta({\widetilde{\eta}}) \delta(z - {\widetilde{z}}),$$ which means that, on the face $\operatorname{ff}$, we expect that the restriction ${\widetilde{x}}^{nk} H \rvert_{\operatorname{ff}}$ will be given by $\delta(\sigma)
\delta({\widetilde{\eta}}) \delta(z - {\widetilde{z}})$ *at least as the time variable* ${\widetilde{T}} = t / {\widetilde{x}}^{k}$ *goes to zero*, as that is the region in which the action of $H$ is definitively approximated by the identity. On the other hand, ${\widetilde{x}}$ commutes with the heat operator ${\partial}_{t} + \Delta$. As we will see in , $t({\partial}_{t} + \Delta)$ restricts to an operator on $\operatorname{ff}$ and defines a fiber-wise heat type operator on $\operatorname{ff}$, so we expect to have $$\label{eq:ff-reason}
t({\partial}_{t} + \Delta) \rvert_{\operatorname{ff}} ({\widetilde{x}}^{nk} H) \rvert_{\operatorname{ff}} = 0.$$ This, together with , implies that an ansatz for the heat kernel should include that **on each fiber of $\operatorname{ff}$, ${\widetilde{x}}^{nk} H \rvert_{\operatorname{ff}} $ is the fundamental solution to the induced heat equation on the fiber**, more precisely, it is the solution which equals $\delta_{\sigma =
0}\delta_{{\widetilde{\eta}} = 0} \operatorname{Id}_{Z}$ at time equals zero. The induced heat equations are translation invariant in $\sigma$ and ${\widetilde{\eta}}$, thus induced by convolution operators, and the heat kernels we speak of are the convolution kernels in $\sigma$ and ${\widetilde{\eta}} $.
As for the blow up at $\operatorname{ff_1}$, as we will see below, the operator acts as a modified heat operator in ${\partial}_{x}$ and $Y$ on the bundle of fiber harmonic forms, so in the coordinates in we will have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:fff-reason}
\delta(x - {\widetilde{x}})
\delta(y - {\widetilde{y}}) \delta(z - {\widetilde{z}})
= \frac{1}{{\widetilde{x}}^{1 + {b}}}\delta(s - 1) \delta(z - {\widetilde{z}})
\delta(\eta).
\end{aligned}$$ In this case, $t({\partial}_{t} + \Delta)$ only admits a restriction to $\operatorname{ff_1}$ on the fiber-harmonic forms ${\mathcal{H}}$, on which $\delta(z -
{\widetilde{z}})$ becomes projections $\Pi_{Z, y}$ onto the kernel of $\Delta^{Z, y}$. Thus we expect that ${\widetilde{x}}^{1 + {b}+ kf} H
\rvert_{\operatorname{ff_1}}$ on fiber harmonic forms is given by the convolution kernel for the heat kernel in $\eta$, times the dilation invariant kernel for the heat kernel in $s$ with limit $\delta_{s = 1}$ at time $0$.
We now compute the asymptotic behavior of $t({\partial}_t + \Delta)$ at the faces $\operatorname{ff}$ and $\operatorname{ff_1}$. First we will work at $\operatorname{ff}$.
The operator $ {N_{\operatorname{ff}}(t({\partial}_{t} + \Delta^{g}))}= t({\partial}_t + \Delta^g) \rvert_{\operatorname{ff}}$ acts fiberwise on $\operatorname{ff}$, and is expressed in the coordinates in by $$\label{eq:modelheatsecond}
\begin{split}
{N_{\operatorname{ff}}(t({\partial}_{t} + \Delta^{g}))}&= {\widetilde{T}} {\left(}{\partial}_{{\widetilde{T}}} + {\left(}\begin{array}{cc}
- {\partial}_{\sigma}^{2} + \Delta_{\eta} +
\Delta^{Z,y} & 0 \\
0 & - {\partial}_{\sigma}^{2} + \Delta_{\eta} +
\Delta^{Z,y}
\end{array}
{\right)}{\right)}\end{split}$$ on the fiber above $y \in Y$. Here $\Delta_{\eta}$ is the constant coefficient Hodge-Laplacian on the tangent space $T_{y}Y$ with translation invariant metric $h(y)$, and $\Delta^{Z, y}$ is the Hodge-Laplacian on $(Z, {\textbf{k}}_y)$
The situation is more delicate at $\operatorname{ff_1}$. As we will see in Section \[sec:parametrix-construction\], near $\operatorname{ff_1}$, it will suffice to consider $t({\partial}_t + \Delta)$ restricted to approximately fiber harmonic forms, (see Section \[sec:fibharmforms\]). Thus let $\gamma \in x^s
\mathcal{H}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}({{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}})$ with the space on the right defined in , and thus by assumption $\delta^Z \gamma, d^Z \gamma$ are both $O(x^{s + k})$. From it follows that for such fiber harmonic forms, $$\label{eq:Hodge-Lapl-on-fiber-harmonic}
\begin{split}
\Delta \gamma &= {\widetilde{\Delta}}_0 \gamma + x^{-2k} \Delta_Z \gamma +
x^{-k} (\delta_Z Q_1 + d_Z Q_2) \gamma
+ O(x^{s - 1}) \\
\end{split}$$ where ${\widetilde{\Delta}}_0$ acts on forms decomposed as in as $$\begin{aligned}
{\widetilde{\Delta}}_0 &= -
{\partial}_{x}^{2} - \frac{kf}{x} {\partial}_{x} + \Delta_{Y}
+ {\left(}\begin{array}{cc}
k\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}(1 - k(f - \operatorname{\mathbf{N}})) x^{-2} & - 2k x^{-k - 1} d^{Z} \\
- 2 k x^{-k - 1} \delta^{Z} & k(f - \operatorname{\mathbf{N}})(1 - k \operatorname{\mathbf{N}}) x^{-2}
\end{array} {\right)}.\end{aligned}$$ By fiber harmonicity, $x^{-2k} \Delta_Z \gamma = O(x^{s-k})$. Thus the two terms $x^{-2k}\Delta_Z $ and $x^{-k} \delta_Z Q_1$ act on fiber harmonic forms as operators of order $x^{-k}$, and thus in the heat operator $t({\partial}_t + \Delta)$ there are term behaving like $t x^{-k}$ (on fiber harmonic forms) and *$t/x^{-k}$ is not a bounded function at $\operatorname{ff_1}$*! On the other hand, if we project back to the fiber harmonic forms, then by - we kill these terms; concretely, with $\Pi_{\mathcal{H}}$ the fiber harmonic projector in , we have $$\label{eq:Hodge-Lapl-on-fiber-harmonic-2}
\Pi_{\mathcal{H}} \Delta \Pi_{\mathcal{H}} = {\widetilde{\Delta}}_0 + x^{-1} {\widetilde{E}}'$$ where ${\widetilde{E}}' \in {\mathrm{Diff}}^2_{{{\mathrm b}}, \operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}$ (see ), and thus does not decrease the order of vanishing of polyhomogeneous distributions. Defining $$\label{eq:regsingheat}
P_{A, B} := - {\partial}_{s}^{2} - \frac{A}{s}{\partial}_{s} + \frac{B}{s^{2}}.$$ and $$\label{eq:alpha-beta-gamma}
\alpha(\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}) := kf, \quad \beta(\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}) := k\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}(1 - k(f - \operatorname{\mathbf{N}})), \quad \gamma(\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}) = k(f - \operatorname{\mathbf{N}})(1 - k
\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}),$$ we have the following.
\[eq:model-first-heat\] Restricted to the fiber harmonic forms $\mathcal{H}$ as defined through , $$\label{eq:normal-operator-ff}
{N_{\operatorname{ff_1}}(t({\partial}_{t} + \Delta^{g}))}:= \Pi_{\mathcal{H}} t ({\partial}_{t} + \Delta)
\Pi_{\mathcal{H}} \rvert_{\operatorname{ff_1}}$$ restricts to the face $\operatorname{ff_1}$ in the coordinates as $$\label{eq:modelheatfirst}
\begin{split}
& {N_{\operatorname{ff_1}}(t({\partial}_{t} + \Delta^{g}))}= t' {\left(}{\partial}_{t'} +
{\left(}\begin{array}{cc}
P_{\alpha({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}), \beta({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}})} + \Delta_{\eta} & 0 \\
0 & P_{\alpha({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}), \gamma({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}})} + \Delta_{\eta}
\end{array} {\right)}{\right)}.
\end{split}$$
\[thm:explanation\] Analysis of the fiber harmonic forms is necessary in particular because the structure of the operator $\Delta^g$ is such that, off of the fiber harmonic forms, the leading order term is $x^{-2k}
\Delta^{Z, y}$, while restricted to the fiber harmonic foms the leading order term drops in order. Indeed, if it weren’t for the presence of the term $x^{-k} {\widetilde{P}}$ in , which presents complications in the analysis, on fiber harmonic forms $\Delta^g$ would be given by to leading order by ${\widetilde{\Delta}}_0$. Indeed, the need for the two different regimes represented by the boundary hypersurfaces $\operatorname{ff}$ and $\operatorname{ff_1}$ is exactly this change in asymptotic order of the operator on and off the fiber harmonic forms. Correspondingly, we will see below in the proof of Lemma \[thm:pre-ansatz\] that the operator $t({\partial}_t
+ \Delta)$ restricted to $\operatorname{ff}$ has a fundamental solution which vanishes at $\operatorname{ff_1}$ to infinite order *off the fiber harmonic forms*.
The heat equation for the regular singular ODEs in has been studied in detail. To such an operator there corresponds a pair of indicial roots given by the order of vanishing of homogeneous solutions, specifically $P_{A,B} (s^{\ell}) = 0$ if and only if $$\label{eq:indicialroots}
\ell = \frac{-(A - 1) \pm \sqrt{(A - 1)^{2} + 4B}}{2}.$$ The numbers $\ell$ give important information about the operator $P_{A, B}$, in particular they give the order of vanishing of the Green’s function at $s = 0$. The operators that will arise in our work are those in the matrices in . We define the indicial set $$\label{eq:indicial-roots}
\begin{split}
\Lambda &= \bigcup_{{\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}} = 1}^{f} {\left\{ \frac{-(\alpha - 1) \pm
\sqrt{(\alpha- 1)^{2} + 4\beta}}{2}, \frac{-(\alpha - 1) \pm
\sqrt{(\alpha- 1)^{2} + 4\gamma}}{2} \right\} } \\
& = \bigcup_{{\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}} = 1}^{f} {\left\{ -(kf - 1)/2 \pm
|k({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}} - f/2) + 1/2|, -(kf - 1)/2 \pm
|k({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}} - f/2) - 1/2| \right\} }
\end{split}$$ Letting $$\label{eq:nu}
\nu^{2} = B + (\frac{A - 1}{2})^{2} > 0$$ where $\nu > 0$, from [@taylor:vol2 Vol. 2, Eqn. 8.45] there is a fundamental solution $H_{A,B}(s, {\widetilde{s}}, t)$ $$\label{eq:modelheatpotentialfirst}
({\partial}_{t} + P_{A,B}) H_{A,B}(s, {\widetilde{s}},t) = 0,\mbox{ and }
H \to \operatorname{Id}\mbox{ as } t \to 0, \mbox{ on } L^{2}(s^{A}ds).$$ Indeed, one has the explicit formula $$\label{eq:modelheatpotentialfirst2}
H_{A,B}(s, {\widetilde{s}}, t) = (s {\widetilde{s}})^{-(A - 1)/2}\frac{1}{2t}
e^{-(s^{2} + {\widetilde{s}}^{2})/4t} I_{\nu}{\left(}\frac{s {\widetilde{s}}}{2t} {\right)}$$ where $I_{\nu}$ is the modified Bessel function of order $\nu$ of the first kind [@AS1964 Chap. 9].
As discussed below , at the face $\operatorname{ff_1}$ we expect the heat kernel to be of order ${\widetilde{x}}^{-1 - {b}- kf}$. Thus we expect to have $$\label{eq:18}
0 = t ({\partial}_{t} + \Delta) H = \frac{1}{{\widetilde{x}}^{1 + {b}+ kf}}
(t ({\partial}_{t} + \Delta)) ({\widetilde{x}}^{1 + {b}+ kf} H),$$ and since $\Pi_{\mathcal{H}} t ({\partial}_{t} + \Delta) \Pi_{\mathcal{H}} $ defines a differential operator on section of $\mathcal{H} \otimes {\overline{\mathcal{H}}}^*$ restricted to $\operatorname{ff_1}$, we include in our ansatz for the fundamental solution , and indeed prove in Theorem \[thm:heatkernel\] below, that there is a fundamental solution $H$ satisfying that ${\widetilde{x}}^{1 + {b}+ kf}
H$ has a smooth restriction to $\operatorname{ff_1}$, and writing $$\label{eq:27}
{N_{\operatorname{ff_1}}(H)}:= ({\widetilde{x}}^{1 + {b}+ kf}H)\rvert_{\operatorname{ff_1}}, \mbox{ we have
} N_{\operatorname{ff_1}}(t ({\partial}_{t}
+ \Delta)) {N_{\operatorname{ff_1}}(H)}= 0.$$ Furthermore, again as discussed below , it is sensible to include in the ansatz for $H$ that ${N_{\operatorname{ff_1}}(H)}$ is the fundamental solution for the model operator $N_{\operatorname{ff_1}}(t ({\partial}_{t}
+ \Delta))$, meaning specifically that ${N_{\operatorname{ff_1}}(H)}$ is a section of the restriction of the sub-bundle $\operatorname{End}({\mathcal{H}})$ to $\operatorname{ff_1}$ and is given using the fundamental solutions to the model heat equations $H_{A,B}$ from -. Specifically, we will have as an ansatz that $ {N_{\operatorname{ff_1}}(H)}= \kappa_{\operatorname{ff_1}}
$, where $$\label{eq:fffimposed}
\kappa_{\operatorname{ff_1},y} := {\left(}\begin{array}{cc}
H_{\alpha, \beta}(s, 1, t') & 0 \\
0 & H_{\alpha, \gamma}(s, 1, t')
\end{array} {\right)}(4\pi t')^{-b/2}e^{- |\eta|_{y}^{2}/4t'},$$ where $\alpha, \beta, \gamma$ are as in , and in particular continue to be *operators* depending on the fiber form degree $\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}$. The distribution ${N_{\operatorname{ff_1}}(H)}$ is polyhomogeneous on $\operatorname{ff_1}$, and the leading order behavior at $s = 0$ satisfies that for $0< c \le t' \le
C < \infty$, for some smooth $a(t'), b(t')$, $$\label{eq:model-heat}
\begin{split}
H_{\alpha, \beta}(s, 1, t') \sim s^{-(kf - 1)/2} a(t')
s^{\nu(\alpha, \beta)},
\quad H_{\alpha, \gamma}(s, 1, t') \sim s^{-(kf - 1)/2} b(t')
s^{\nu(\alpha, \gamma)}
\end{split}$$ with $\nu$ as in $$\begin{split}
\label{eq:nu-in-terms-of-alphabeta}
\nu(\alpha, \beta) = \left\{
\begin{array}{cc}
k(f/2 - {\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}) - 1/2 & \mbox{ if } {\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}} < f/2, \\
k({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}} - f/2) + 1/2 & \mbox{ if } {\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}} \ge f/2,
\end{array}
\right. \\
\quad \nu(\alpha, \gamma) = \left\{
\begin{array}{cc}
k(f/2 - {\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}) + 1/2 & \mbox{ if } {\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}} \le f/2, \\
k({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}} - f/2) - 1/2 & \mbox{ if } {\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}} > f/2,
\end{array}
\right.
\end{split}$$ and thus by on $\operatorname{ff_1}$ in the region $0< c \le t' \le
C < \infty$, $$\label{eq:first-model-asymptotics}
\kappa_{\operatorname{ff_1}} = O(s^{{\overline{\nu}}}) \mbox{ where } {\overline{\nu}}(\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}) =
\left\{
\begin{array}{cc}
-k{\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}} & \mbox{ if } {\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}} < f/2, \\
- k{\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}+ 1 & \mbox{ if } {\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}} = f/2, \\
{- k(f - {\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}})} & \mbox{ if } {\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}} > f/2.
\end{array}
\right.$$ In words, each $P_{\alpha, \beta}$ has two indicial roots, the order of $H_{\alpha,
\beta}$ for fixed ${\widetilde{s}}, t > 0$ is the larger of these two, and $p$ is the *smaller* of the leading orders of $H_{\alpha, \beta}$ and $H_{\alpha, \gamma}$.
The behavior of the heat kernel at $\operatorname{ff_1}$ also shows what to expect at the left face, the lift of $x = 0$. There we should just have the projection onto the fiber harmonic forms times the leading order behavior of the $H_{\alpha, \beta}$ and $H_{\alpha, \gamma}$, acting appropriately on ${{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}}$, times the lifted heat kernel of the base $Y$. Indeed, we expect $$\label{eq:heat-kernel-left-face}
\Pi_\mathcal{H} H \Pi_\mathcal{H} \simeq \kappa := {\left(}\begin{array}{cc}
H_{\alpha(\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}), \beta(\operatorname{\mathbf{N}})}(x, {\widetilde{x}}, t) & 0 \\
0 & H_{\alpha(\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}), \gamma(\operatorname{\mathbf{N}})}(x, {\widetilde{x}}, t)
\end{array} {\right)}H_Y$$ where $H_Y$ is the heat kernel on $(Y, h)$ lifted to the tubular neighborhood $\mathcal{U}$ in via the projection and $\kappa$ acts on sections of the bundle of fiber harmonic forms $\mathcal{H}$ with its grading by fiber form degree $\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}$. (See Section \[sec:fibharmforms\].) In fact, with ${\overline{\nu}} = {\overline{\nu}}(\operatorname{\mathbf{N}})$ the fiber degree dependent weight in , $$\label{eq:kappa-section-of}
\kappa \in x^{{\widetilde{\nu}}(\operatorname{\mathbf{N}})} C^\infty(M \times M ; \oplus_{\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}= 0}^f\mathcal{H}^{\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}} \otimes ({\widetilde{\mathcal{H}}}^{\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}})^*)$$ where $\mathcal{H}$ and ${\widetilde{\mathcal{H}}}$, respectively, the pullbacks of the fiber harmonic form bundle (defined on a neighborhood $\mathcal{U}$ of the boundary) via the left and right projections of $M \times M$.
As discussed below , on the face $\operatorname{ff}$, we expect that the heat kernel will have leading asymptotic ${\widetilde{x}}^{-nk}$, so we expect and prove that $$\label{eq:27-ff}
{N_{\operatorname{ff}}(H)}:= ({\widetilde{x}}^{nk}H)\rvert_{\operatorname{ff}}, \implies N_{\operatorname{ff}}(t ({\partial}_{t}
+ \Delta)) {N_{\operatorname{ff}}(H)}= 0.$$ Again, we will set ${N_{\operatorname{ff}}(H)}$ equal to a fundamental solution to the heat equation, namely, using the decomposition in , we expect to have ${N_{\operatorname{ff}}(H)}= \kappa_{\operatorname{ff}}$ where $$\label{eq:ffimposed}
\kappa_{\operatorname{ff}, y}(\sigma, \eta, z, z', {\widetilde{T}})
:= \operatorname{Id}_{2 \times 2} (4 \pi {\widetilde{T}})^{-(b +1)/2}e^{-(\sigma^{2} +
|\eta|_{h_{1}}^{2})/4{\widetilde{T}}} H_{Z,y},$$ where $H_{Z,y} = H_{Z,y}(z, z', {\widetilde{T}})$ is the heat kernel for $\Delta^{Z, y}$.\
Before stating the full structure theorem for the heat kernel let us briefly recall the notion of an [**[index set]{}**]{}, which by definition is a set of exponents $\mathcal E(\bullet)=\{(\gamma,p)\}\subset \mathbb C\times\mathbb N$ associated with each face $\bullet\in\{\operatorname{lf},\operatorname{rf},\operatorname{tb},\operatorname{ff}_1,\operatorname{ff},\operatorname{tf}\}$ such that
- each half-plane ${\operatorname{Re}}\gamma<C$ contains only finitely many $\gamma$;
- for each $\gamma$, there is a number $P(\gamma)\in\mathbb
N_0$ such that $(\gamma,p)\in \mathcal E(\bullet)$ for every $0\leq
p\leq P(\gamma)$ and $(\gamma,p)\notin \mathcal E(\bullet)$ if $p>P(\gamma)$;
- If $(\gamma,p)\in\mathcal E(\bullet)$, then $(\gamma+j,p)\in \mathcal E(\bullet)$ for all $j\in\mathbb N$.
We give a full rigorous definition of polyhomogeneity in Section \[sec:mwc\], but roughly speaking, we call a differential form $\alpha$ [**[polyhomogeneous with index family]{}**]{} $\mathcal E=\{\mathcal E(\bullet)\mid\bullet\in
\{\operatorname{lf},\operatorname{rf},\operatorname{tb},\operatorname{ff}_1,\operatorname{ff},\operatorname{tf}\}\}$ if it has an expansion at each boundary hypersurface $\bullet$ with exponents determined by the corresponding index set $\mathcal E(\bullet)$ and coefficient functions which are themselves polyhomogeneous (with exponents determined by $\mathcal E$). For example, smooth functions on ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}$ are polyhomogeneous with indicial set satisfying $\mathcal{E}(\bullet) = \mathbb{Z} \times \{ 0 \}$ for all $\bullet$, and if a polyhomogeneous function vanishes to infinite order at a particular boundary hypersurface $\bullet$, then it is polyhomogeneous with an index set $\mathcal{E}$ satisfying $\mathcal{E}(\bullet) =
\varnothing$. We define $$\inf \mathcal{E}(\bullet) = \inf \{ \gamma \mid (\gamma, p) \in
\mathcal{E}(\bullet) \}.$$
\[thm:heatkernel\] There exists a section $H$ of $\beta^{*} \operatorname{End}$ over ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}$ which is polyhomogeneous, i.e. $H \in \mathcal{A}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}^{\mathcal{E}}({M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}};
\beta^{*}\operatorname{End})$ for some index set $\mathcal{E}$ and satisfying the following properties.
1. In the interior of ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}$, $({\partial}_{t} + \Delta) H =
0$.
2. The operator $H_{t}$ defined initially on forms $\alpha \in C^{\infty}_{c}(M; \Omega^{*}(M))$ by $$\label{eq:heatflow}
H_{t} \alpha(w) = \int_{M} H(w, {\widetilde{w}}, t) \alpha({\widetilde{w}}) \operatorname{dVol}_{{\widetilde{w}}}$$ is symmetric on $L^2(d\operatorname{Vol}_g)$, and for such $\alpha$ $$\label{eq:39}
H_{t}\alpha \to \alpha \mbox{ as } t \to 0$$ in $L^2$.
3. The index set $\mathcal{E}$ of $H$ satisfies that $\mathcal{E}(\operatorname{tb}) = \varnothing$, while $$\label{eq:indexsets}
\inf \mathcal{E}(\operatorname{ff_1}) \ge -1 - {b}- kf , \quad
\inf \mathcal{E}(\operatorname{ff}) \ge -kn,
\quad
\mathcal{E}(\operatorname{tf}) = \mathbb{N} - \dim(M),$$ where $\mathcal{E}(\bullet) \ge c$ means that $\inf_{\zeta, p \in
\mathcal{E}(\bullet)} \mbox{Re} \ \zeta \ge c$.
4. Moreover, at the faces $\operatorname{ff}$ and $\operatorname{ff_1}$, $$\label{eq:ansatzfaces}
({\widetilde{x}}^{1+ {b}+ kf}H) \rvert_{\operatorname{ff_1}} = \kappa_{\operatorname{ff_1}}, \quad
({\widetilde{x}}^{kn}H) \rvert_{\operatorname{ff}} = \kappa_{\operatorname{ff}},$$ with $\kappa_{\operatorname{ff_1}}$ and $\kappa_{\operatorname{ff}}$ the model heat kernels defined in and .
5. At the left face $\operatorname{lf}$, with $\kappa$ as in $$\label{eq:leftfacebehaviour}
H_{t} = \kappa(1 + O(\rho_{\operatorname{lf}}^k)).$$ In particular, for $t > 0$ fixed, $H_t$ is approximately fiber harmonic in the sense of , and $\rho_{\operatorname{lf}}$ is a boundary defining function for $\operatorname{lf}$ (see ). Thus $$\label{eq:left-face-index}
\inf \mathcal{E}(\operatorname{lf}) \ge - \frac{kf}{2} + 1.$$ The behavior of $H_{t}$ at the right face $\operatorname{rf}$ can be deduced from symmetry. Moreover for the behavior at the codimension $2$ face $\operatorname{lf}\cap \operatorname{rf}$, the leading order behavior is the product of that at $\operatorname{lf}$ and $\operatorname{rf}$, i.e. $H_t = O((\rho_{\operatorname{lf}} \rho_{\operatorname{rf}})^{-kf/2 + 1})$.
The proof of Theorem \[thm:heatkernel\] is at the end of \[sec:parametrix-construction\].
Parametrix construction {#sec:parametrix-construction}
-----------------------
We will establish the following
\[thm:ansatz\] There exists a polyhomogeneous section $$K \in
\mathcal{A}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}({M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}; \beta^{*}(\operatorname{End}))\label{eq:13}$$ such that $K$ satisfies – above, and such that $Q := t({\partial}_{t} + \Delta) K$, which is polyhomogeneous, has index set $\mathcal{E}'$ satisfying $$\label{eq:indexsetsprime}
\mathcal{E}'(\operatorname{ff_1}) \ge -1 - {b}- kf + 1, \quad
\mathcal{E}'(\operatorname{ff}) \ge -kn + 1,
\quad
\mathcal{E}'(\operatorname{lf}) = \mathcal{E}'(\operatorname{tf}) = \mathcal{E}'(\operatorname{tb}) = \varnothing.$$
Our work above allows us to break the proof of the proposition into two main steps; first we will prove the following lemma:
\[thm:pre-ansatz\] There exists a polyhomogeneous $K_1$ satisfying – above, together with for the indicated $b_j$. Furthermore, $K_1$ can be taken fiber harmonic in a neighborhood of $\operatorname{ff_1}$. In fact we can assume that $K_1 \equiv
\kappa$ in a neighborhood of $\operatorname{lf}$ and also in a neighborhood of $\operatorname{rf}$, where $\kappa$ is as in .
Assuming that we have such a distribution $K_1$, we study $t({\partial}_t +
\Delta) K_1$. Automatically we have that $t({\partial}_t + \Delta) K_1$ vanishes to infinite order at $\operatorname{tf}$ and $\operatorname{tb}$, as follows from Lemma \[thm:tf-expansion\]. Furthermore, $t({\partial}_t + \Delta) K_1$ vanishes to order $-kn +
1$ at $\operatorname{ff}$ by and the fact that the leading order term $\kappa_{\operatorname{ff}}$ there solves the model problem.
At $\operatorname{ff_1}$ things are again more delicate. Recall that $K_1 = O(\rho_{\operatorname{ff}}^{-1
- {b}- kf})$ at $\operatorname{ff_1}$, where $\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}}$ is the boundary defining function for $\operatorname{ff_1}$ in, e.g. $\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}} = \rho /
{\overline{\rho}}$ with $\rho$ as in and ${\overline{\rho}}$ as in . Since $K_1$ is fiber harmonic near $\operatorname{ff_1}$, by and we have $$\begin{split}
\Delta K_1 &= {\widetilde{\Delta}}_0 K_1 + x^{-2k} \Delta^{Z, y} K_1 +
x^{-k} (\delta_Z Q_1 + d_Z Q_2) K_1 + x^{-1} {\widetilde{E}} K_1
\\
&= {\widetilde{\Delta}}_0 K_1 + x^{-k} (\delta_Z Q_1 + d_Z Q_2)K_1 + x^{-1} {\widetilde{E}} K_1\\
&\qquad + x^{-k} (d_Z {\widetilde{Q}}_1 + \delta_Z {\widetilde{Q}}_2) K'
+ O(\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}}^{-1 - {b}- kf + 2k}).
\end{split}$$ Furthermore, by we have that $\Pi_{\mathcal{H}}t({\partial}_t + \Delta) \Pi_{\mathcal{H}} K_1$ is order $
-1 - {b}- kf + 1$ since its leading order term solves the model problem.
We assert the existence of a polyhomogeneous distribution $A$ of order $-1 - {b}- kf + k$ such that $t({\partial}_t + \Delta) (K_1 - A)$ itself vanishes to order $-1 - {b}- kf + 1$ at $\operatorname{ff_1}$. Indeed, since the leading order term in $t({\partial}_t + \Delta)$ is $tx^{-2k} \Delta^{Z, y}$, and since by we can solve $\Delta^{Z, y} B = (d_Z {\widetilde{Q}}_1 + \delta_Z {\widetilde{Q}}_2) K' +
\delta_Z Q_1 K_1 + O(\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}}^{-1 -
{b}- kf + k})$ where $B$ is polyhomogeneous with asymptotic expansion determined by the expansion of the right hand side, in particular $B = O(\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}}^{-1 - {b}- kf})$. We take $A = x^{k} B$ and thus obtain, with ${\widetilde{P}}$ as in , $$\begin{split}
t({\partial}_t + \Delta)(K_1 - x^k B) &= t({\partial}_t + {\widetilde{\Delta}}_0) (K_1 -
x^k B) + t x^{-1} {\widetilde{E}} (K_1 -
x^k B)
\\
&\qquad
- t x^{-k} {\widetilde{P}} x^k B + t O(\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}}^{-1 -
{b}- kf + 2k})\\
&= t({\partial}_t + {\widetilde{\Delta}}_0) (K_1 -
x^k B) +
t O(\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}}^{-1 - {b}- kf}) \\
&\qquad + t x^{-1} O(\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}}^{-1 - {b}- kf})
+ t O(\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}}^{-1 - {b}- kf }) \\
&= O(\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}}^{-1 - {b}- kf + 1}).
\end{split}$$ Since the expansion of $B$ at $\operatorname{ff}$ has the same order as $K_1$, the distribution $$K_2 = K_1 - x^k B$$ has all of the desired properties of $K$ in the statement of the proposition except that $({\partial}_t + \Delta) K_2$ is not rapidly decreasing at $\operatorname{lf}$. Note that, since $\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}}^{1 + b + kf} K_1 = O(s^{{\overline{\nu}}(\operatorname{\mathbf{N}})})$ where ${\overline{\nu}}$ is the (fiber degree dependent) order of $\kappa$ computed in , by well-posedness $B$ also satisfies $B= O(\rho_{\operatorname{lf}}^{{\overline{\nu}}})$.
To deal with the expansion at $\operatorname{lf}$ we argue along similar lines, but there we iterate the argument to get a parametrix $K$ with $({\partial}_t + \Delta) K$ vanishes to infinite order at $\operatorname{lf}$. (We work in the interior of $\operatorname{lf}$ though the arguments at the intersection of $\operatorname{lf}$ and $\operatorname{ff_1}$ are the same in the projective coordinates $s' = x/{\widetilde{x}}, \eta' = (y - {\widetilde{y}})/{\widetilde{x}}, \tau' = t/
{\widetilde{x}}^2$ together with $z, {\widetilde{x}}, {\widetilde{y}}, {\widetilde{z}}$.) Recall that $K_1
\equiv \kappa$ near $\operatorname{lf}$ and thus $K_2 = \kappa - x^k B$ near $\operatorname{ff}_1$. Again with ${\widetilde{P}}$ as in , we have $$\label{eq:left-face-1}
\begin{split}
({\partial}_t + \Delta) K_2 &= x^{-k} {\widetilde{P}} \kappa + x^{k - 2} {\widetilde{E}}
\kappa - x^{-k } \Delta^{Z, y} B - x^{-k}{\widetilde{P}}x^{k}B + O(x^{{\overline{\nu}} + k})\\
&= x^{-k} (d_Z Q_1 + \delta_Z Q_2) \kappa - x^{-k} \Delta^{Z, y} B+ O(x^{{\overline{\nu}} + k -
2}),
\end{split}$$ where ${\overline{\nu}}$ is the leading order power of $\kappa$ computed in . As in the argument at $\operatorname{ff_1}$, since the RHS of manifestly gives that $\Pi_{\mathcal{H}}( ({\partial}_t + \Delta) K_2) =
O(x^{{\overline{\nu}} + k - 2})$, by Section \[sec:fibharmforms\] there is distribution $A_0$ such that $x^{{\overline{\nu}}} \Delta^{Z, y} A_0 = (d_Z Q_1 +
\delta_Z Q_2) \kappa - \Delta^{Z, y} B + O(x^{{\overline{\nu}} + k})$. Here the $x^{{\overline{\nu}}}$ in front makes it so that $A_0$ is $O(1)$. Thus $$({\partial}_t + \Delta) (K_2 - x^{{\overline{\nu}} + k} A_0) = O(x^{{\overline{\nu}} + k - 2}) - x^{-k}
{\widetilde{P}} x^{{\overline{\nu}} + k} A_0 = O(x^{{\overline{\nu}}}).$$
We will now solve away iteratively to decrease the order of the error. For this we assume for the moment that we are given, for some $q > {\overline{\nu}} + \epsilon$, *any* distribution $A_1 = x^q {\widetilde{A}}_1 + O(x^{q + \epsilon})$ with ${\widetilde{A}}_1$ smooth and non-vanishing up to the boundary as in ${\mathrm{ice}}-$form. First, we find a distribution $B_1$ so that $x^qA_2 := ({\partial}_t + \Delta) (x^{q + 2k}B_1 ) - A_1$ is fiber harmonic. We can do this by solving $(I - \Pi_{\mathcal{H}})A_1 = \Delta^{Z, y} B_1 +
O(x^k)$ as in Section \[sec:fibharmforms\], where $\Pi_\mathcal{H}$ is the projection onto the fiber harmonic forms, since then $({\partial}_t +
\Delta) x^{q + 2k}B_1 = x^q \Delta^{Z, y} B_1 + O(x^{q + k})$. We then construct a term $C_1$ with $({\partial}_t + \Delta) x^{q + 2} C_1 \approx A_2$, as follows. Decomposing $A_2 = (A_2^1, A_2^2)$ as in in the left varibles, and noting that if $C_1 =
((-(q + 2)^2 - (\alpha - 1)(q + 2) + \beta)^1 A_2^{-1} , (-(q + 2)^2 - (\alpha - 1)(q + 2) +
\gamma)^{-1} A_2^2)$, then $${\left(}\begin{array}{cc}
P_{\alpha, \beta} & 0 \\ 0 & P_{\alpha, \gamma}
\end{array}
{\right)}x^{q + 2} C_1 = x^q A_2.$$ (The numbers we divided by above are non-zero, since the indicial roots of $P_{\alpha, \beta}$ and $P_{\alpha, \gamma}$ are bounded above by ${\overline{\nu}} - \epsilon$, as explained below .) For this $C_1$ we have $$\begin{split}
x^q A_2 - ({\partial}_t + \Delta) x^{q + 2}C_1 &= x^{q} A_2 -
{\widetilde{\Delta}}_0 x^{q + 2} C_1 + x^{- k} {\widetilde{P}}' x^{q + 2}C_1 + O(x^{q + 2}) \\
&= O(x^{q + \delta}) + x^{- k} {\widetilde{P}}' x^{q + 2}C_1 + O(x^{q + 2 + k
- 2}) ,
\end{split}$$ where $q + \delta$ can be taken to be the order of the subsequent term in the expansion of $A_2$ where ${\widetilde{\Delta}}_0$ is in and ${\widetilde{P}}$ is as in , and thus by Section \[sec:fibharmforms\] we see that the left hand side lies in the image of $\Delta^{Z, y}$ to order $x^{k}$. We can thus find a distribution $D_1$ such that $$\begin{split}
x^q A_2 - ({\partial}_t + \Delta)( x^{q + 2}C_1 - x^{q + 2 + k}D_1) &=
O(x^{q + 1}) - x^{q + 2 - k} \Delta^{Z, y} D_1 + x^{k} {\widetilde{P}}' x^{q +
2} C_1 \\
&= O(x^{q + 1}) ,
\end{split}$$ which gives $$\label{eq:improvement}
({\partial}_t + \Delta)(x^q(x^{2k} B_1 - x^{2}C_1 + x^{2 + k}D_1)) =
x^qA_1 + O(x^{q + \delta}).$$ It is straightforward to check that the added terms do not increase the order of blowup at $\operatorname{ff_1}$. Thus we can kill off the leading order term of $x^q A$, and in fact can kill off all terms iteratively by this process. (If there are log terms present the arguement is analogous and left to the reader.)
From the previous two paragraphs, it follows that we can find a distribution $K'$ such that $K := K_2 - K'$ satisfies the requirements of the lemma, specifically such that $t({\partial}_t + \Delta)K$, in addition to having the same leading order asymptotics at $\operatorname{tf}$ and $\operatorname{ff}$ and $\operatorname{ff_1}$ that $t({\partial}_t + \Delta) K_2$ has, also vanishes to infinite order at $\operatorname{lf}$. Indeed, since we can solve away terms to obtain errors of succesively decreasing order, taking the Borel sum [@damwc] of these distributions gives $K'$.
We seek a distribution $K'$ with the stated asymptotic properties; namely - and for the indicated $b_j$. Such a $K'$ will exist by Lemma \[thm:matching\] in Appendix \[sec:mwc\] provided the hypotheses are satisfied, meaning that the following matching conditions hold. We must find a set $\{ \rho_\bullet \}$ of boundary defining functions for the boundary hypersurfaces, $\bullet
= \operatorname{lf}, \operatorname{rf},
\operatorname{tf}, \operatorname{tb}, \operatorname{ff}, \operatorname{ff_1}$ of ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}$ such that $$\label{eq:practical-matching}
\begin{split}
\kappa_{\operatorname{ff}} &=
\frac{1}{(4\pi)^{n/2} } \tau^{-n} \sum_{j \in \mathbb{N}} \tau^{j}
{\widetilde{b}}_{j} \rvert_{\operatorname{ff}},\\
{\widetilde{x}}^{kn}\kappa_{\operatorname{ff_1}}
&= {\widetilde{x}}^{1 + {b}+ kf}\kappa_{\operatorname{ff}} \mbox{ on } \operatorname{ff}\cap \operatorname{ff_1},
\end{split}$$ and that $\kappa_{\operatorname{ff}}, \kappa_{\operatorname{ff_1}}$ and the $b_j$ vanish to infinite order at $\operatorname{tb}$. Indeed, in the notation of Lemma \[thm:matching\] we have $\kappa_1 = (\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}} / {\widetilde{x}})^{1 +
{b}+ kf} \kappa_{\operatorname{ff_1}}$ and $\kappa_2 = (\rho_{\operatorname{ff}} /
{\widetilde{x}})^{kn} \kappa_{\operatorname{ff}}$, and the matching conditions in terms of $\kappa_1$ and $\kappa_2$ in Lemma \[thm:matching\] are exactly . We use boundary defining functions $\rho_{\operatorname{ff}} = \overline{\rho}, \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}} = \rho /
\overline{\rho}$ for the faces $\operatorname{ff}$ and $\operatorname{ff_1}$ defined in and . We define boundary defining functions $\rho_{\operatorname{lf}}, \rho_{\operatorname{rf}}$ for the faces $\operatorname{lf}$ and $\operatorname{rf}$ by the equations $$\label{eq:bdfsatfffff}
\rho_{\operatorname{lf}}
\rho_{\operatorname{ff}} \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}} = {\widetilde{x}}, \quad
\rho_{\operatorname{rf}} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}} \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}} = x.$$ Finally, we use $\tau$ in as $\rho_{\operatorname{tf}}$; though it is not valid at $\operatorname{tb}\cap \operatorname{tf}$, all the distributions in question will vanish to infinite order there and there will be no conditions to check.
The first matching condition in follows easily since the coefficients of the expansion of $\kappa_{\operatorname{ff_1}}$ are determined by the same differential equation which determines the $b_j$, and the coefficients in both expansions are uniquely determined by their being equal to polynomials times Gaussians on the fibers of $\operatorname{tf}\cap \operatorname{ff}$.
Finally we check that the second condition in holds. First we consider $\kappa_{\operatorname{ff_1}} = \kappa_{\operatorname{ff_1}, {\widetilde{y}}}(s, 1, \eta, t')$ above the point ${\widetilde{y}} \in Y$ (i.e. restricted to $\operatorname{ff_1}_{{\widetilde{y}}}$). In the polar coordinates in and using the boundary defining functions above , we have $$\label{eq:32}
s = \frac{\overline{\psi}_{x} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}}^{k-1}}{\rho_{\operatorname{lf}}} + 1,
\quad t' = \frac{\overline{\phi}_{t}
\rho_{\operatorname{ff}}^{2(k-1)}}{\rho^{2}_{\operatorname{lf}}} , \quad \eta = \frac{\overline{\psi}_{y}
\rho_{\operatorname{ff}}^{k-1}}{\rho_{\operatorname{lf}}}.$$ Using [@AS1964 Eqn. 9.7.1], we have that the modified Bessel function satisfies $$I_{\nu}(z) = (e^{-z}/\sqrt{2 \pi z}) (1 + O(1/z)),$$ and thus $$\label{eq:40}
\rho_{\operatorname{ff}}^{kn}(\rho_{\operatorname{lf}} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}})^{-1 - {b}- kf}
\kappa_{\operatorname{ff_1}, {\widetilde{y}}} = \frac{\rho_{\operatorname{lf}}^{-kf}}{(4 \pi
\overline{\phi}_{t})^{(b + 1)/2}} e^{-(|\overline{\psi}_{x}^{2} +
|\overline{\psi}_{y}|^{2}_{{\widetilde{y}}}) / 4 \overline{\phi}_{t}} ( 1 + O(\rho_{\operatorname{ff}})).$$ On the other hand, above each base point ${\widetilde{y}} \in Y$, $\kappa_{\operatorname{ff}, {\widetilde{y}}}(\sigma, \eta', z,
z', {\widetilde{T}})$ can be written using separation of variables with respect to the spectrum of $\Delta^{Z, y}$. Indeed, since $H_{Z,y}$ has discrete spectrum, it is standard that $H_{Z,y}(z, {\widetilde{z}}, t) =
\Pi_{0} + E$ where $\Pi_{0}$ is projection onto the kernel of $\Delta^{Z,y}$ and $|E| < e^{-\lambda_{0} t}$ as $t \to \infty$, $\lambda_{0}$ being the smallest non-zero eigenvalue of $\Delta_{Z,y}$. Thus $$\label{eq:seporvars}
\kappa_{\operatorname{ff}, y} = (2 \pi {\widetilde{T}})^{-(b +1)/2}e^{-(\sigma^{2} +
|\eta'|_{h_{1}}^{2})/2} \Pi_{0} + E',$$ where $E'$ is exponentially decaying. Now we have $$\label{eq:42}
{\widetilde{T}} = \overline{\phi}_{t} \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}}^{-2(k - 1)}
\rho_{\operatorname{lf}}^{-2k}, \quad \eta' = \overline{\phi}_{t} \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}}^{-(k
- 1)} \rho_{\operatorname{lf}}^{-k}, \quad \sigma = \overline{\psi}_{x}
\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}}^{-(k - 1)} \rho_{\operatorname{lf}}^{-k},$$ and thus $$\label{eq:43}
\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}}^{1 + {b}+
kf}(\rho_{\operatorname{lf}} \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}})^{-kn} \kappa_{\operatorname{ff}} =
\frac{\rho_{\operatorname{lf}}^{-kf}}{(4 \pi \overline{\phi}_{t})^{(b + 1)/2}}
e^{-(|\overline{\psi}_{x}^{2} +
|\overline{\psi}_{y}|^{2}_{{\widetilde{y}}}) / 4 \overline{\phi}_{t}},$$ so the matching condition at $\operatorname{ff}\cap \operatorname{ff_1}$ holds.
For the behavior of $K_1$ at $\operatorname{lf}$, since $\kappa_{\operatorname{ff_1}}$ is given by ${\widetilde{x}}^{- 1 - {b}- kf} \kappa$ at the boundary and we can take $K_1$ to be equal to $\kappa$ at $\operatorname{lf}$ and at $\operatorname{rf}$.
We can now conclude the proof of Theorem \[thm:heatkernel\] modulo arguments in Appendix \[sec:triple-space\].
Having established the existence of a parametrix $K$ as in Proposition \[thm:ansatz\], we will now prove Theorem \[thm:heatkernel\]. We do so by inverting the error $ Q =
t({\partial}_t + \Delta) K$ from Proposition \[thm:ansatz\] via a Neumann series. To be precise, it will be convenient to think of distributional kernels $A(p, p', t)$ on $M \times M \times \mathbb{R}^+$ acting on $C_{c}^{\infty}(M^{\circ} \times (0, \infty))$ by operating as convolution kernels in the time variable, so for $\phi \in
C_{c}^{\infty}(M^{\circ} \times (0, \infty))$ by $$\label{eq:convolution-operator}
(A \star \phi)(p, t) := \int_{M} \int_{0}^{t} A(p, p', t - s)
\phi(p', s) ds \operatorname{dVol}_{p'}.$$ Then $$\label{eq:real-error-to-iterate}
({\partial}_t + \Delta) {\widetilde{K}} = I + t^{-1}Q,$$ and the right hand side can be inverted via a Neumann series, i.e. $(\operatorname{Id} +
t^{-1}Q)(I + Q') = \operatorname{Id}$ where $Q' = \sum_{j =
1}^{\infty}(-1)^j (t^{-1} Q)^{j}$ and $(t^{-1} Q)^j = t^{-1} Q
\star \cdots \star t^{-1} Q$, $j$-times. In Proposition \[thm:composition\] below, we show that the summands $(t^{-1} Q)^j$ vanishes at successively faster orders at $\operatorname{ff}$ and $\operatorname{ff_1}$. Moreover, as discussed in [@MV2012; @BGV2004], this series is convergent in $C^\infty$, and the infinite order of vanishing of $t^{-1} Q$ at $\operatorname{lf}$ is preserved in the sum, i.e. $Q'$ vanishes also to infinite order there. In fact, one sees as in [@MV2012] that ${\widetilde{K}} (I + Q')$ is polyhomogeneous with the index set $\mathcal{E}$ statisfying the properties of Theorem \[thm:heatkernel\].
Spectral and Hodge theoretic properties of the Hodge-Laplacian {#sec:proofs}
==============================================================
In this section we deduce the main theorems from the introduction. We begin with a detailed analysis of the polyhomogeneous forms in the maximal domain.
Polyhomogeneous forms in $\mathcal{D}_{\max}$ and $\mathcal{D}_{\min}$
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Recall the definition of $\mathcal{D}_{max}$ and $\mathcal{D}_{min}$ from the introduction, and the space $\mathcal{A}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}({{}^{\textrm{ice}}\Lambda^{*}})$ of polyhomogeneous ${\mathrm{ice}}$-forms (below denoted simply by $\mathcal{A}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}$) discussed in Section \[sec:mwc\]. We determine conditions which assure that a given polyhomogeneous differential form $\gamma\in \mathcal{A}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}$ is contained in the maximal domain $\mathcal{D}_{\max}$ of $\Delta^g$. This will be used to show, with an additional assumption on the index set of a $\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}$ form, that $$\label{eq:7}
\gamma \in \mathcal{D}_{\max} \cap \mathcal{A}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}} \implies \gamma
\in \mathcal{D}_{\min} \cap \mathcal{A}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}.$$
Let $\gamma\in \mathcal{A}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}$ be contained in the maximal domain, i.e. we assume that $\gamma\in L^2$ and $\Delta^g\gamma\in L^2$. Let $\gamma=x^s\tilde\gamma$ where $\tilde\gamma= \tilde{\gamma}_0(y, z) + \mathcal O(x^\epsilon)$. Here notation such as $\mathcal O(x^{\epsilon})$ indicates that the differential form $\gamma$ is locally a combination of basis forms $$\begin{aligned}
\quad dy_I \wedge x^{k\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}dz_A\qquad \textrm{and}\qquad dx\wedge x^{k\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}dy_I \wedge x^{k\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}dz_A,\end{aligned}$$ where $I$ and $A$ are multi-indices on the base and fiber, respectively. with coefficient functions which are bounded by $c x^\epsilon$ pointwise in norm when $x\searrow 0$, and $\tilde{\gamma}_0$ is a form on $M$ whose coefficient functions are independent of $x$. Let us determine the possible range of values $s$. From it follows that in a neighborhood of the boundary, the volume form of the cuspedge metric $g$ is $$\operatorname{dVol}_g=x^{kf}\rho\,dx\wedge dy \wedge dz,$$ where $\rho= a(y,z) + \mathcal{O}(x^k)$ and $a$ is a non-vanishing positive function. It follows that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:condL2}
x^s\tilde\gamma\in L^2(M,g) \iff s>-\frac{1}{2}(kf+1).\end{aligned}$$ We begin by analyzing the indicial roots of $\Delta^g$, specifically we find the order of vanishing of approximately fiber harmonic homogeneous forms in the kernel of $\Delta^g$. By Proposition \[thm:Hodge-Laplacian\], the leading order part of $\Delta^g$ restricted to approximately fiber harmonic forms (see Section \[sec:fibharmforms\]) is $$\begin{aligned}
\Pi_{\mathcal{H}} \Delta^g_0 \Pi_{\mathcal{H}} \sim := {\left(}\begin{array}{cc}
P_{\alpha({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}), \beta({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}})} & 0 \\ 0 & P_{\alpha({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}), \gamma({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}})}
\end{array}
{\right)},\end{aligned}$$ with $P_{\alpha({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}), \beta({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}})}, P_{\alpha({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}), \gamma({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}})}$ the operators, depending on fiber degree, defined in – We note that $$\label{eq:symindroots}
P_{\alpha({f - \operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}), \beta({f - \operatorname{\mathbf{N}}})} = P_{\alpha({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}), \gamma({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}})} \qquad (\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}=0,\ldots,f).$$ By , the values $s$ for which $P_{\alpha(\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}), \beta(\operatorname{\mathbf{N}})} x^s = 0$ and for which elements of size $x^s$ are in addition contained in $L^2(M,g)$ is $$\label{eq:L2indroots}
s=\begin{cases} -k\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}&\quad\textrm{if}\; \operatorname{\mathbf{N}}<\frac{1}{2}(f+\frac{1}{k}),\\1-k(f-\operatorname{\mathbf{N}})&\quad\textrm{if}\; \operatorname{\mathbf{N}}>\frac{1}{2}(f-\frac{3}{2k}). \end{cases}$$
\[prop:criterionDmax\] Suppose the differential form $\gamma=(\gamma^1,\gamma^2)=(x^{s_1}\tilde \gamma^1,x^{s_2}\tilde
\gamma^2)\in \mathcal{A}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}$ and that $\tilde\gamma^j=
\tilde{\gamma}_0^j(y, z) + \mathcal O(x^\epsilon)$ is contained in the maximal domain $\mathcal{D}_{\max}$. (Thus the leading order term is assumed not to have a logarithm, as is a priori allowed for $\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}$-distributions.) Then each $s_j$ is an indicial root of $P_{\alpha(\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}), \beta(\operatorname{\mathbf{N}})}$ for some $0\leq \operatorname{\mathbf{N}}_j\leq f$ or $s_j>\frac{1}{2}(-kf+3)$. In either case, $s_j\geq \frac{1}{2}(-kf+3)$.
Recall form Proposition \[thm:Hodge-Laplacian\] that $$\Delta^g = \Delta_0 + x^{-k}{\widetilde{P}} + x^{-1} {\widetilde{E}},$$ where $$\label{eq:leadingtermLapl}
\Delta_0 = {\left(}\begin{array}{cc}
P_{\alpha({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}), \beta({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}})} & 0 \\ 0 & P_{\alpha({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}}), \gamma({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}})}
\end{array}
{\right)}+ {\left(}\begin{array}{cc}
\frac{1}{x^{2k}} \Delta^{Z,y} + \Delta_{Y} & - 2k x^{-k - 1} d^{Z} \\
- 2 k x^{-k - 1} \delta^{Z} & \frac{1}{x^{2k}} \Delta^{Z,y} + \Delta_{Y}
\end{array} {\right)}.$$ In view of the symmetry it suffices to consider the image of the the component $\gamma^1=x^{s_1}\tilde\gamma^1$ under $\Delta^g$. The discussion naturally falls into several cases.
- The form $\tilde\gamma_0^1$ is not approximately fiber harmonic in the sense of \[sec:fibharmforms\]. Then the lowest nonvanishing term in is $x^{-2k+s_1}\Delta^Z\tilde\gamma_0^1$, which is contained in $L^2$ if and only if $$\begin{aligned}
s_1>\frac{1}{2}(3kf-1).\end{aligned}$$
- The form $\tilde\gamma_0^1$ is approximately fiber harmonic harmonic. We then consider the following subcases.
- $s_1$ is an indicial root of $P_{\alpha({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}_1}), \beta({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}_1})}$ and hence equals the number in .
- $s_1$ is not an indicial root of $P_{\alpha({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}_1}), \beta({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}_1})}$, i.e. $P_{\alpha({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}_1}), \beta({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}_1})}(x^{s_1}\tilde\gamma^1)\neq0$. We claim that at least one of the following two statements holds true:
- The polyhomogeneous expansion of $\tilde\gamma^1$ contains a term $\tilde\gamma_{\ell}^1$ of order $\mathcal O(x^{\delta})$ where $\delta-2k<s_1-2$ and $\tilde\gamma_{\ell}^1$ is not approximately fibre harmonic.
- The lowest nonvanishing term in the first component of $\Delta^g\gamma$ is of order $x^{s_1-2}$.
If this claim holds true we conclude that the lowest nonvanishing term in the first component of $\Delta^g\gamma$ is of order at most $x^{s_1-2}$. To prove the claim, assume that the first statement is false. Then the second one must hold true as is clear from the form of the Laplacian $\Delta_0$ in . To be specific, collecting the terms of order $x^{s_1-2}$ in the first component of $\Delta_0\gamma$ we obtain $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:termsorders2}
P_{\alpha({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}_1}), \beta({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}_1})}(x^{s_1}\tilde\gamma^1)+x^{-2k}\Delta^Z\tau^1 +x^{-k-1}d^Z\tau^2+x^{-k}d_ZQ_2\tau^3+x^{-k}Q_4d_Z\tau^4\\
+x^{-k}\delta_ZQ_1\tau^5+x^{-k}Q_3\delta_Z\tau^6\end{gathered}$$ for suitable differential forms $\tau^1,\ldots,\tau^6$ of orders $$\tau^1= O(x^{s_1+2k-2}),\quad \tau^2=O(x^{s_1+k-1}),\mbox{ and } \tau^j=O(x^{s_1+k-2})\quad (j=3,4,5,6).$$ By Hodge theory, the terms $d_Z\tau^4$ and $\delta_Z\tau^6$ both vanish approximately in the sense of \[sec:fibharmforms\], since otherwise a nonvanishing term $x^{-2k}\Delta^Z\tau^4$, respectively $x^{-2k}\Delta^Z\tau^5$ would occur. These are both of order strictly less than $s_1-2$, contradicting our initial assumption. Considering the remaining five terms in it follows from Hodge theory and the assumption that $\tilde\gamma_0^1$ is approximately fibre harmonic that the sum $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:restterms}
x^{-2k}\Delta^Z\tau^1 +x^{-k-1}d^Z\tau^2+x^{-k}d_ZQ_2\tau^3 +x^{-k}\delta_ZQ_1\tau^5\end{aligned}$$ is approximately orthogonal to $P_{\alpha({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}_1}), \beta({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}_1})}(x^{s_1}\tilde\gamma^1)$ in the sense of \[sec:fibharmforms\]. Hence we conclude that the nonzero term $P_{\alpha({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}_1}), \beta({\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}_1})}(x^{s_1}\tilde\gamma^1)$ cannot cancel with the sum . It follows that the second statement is true, whence the claim.
The asserted statement follows by inspection of each of the above cases. In case (1) it follows from $$s_1> \frac{1}{2}(3kf-1) >\frac{1}{2}(-kf+3),$$ using that $k\geq3$. In case (2.b) the lowest nonvanishing term in $\Delta^g\gamma$ is of order at most $s_1-2$. Since $\gamma\in\mathcal D_{\max}$ it follows from that $$s_1-2>-\frac{1}{2}(kf+1)\Longleftrightarrow s_1>-\frac{1}{2}(kf+3).$$ In case (2.a), the form $\tilde\gamma_0^1$ is approximately fibre harmonic and therefore by the Witt condition $\operatorname{\mathbf{N}}\neq\frac{f}{2}$. The exponent $s_1$ is given by from which it follows that if $f$ is even that $$s_1\geq-k\big(\frac{f}{2}-1\big)$$ (here we use the Witt condition) and if $f$ is odd that $$s_1\geq-k\big(\frac{f}{2}-\frac{1}{2}\big)\geq -\frac{kf}{2}+\frac{3}{2} ,$$ where the last inequality follows from the assumption $k\geq3$.
\[lem:AmaxequalsAmin\] Assume $k\geq3$. Then $\mathcal D_{\min}\cap\mathcal A_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}=\mathcal D_{\max}\cap\mathcal A_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}$.
It suffices to prove the inclusion $\mathcal D_{\max}\cap\mathcal A_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}} \subseteq\mathcal D_{\min}\cap\mathcal A_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}$. For $\varepsilon>0$ we define the logarithmic cutoff function $\chi_{\varepsilon}\colon[0,\infty)\to[0,1]$ by $$\begin{aligned}
\chi_{\varepsilon}(x):=\begin{cases}0,&x\leq\varepsilon^2,\\-\frac{\log(x/\varepsilon^2)}{\log(\varepsilon)},&\varepsilon^2<x<\varepsilon,\\1,&x\geq\varepsilon.\end{cases}\end{aligned}$$ For $\varepsilon^2<x<\varepsilon$ it satisfies $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:dercutoff}
\chi_{\varepsilon}'(x)=-\frac{1}{\log(\varepsilon)x}\qquad\textrm{and}\qquad\chi_{\varepsilon}''(x)=\frac{1}{\log(\varepsilon)x^2}.\end{aligned}$$ Let $\gamma \in\mathcal D_{\max}\cap\mathcal A_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}$ and set $\gamma_{\varepsilon}=\chi_{\epsilon}\gamma$. Then $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:Laplacecutoff}
\Delta^g\gamma_{\varepsilon}=\chi_{\varepsilon}\Delta^g\gamma-(\partial_x^2\chi_{\varepsilon})\gamma-(\partial_x\chi_{\varepsilon})(\partial_x\gamma)-\frac{kf}{x}(\partial_x\chi_{\varepsilon})\gamma\\
+A^j(\partial_x\chi_{\varepsilon})(\partial_{z_j}\gamma)+B^i(\partial_x\chi_{\varepsilon})(\partial_{y_i}\gamma),\end{gathered}$$ where $A^j= \mathcal O(x^k)$ and $B^i= \mathcal O(x^{2k})$ are bounded functions with that order of decay in $x$. We show that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:condDmin}
\|\Delta^g\gamma_{\varepsilon}-\Delta^g\gamma\|_{L^2(M,g)}\to0\qquad\textrm{as}\quad\varepsilon\to0,\end{aligned}$$ hence establishing that $\gamma\in\mathcal D_{\min}$. It is clear that $$\|\chi_{\varepsilon}\Delta^g\gamma-\Delta^g\gamma\|_{L^2(M,g)}\to0\qquad\textrm{as}\quad\varepsilon\to0,$$ and thus it suffices to consider the next three terms in and to show that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:errorterms}
\frac{1}{\log^2(\varepsilon)}\int_{\varepsilon^2}^{\varepsilon}\frac{1}{x^4}|\gamma|^2x^{kf}\,dx+\frac{1}{\log^2(\varepsilon)}\int_{\varepsilon^2}^{\varepsilon}\frac{1}{x^2}|\partial_x\gamma|^2x^{kf}\,dx +\frac{k^2f^2}{\log^2(\varepsilon)}\int_{\varepsilon^2}^{\varepsilon}\frac{1}{x^4}|\gamma|^2x^{kf}\,dx\end{aligned}$$ converges to $0$ as $\varepsilon\to0$. Let $\gamma=x^s\tilde\gamma$ for some $\tilde\gamma=\mathcal O(1)$. A short calculation shows that each integrand in is of order $x^{-1+\delta}$ for some $\delta>0$ and hence converges to $0$ as $\varepsilon\to0$ if $$\begin{aligned}
s>-\frac{kf}{2}+\frac{3}{2}.\end{aligned}$$ In the borderline case $s=-\frac{kf}{2}+\frac{3}{2}$ we still get convergence since then the first integral in becomes $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{\log^2(\varepsilon)}\int_{\varepsilon^2}^{\varepsilon}\frac{1}{x}\,dx=\frac{1}{\log^2(\varepsilon)}(\log(\varepsilon)-\log(\varepsilon^2))=-\frac{1}{\log(\varepsilon)}\to0\quad\textrm{as}\;\varepsilon\to0,\end{aligned}$$ and analogously for the second and third integral. Hence $$s\geq-\frac{kf}{2}+\frac{3}{2}\quad \Longrightarrow\quad \gamma \in\mathcal D_{\min}$$ for any $\gamma=x^s\tilde\gamma \in\mathcal D_{\max}\cap\mathcal A_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}$. On the other hand, Proposition \[prop:criterionDmax\] shows that $$\gamma=x^s\tilde\gamma \in\mathcal D_{\max}\cap\mathcal A_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}\quad \Longrightarrow\quad s\geq-\frac{kf}{2}+\frac{3}{2},$$ and hence the claim follows.
Spectral theory {#sec:spectral-theory}
---------------
\[Proof of Theorem \[thm:heatkernelmap\]\] The existence of a fundamental solution $H_t$ is the content of Theorem \[thm:heatkernel\], so it suffices to show that $H_t$ has the properties stated in Theorem \[thm:heatkernelmap\]. Since $H_t$ and ${\partial}_t H_t$ are formally self-adjoint (i.e. symmetric), to show that they are self-adjoint it suffices to show that they are compact operators. But indeed they are, as follows from [@RSI Thm VI.23-24] together with $$H_t, {\partial}_t H_t \in L^2(\operatorname{End}; M \times M),$$ where, given a smooth section $A$ of $\operatorname{End}$, then $A \in L^2(\operatorname{End}; M
\times M)$ if $$\int \| A(p, q) \|^2_{\operatorname{End}} \operatorname{dVol}_{M}(p) \operatorname{dVol}_M(q) < \infty.$$ For $t>0$, $H_{t}$ is given by an $L^{2}$ integral kernel, so is a compact operator; indeed, by , the index set $\mathcal{F}$ of $H_t \in \mathcal{A}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}(M \times M)$ restricted to $t > 0$ constant is $\mathcal{F}(\operatorname{lf}) =
\mathcal{E}(\operatorname{lf})$ and $\mathcal{F}(\operatorname{rf}) = \mathcal{E}(\operatorname{rf})$, for $\mathcal{E}$ the index family of $H$. From , these satisfy the lower bound $$\label{eq:lowerbindsetlf}
\inf \mathcal{F}(\operatorname{lf}), \inf \mathcal{F}(\operatorname{rf})\geq -\frac{kf}{2}+1$$ (meaning $H_t$ is a bounded endomorphism) and $$\label{eq:expvolform}
\operatorname{dVol}_{M}(p) \operatorname{dVol}_M(q) \simeq x^{kf} {\widetilde{x}}^{kf}\, dx\, d{\widetilde{x}}\, dy\,
d{\widetilde{y}}\, dz\, d{\widetilde{z}},$$ so the kernel of $H_t$ is square integrable. Since the restriction of ${\partial}_{t} H_{t}$ to a fixed time $t$ has the same index set on $M \times M$ as $H_{t}$, it is also compact.\
It remains to establish , i.e. that $H_t(\alpha) \in \mathcal{D}_{\min}$ for every $\alpha\in L^2$. In fact, $H_t(\alpha)$ is a polyhomogeneous distribution with index set $\mathcal{E}(\operatorname{lf})$. This is straightforward: writing the expansion of $H_t$ at $x = 0$ up to some order $N$ we have $$H_t = \sum_{\substack{(s,p) \in \mathcal{E}(\operatorname{lf}) \\ |s| \le N}} x^s
\log^p(x) a_{s, p}(y, z, {\widetilde{w}}) + E_N$$ where ${\widetilde{w}} = ({\widetilde{x}}, {\widetilde{y}}, {\widetilde{z}})$, and the coefficients $a_{s,p}$ are polyhomogeneous endomorphisms on the manifold with boundary ${\partial}M \times M$ and $E_N$ is a polyhomogeneous endomorphism on $M \times M$ with $E_N = o(x^N)$. Thus $$\label{eq:image-is-phg}
H_t(\alpha) = \int_M \Big(\sum_{\substack{(s,p) \in \mathcal{E}(\operatorname{lf}) \\
\Re s \le N}} x^s \log^p(x) a_{s, p}(z,
y, {\widetilde{w}}) \alpha({\widetilde{w}}) + E_N \alpha({\widetilde{w}}) ) \Big) \operatorname{dVol}_g({\widetilde{w}}).$$ For example by [@Ma1991 Proposition 3.20], since the $x^{-N}E_N$ are given by a polyhomogeneous integral kernel, they define bounded maps of $L^2$, and the conormality estimates (see –) follow by differentiating $x^{-N} E_N$. The integrals coming from the partial expansion terms are finite and give the expansion coefficients of $H_t(\alpha)$. This shows that $H_t(\alpha)\in\mathcal A_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}$, and moreover that the leading order term has no logarithmic factor. Thus, In view of Lemma \[lem:AmaxequalsAmin\] it suffices to prove $H_t(\alpha)\in\mathcal D_{\max}$ in order to conclude that $H_t(\alpha)\in\mathcal D_{\min}$. But indeed, $\inf \mathcal{E}(\operatorname{lf})$ satisfies the lower bound , hence it follows that the lowest order term in the polyhomogeneous expansion is of order at least $-\frac{kf}{2}+1$ which by is sufficient to conclude $H_t(\alpha)\in L^2$. Because $H_t$ is a fundamental solution of the heat equation, it follows that $\Delta^gH_t(\alpha)=-\partial_tH_t(\alpha)$ which by the same argument is contained in $L^2$ since $\partial_tH_t$ has the same index set as $H_t$ for $t>0$.
It now follows that the fundamental solution $H_t$ from Theorem \[thm:heatkernel\] is in fact the heat kernel in the following sense.
\[thm:fund-soln-is-heat-kernel\] \[eq:spectral-heat-kernel\] The heat kernel $\exp(-t \Delta^g)$ defined by applying the spectral theorem to the self-adjoint operator $(\Delta^g, \mathcal{D})$ has Schwartz kernel equal to the fundamental solution $H_t$ in Theorem \[thm:heatkernel\], meaning $$(e^{-t \Delta^g} \alpha)(w) = \int_M H_t(w, {\widetilde{w}}, t) \alpha({\widetilde{w}}) \operatorname{dVol}_g({\widetilde{w}}).$$
Using this we may finish the proof of Theorem \[thm:essentiallyselfadjoint\].
As discussed below the statement of Theorem \[thm:heatkernelmap\], Theorem \[thm:heatkernelmap\] itself establishes essential self-adjointness of $\Delta^g$. It remains to prove that the spectrum is discrete, but this follows immediately from the spectral theorem and the fact that $H_t$ is a compact operator (hence has discrete spectrum.)
Moreover, the Weyl asymptotic formula in follows from the standard heat kernel argument in [@taylor:vol2 8.3] together with the heat trace asymptotics in Corollary \[thm:heat-trace\].
\[thm:heat-trace\] For each $t > 0$, the fundamental solution $H_t$ in Theorem \[thm:heatkernel\] is trace class and satisfies that $F(t) := \operatorname{Tr}H_t$ is a polyhomogenous conormal distribution on $\mathbb{R}^+$ satisfying $$\begin{split}
\label{eq:heat-trace}
F(t) &= t^{-n/2} \operatorname{Vol}(M,g) + (\sum_{j = 1}^{\infty} a_j t^{-n/2 + j} )+
c_0 t^{-({b}+ 1)/2 + 1/2k} \\
&\qquad + O(t^{-({b}+ 1)/2 + 1/2k
+ \epsilon}).
\end{split}$$
The proof of Corollary \[thm:heat-trace\], which uses Theorem \[thm:heatkernel\] and Melrose’s pushforward theorem, is deferred to Section \[sec:heat-trace-asymptotics\] below.
Harmonic forms and Hodge theory {#sec:hodge-theory}
-------------------------------
We begin our discussion of Hodge theory by pointing out that elements $\gamma \in L^2$ satisfying $\Delta^g\gamma = 0$, admit asymptotic expansions at the boundary of $M$. Indeed, for such forms $\gamma$, by the spectral theorem and the fact that $H_t$ is the heat kernel (Corollary \[thm:fund-soln-is-heat-kernel\]), we see that $$\label{eq:phg-kernel}
\begin{split}
\gamma = H_t \gamma & = \int_M H_t(w, {\widetilde{w}}, t) \gamma({\widetilde{w}})
\operatorname{dVol}_g({\widetilde{w}}).
\end{split}$$ By the proof of Theorem \[thm:heatkernelmap\], specifically , we have the following.
\[thm:phg-kernel\] Assume that $\gamma \in \ker(\Delta^g \colon L^2 {\longrightarrow}L^2)$. Then $\gamma$ is polyhomogeneous conormal and $\gamma =
\mathcal{O}(1)$, i.e. is bounded in norm.
Lemma \[thm:phg-kernel\] allows us to conclude that the $L^2$ kernel of $\Delta^g$ is equal to the Hodge cohomology in .
Notation as above, $\mathcal{H}_{L^2}(M, g) = \ker(\Delta^g \colon L^2 {\longrightarrow}L^2)$.
If $\gamma \in \mathcal{H}_{L^2}(M, g)$ then $\gamma$ is in the maximal domains of both $d$ and $\delta$, and so for smooth compactly supported $\beta$, $$\begin{aligned}
{\langle}\Delta^g \gamma , \beta {\rangle}_{L^2} &:= {\langle}\gamma ,
\Delta^g\beta {\rangle}_{L^2}
= {\langle}\gamma , d\delta \beta {\rangle}_{L^2} + {\langle}\gamma , \delta d
\beta {\rangle}_{L^2} = 0 + 0 = 0,
\end{aligned}$$ so $\gamma \in \ker(\Delta^g \colon L^2 {\longrightarrow}L^2)$
On the other hand, if $\gamma \in \ker(\Delta^g \colon L^2 {\longrightarrow}L^2)$, then by Lemma \[thm:phg-kernel\] we can integrate by parts to obtain $$0 = {\langle}\Delta^g \gamma , \gamma {\rangle}_{L^2} = \| d \gamma
\|^2_{L^2} + \| \delta \gamma \|^2_{L^2},$$ so $\gamma \in \mathcal{H}^*_{L^2}(M, g)$.
We can now follow the arguments in [@HHM2004; @HR2012] to prove Theorem \[thm:hodge\] above. Before we begin we recall some facts about intersection cohomology, a cohomology theory that applies to stratified spaces. We do not attempt to make a full explanation of it here, but mention only that there is in fact a family of intersection cohomology groups for our stratified space $X$ defined in (obtained by collapsing the boundary of ${\partial}M$ over the base $Y$) depending on a function ${\mathfrak{p}}\colon \mathbb{N} {\longrightarrow}\mathbb{N}$ called the ‘perversity,’ which is non-decreasing and whose values matter only on the codimensions of the strata of $X$. Here we have only one singular stratum, $Y \subset
X$, the image of the boundary ${\partial}M$ via the projection onto $X$, and its codimension is $f + 1$, where $\dim Z = f$. The ‘upper middle degree’ perversity ${\overline{{\mathfrak{m}}}}$ is a special example of a perversity, which satisfies $$\label{eq:upper-middle}
{\overline{{\mathfrak{m}}}}(f + 1) = \left\{
\begin{array}{cc}
(f - 1)/2 & \mbox{ if } f \mbox{ is odd,} \\
f /2 - 1& \mbox{ if } f \mbox{ is even.}
\end{array}
\right.$$ The ‘lower middle perversity’ $\underline{{\mathfrak{m}}}$ differs from ${\overline{{\mathfrak{m}}}}$ only when $f$ is even, in which case $\underline{{\mathfrak{m}}}(f +
1) = f/2$. As we will rely on the spectral sequence arguments from [@HHM2004; @HR2012] during the proof, we will only need to study the intersection cohomology locally, specifically on a basis of open sets of $X$. Concretely, from [@HHM2004], for canonical neighborhoods $U
= V \times C_1(Z)$ as in with contractible $V$, we have $$\label{eq:local-intersection-cohomology*}
I\!H^p_{{\mathfrak{p}}}(U) = \left\{
\begin{array}{cc}
H^p(Z) & \mbox{ if } p < f - 1 - {\mathfrak{p}}(f + 1), \\
{\left\{ 0 \right\} } & \mbox{ if } p \ge f - 1 - {\mathfrak{p}}(f + 1).
\end{array}
\right.$$ From the Witt condition , we see that $$\label{eq:local-intersection-cohomology}
I\!H^p_{{\overline{{\mathfrak{m}}}}}(U) = I\!H^p_{\underline{{\mathfrak{m}}}}(U) = \left\{
\begin{array}{cc}
H^p(Z) & \mbox{ if } p < f /2, \\
{\left\{ 0 \right\} } & \mbox{ if } p \ge f / 2,
\end{array}
\right.$$ regardless of the parity of $f$.
Although Theorem \[thm:hodge\] describes a relationship between the Hodge cohomology and the intersection cohomology, to prove it we go through the standard route and use the intermediary of $L^2$-cohomology. Thus consider the chain complex $$\label{eq:L2-coho-complex}
\dots {\longrightarrow}L^2_d\Omega^{p-1}(M, g) {\longrightarrow}L^2_d\Omega^{p}(M, g) {\longrightarrow}L^2_d\Omega^{p+1}(M, g) {\longrightarrow}\dots.$$ where $L^2_d\Omega^{p}(M, g)$ is the maximal domain of the exterior derivative $d$, specifically $$L^2_d\Omega^{p}(M, g) = \{ \alpha \in L^2\Omega^p(M, g) : d\alpha \in
L^2\Omega^{p + 1}(M, g) \}.$$ Then the $L^2$-cohomology is the quotient $$L^2H^p (M, g) = \frac{{\left\{ \alpha \in L_d^2\Omega^{p}(M, g) : d\alpha = 0 \right\} }}
{{\left\{ d\eta : \eta \in L^2_d\Omega^{p-1}(M, g) \right\} }}.$$ As explained in [@HR2012 page 6], it suffices to show that $$\label{eq:L2-equals-singular}
L^2H^p(M, g) \simeq I\!H^p_{{\overline{{\mathfrak{m}}}}}(X; \mathbb{R}),$$ for then the $L^2$-cohomology is finite dimensional, which implies that the range of $d$ (and thus its adjoint $\delta$) is closed. From [@HHM2004 2.1] it then follows using the Kodaira decomposition theorem that $\mathcal{H}^p_{L^2}(M, g)$ is isomorphic to $L^2H^p(M, g)$ and thus by Theorem \[thm:hodge\] holds.
Thus it suffices to prove , and for this we also follow the arguments in [@HR2012 pp. 5-6], where it is explained that it suffices to show that for canonical neighborhoods $U
= V \times C_1(Z)$ as in with contractible $V$, the local chain complex $$\label{eq:L2-coho-complex-local}
\dots {\longrightarrow}L^2_d\Omega^{p-1}(U, g) {\longrightarrow}L^2_d\Omega^{p}(U, g) {\longrightarrow}L^2_d\Omega^{p+1}(U, g) {\longrightarrow}\dots,$$ satisfies $$\label{eq:L2-equals-singular-local}
L^2H^p(U, g) \simeq I\!H^p_{{\overline{{\mathfrak{m}}}}}(U)$$ Here $L^2H^p(U, g)$ is defined as above with $U$ replacing $M$. The intersection cohomology groups for ${\overline{{\mathfrak{m}}}}$ are computed in , and thus we need only to analyze the groups on the left. To see we use the Künneth formula of Zucker, [@Z1982 Corollary 2.34], whose assumptions are satisfied here by the fact that the exterior derivative on $Z$ is closed on its maximal domain. Thus, in the notation of [@HR2012 Page 5], we have $$\label{eq:local-L2-coho-check}
\begin{split}
L^2H^p(U, g) &= \bigoplus_{i = 0}^1 W\!H^i((0, 1), dx^2, k(p - i -
f/2))) \otimes H^{p -i}(Z ; \mathbb{R}) , \end{split}$$ where $W\!H^i((0, 1), dx^2, a)$ is the cohomology of the complex $$\label{eq:L2-coho-complex-local-2}
0 {\longrightarrow}(x^a L^2\Omega^{0}((0, 1), dx^2))\stackrel{d}{{\longrightarrow}} x^a L^2\Omega^{1}((0, 1), dx^2){\longrightarrow}0,$$ where the space on the left is the maximal domain of $d$ on $x^a
L^2\Omega^{0}((0, 1), dx^2)$. Again from [@HR2012] (via [@HHM2004]), $W\!H^1((0, 1), dx^2, a) = 0$ if $a \neq 1/2$ and $W\!H^0((0, 1), dx^2, a) = \mathbb{R}$ if $a < 1/2$ and $\{ 0 \}$ if $a
\ge 1/2$. When $i = 1$, $k(p - i -
f/2) \neq 1/2$ since $k > 1$, so the $i = 1$ terms do not contribute. When $i = 0$, we have $k(p - i -
f/2) = k(p - f/2)$ which satisfies $$k(p - f/2) < 1/2 \mbox{ if } p \le f/2 \quad \mbox{ and } \quad k(p - f/2) > 1/2
\mbox{ if } p > f/2.$$ Using the Witt condition then gives $$\label{eq:2}
\begin{split}
L^2H^p(U, g) &=
\left\{
\begin{array}{cc}
H^p(Z) &\mbox{ if } p < f/2, \\
\{ 0 \} &\mbox{ if } p \ge f/2,
\end{array} \right.
\end{split}$$ matching and completing the proof.
We now discuss the proof of Theorem \[thm:moduli-space\]. As the spaces in the theorem are incomplete cusp edge spaces in a neighborhood of the divisor by [@MZ2015], our results would apply to these spaces, if not for the fact that moduli spaces such as these have interior orbifold points. This is not a problem, since, as in [@JMMV2014] we may lift to a finite cover with no such points. One can then work on the space $C^\infty_{c, orb}(\mathcal{M}_{1,1})$ of functions which near each orbifold point are smooth when lifted to a local finite cover resolving the singularity. Constructing a heat kernel on the lift and averaging over the group action then gives a fundamental solution to the heat kernel downstairs which has all the desired properties. We leave the details of this simple extension to the reader.
Manifolds with corners {#sec:mwc}
======================
In this section we recall some of the facts about distributions on manifolds with corners (mwc’s) used in this paper. This material is due largely to Melrose, and the reader is referred to his book [@tapsit] for more details. See also [@Hvol1].
The objects considered here, for example the ice-metrics , have polyhomogeneous regularity, which we define now. The sheaf of **polyhomogeneous conormal** (or polyhomogeneous, or simply phg) functions $\mathcal{A}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}(X)$ is defined as follows. First, an index set $\mathcal{E}$ on a manifold with corners $X$ is an association to each boundary hypersurface $H$ of $X$ a set $$\label{eq:indexset}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{E}(H) \subset \mathbb{C} \times \mathbb{N} \mbox{
satisfying that the subset} \qquad \\
{\left\{ (z, p) \in \mathcal{E}(H) : \mbox{ Re } z < c \right\} } \mbox{ is finite for
all } c \in \mathbb{R}.
\end{split}$$ Given an index set $\mathcal{E}$, for a boundary face $F = \cap_{i = 1}^{\delta} H_{i}$ for boundary hypersurfaces $H_{i}$, define the subset $\mathcal{E}(F) \subset \mathbb{C}^{p} \times
\mathbb{N}^{p}$ by $(z, p) = (z_{1}, \dots, z_{\delta}, p_{1}, \dots,
p_{\delta}) \in \mathcal{E}(F)$ if and only if $(z_{i},
p_{i}) \in \mathcal{E}(H_{i})$. We define the Frechet space $\mathcal{A}^{\mathcal{E}}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}(X)$ as follows. We write $u \in
\mathcal{A}^{\mathcal{E}}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}(X)$ if and only if for each boundary face $F
= \cap_{i = 1}^{\delta} H_{i}$, writing $\rho_{i}$ for a boundary defining function of $H_{i}$, $u$ satisfies $$\label{eq:phgexpansion}
\begin{split}
u &\sim \sum_{(z, p) \in
\mathcal{E}(F)} a_{z,p} \rho^{z} \log^{p} \rho \mbox{ where} \\
\rho^{z} &= \prod_{i = 1}^{\delta} \rho_{i}^{z_{i}}, \qquad \log^{p} \rho =
\prod_{i = 1}^{\delta} \log^{p_{i}} \rho_{i} ,
\end{split}$$ and the symbol $\sim$ means that $$\label{eq:simbound}
E_N = u - \sum_{\substack{(z, p) \in
\mathcal{E}(F) \\ \mbox{ Re } z_i < N \ \forall i }} a_{z,p} \rho^{z} \log^{p}
\rho,$$ where $E_N$ is a smooth function on the interior of $X$ which is $O(|\rho|^N)$, where $|\rho| = (\rho_{1}^{2} + \dots +
\rho_{\delta}^{2})^{1/2}$. Moreover, $E_N$ is conormal, meaning that if $\mathcal{V}_b = \mathcal{V}_b(X)$ denotes the set of smooth vector fields on $X$ that are tangent to all boundary hypersurfaces, then $$\label{eq:conormal-estimates}
|\rho|^{-N} \mathcal{V}_b^k E \subset L^\infty.$$
Note that if a phg function $u$ vanishes to infinite order at $H$, then $u$ is polyhomogeneous with index set $\mathcal{E}$ satisfying $\mathcal{E}(H) = \varnothing$.
\[thm:matching\] Let $X$ denote a mwc, $\mathcal{M}(X) = {\left\{ H_{i} \right\} }_{i \in
\mathcal{I}}$ its boundary hypersurfaces, and for each $i \in \mathcal{I}$, let $\rho_{i}$ denote a boundary defining function of $H_i$. Given a smooth vector bundle $E {\longrightarrow}X$, if $\kappa_{i}$ are polyhomogeneous sections on $H_{i}$, then provided $$\label{eq:matchingcondition}
\rho_{i}^{c_{i}} \kappa_{j} \rvert_{H_{i} \cap H_{j}} =
\rho_{j}^{c_{j}} \kappa_{i} \rvert_{H_{i} \cap H_{j}}$$ there exists a polyhomogeneous conormal distribution $K$ on $X$ satsifying $$\label{eq:desired_restriction}
\rho_{i}^{c_{i}}K \rvert_{H_{i} } = \kappa_{i}$$
Assume moreover that at a particular boundary hypersurface which we take to be $H_1$, that we are given an index set $F_1 \subset
\mathbb{C} \times \mathbb{N}$ and polyhomogeneous sections $b_{j, p}
\in \mathcal{A}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}(E\rvert_{H^1}; H_1)$. Then given functions $\kappa_i$ on $H_i$, $i \neq 1$, there exists a distribution $K$ satisfying for $i \neq 1$ and such that $$\label{eq:desired-expansion}
K \simeq \sum_{s,p \in F_1} \rho_1^{s} \log^p (\rho_1) b_{s, p}$$ provided holds for $i, j \neq 1$ and furthermore for $i \neq 1$ $$\label{eq:second-matching-condition}
\kappa_{i} \simeq
\rho_i^{c_i} \sum_{s,p \in F_1} \rho_1^{s} \log^p (\rho_1) b_{s, p} \rvert_{H_i}.$$
\(1) Note the converse; if $K = \rho_i^{-c_i} \rho_j^{-c_j} a$ for some positive function $a$ near $H_i \cap H_j$ then setting $\rho_l^{c_l} K \rvert_{H_l}= \kappa_l$ for $l = i,
j$, we have $\rho_j^{c_j} \kappa_i = \rho_i^{c_i} \kappa_j$ on $H_i
\cap H_j$.
\(2) The matching condition implies further matching conditions on multifold intersections, e.g. it implies that $$\rho_i^{c_i} \rho_j^{c_j} \kappa_l = \rho_i^{c_i} \rho_l^{c_l} \kappa_j =
\rho_l^{c_l} \rho_j^{c_j} \kappa_i \mbox{ on } H_i \cap H_j \cap H_l.$$
\(3) The second matching condition merely says that the desired data on a bhs $H_i$ has the same asymptotic expansion at $H_1$ as the the desired distribution restricted to $H_i$.
Denote the number of boundary hypersurfaces of $X$ by $m = |\mathcal{M}|$. There is a number $\delta$ and boundary defining functions $\rho_i$ such that the set $\{ \rho_i < \delta\}$ is diffeomorphic as mwc’s to $H_i \times [0,
\delta)$. Without loss of generality we take $\delta = 1$. Following the remark, for a collection of bhs’ $H_{i_1}, \dots, H_{i_p}$, the distrubution $$\kappa_{i_1 \dots i_p} = ( \prod_{i \neq i_k} \rho^{c_i} )
\kappa_{i_k} \rvert_{\rho_{i_1} = \dots = \rho_{i_p} = 0}$$ is well-defined independently of the choice of $i_k \in \{ 1, \dots, m
\}$.
Let $\chi(x)$ be a cutoff function with $\chi \equiv 1$ for $x \le 1/3$ and $\chi
\equiv 0$ for $x \ge 2\epsilon/3$. For the distribution $K$ we may take $$K = \sum_{p = 1}^m (-1)^{p - 1} \sum_{1 \le i_1 < \dots < i_p \le m}
\kappa_{i_1 \dots i_p}
(\prod_{j \in \{ i_1, \dots , i_p \}} \chi(\rho_{j}) \rho_j^{-c_j}).$$ For example if $m = 2$ then $$K = \chi(\rho_1) \rho_1^{- c_1} \kappa_1 + \chi(\rho_2) \rho_2^{-
c_2} \kappa_2 - \chi(\rho_1) \chi(\rho_2)\rho_1^{- c_1} \rho_2^{- c_2} \kappa_{12}.$$ Note that each term in the sum defining $K$ defines a polyhomogeneous conormal distribution on all of $X$, as the distribution $\kappa_{i_1 \dots i_p} $ is defined on a neighborhood of $H_{i_1} \cap \dots \cap H_{i_p}$ off which the product $\prod_{j
\in \{ i_1, \dots , i_p \}} \chi(\rho_{j})$ vanishes.
Letting $A_{i_1 \dots i_p}$ be the term corresponding term in the definition of $K$, note that if $i \not \in \{ i_1, \dots, i_p \}$ then $\rho_i^{c_i} A_{i_1 \dots i_p} = \rho_i^{c_i} A_{i_1 \dots i
\dots i_p} \rvert_{\rho_i = 0}$. Fixing $i$, multiplying by $\rho^{c_i} K$ and restricting to $\rho_i =
0$ gives $$\begin{aligned}
\rho_i^{c_i} K \rvert_{\rho_i = 0} &= \kappa_i + \sum_p^{m - 1}
(-1)^{p - 1} \rho_i^{c_i} ( \sum_{\substack{
1 \le i_1 < \dots < i_p \le m \\
i \not \in \{i_1 \dots i_p\}
}} A_{i_1 \dots i_p} - \sum_{\substack{
1 \le i_1 < \dots < i_{p + 1} \le m \\
i \in \{i_1 \dots i_{p + 1}\}
}} A_{i_1
\dots i_{p + 1}}) \rvert_{\rho_i = 0} \\
&= \kappa_i,\end{aligned}$$ which establishes .
We now prove the final statement of the lemma. Let $\chi$ be the cutoff function defined above. First, we claim that under the stated assumptions there exists a distribution $K'$ supported in $\{ \rho_1 \leq 1 \}$ satisfying both (with $K$ replaced by $K'$) and that $$\label{eq:desired-expansion-restriction}
\rho_i^{c_i} K' \rvert_{H_i}= \chi(\rho_1) \kappa_i$$ for each $i \neq 1$. To see this, take any distribution $K''$ supported in $\{ \rho_1 \leq 1 \}$ satisfying , and note that $
a_i := \rho_i^{c_i} K''\rvert_{H_i} - \chi(\rho_1)\kappa_i = O(\rho^\infty_1)$. By the support condition, the distribution $K' = K'' - \sum_{i \neq 1} \chi(\rho_i)
a_i$ is defined globally, has the same asymptotic expansion at $H_1$ as $K''$, and satisfies . This $K'$ will play the role of $\chi(\rho_1)\rho^{-c_1}\kappa_1$ from the previous paragraph. Concretely, for $1 < i_1 < \dots < i_p \le
m$, let $a_{i_1 \dots i_p} = (\Pi_{j \in \{ i_1, \dots, i_p}
\rho_j^{c_j} K') \rvert_{H_{i_1} \cap \dots \cap H_{i_p}}$. Then we may take $$\begin{aligned}
K &= \sum_{p = 1}^m (-1)^{p - 1} \sum_{1 < i_1 < \dots < i_p \le m}
\kappa_{i_1 \dots i_p} (\prod_{j \in \{ i_1, \dots , i_p \}}
\chi(\rho_{j}) \rho_j^{-c_j}) \\
&\quad + K' + \sum_{p = 1}^m (-1)^{p - 1} \sum_{1 < i_1 < \dots < i_p \le m}
a_{i_1 \dots i_p} (\prod_{j \in \{ i_1, \dots , i_p \}}
\chi(\rho_{j}) \rho_j^{-c_j}).\end{aligned}$$ Again, for example if $m = 2$ then $$K = K' + \chi(\rho_2) \rho_2^{-
c_2} \kappa_2 - (\rho_2^{c_1}K')\rvert_{H_2} \rho_2^{- c_2} \chi(\rho_2).$$ The given expression for $K$ can be directly checked to satisfy – .
Melrose’s pushforward theorem {#sec:pushforward}
-----------------------------
Given a map $\beta \colon X {\longrightarrow}Y$ between manifolds with corners, if $\mathcal{M}(\bullet)$ with $\bullet = X, Y$ denotes the space of boundary hypersurfaces, then $\beta$ is a **b-map** if it is smooth and if for each $H \in \mathcal{M}(Y)$ with $\rho_H$ a boundary defining function for $H$ then $$\beta^* \rho_H
= a \Pi_{H'_j \in \mathcal{M}(X)} \rho_{H'_1}^{e(H'_1, H)}
\rho_{H'_1}^{e(H'_2, H)} \dots \rho_{H'_1}^{e(H'_N, H)}$$ where $a
\in C^\infty(X)$ is non-vanishing and $N$ is the number of boundary hypersurfaces of $Y$ and the $e(H', H)$ are non-negative integers. This means foremost that $\rho_H$ pulls back to a smooth function, and the numbers $e(H', H)$ simply keep track of the order of vanishing of $\beta^* \rho_H$ at each face of $X$. The function $$\label{eq:exponent-matrix}
e \colon \mathcal{M}(X) \times \mathcal{M}(Y) {\longrightarrow}\mathbb{N}_0$$ is the **exponent matrix** of $\beta$, and $e(H', H) > 0$ means $H'$ maps into $H$ via $\beta$.
If a b-map has a few additional properties then it pushes forward polyhomogeneous distributions (more accurately, densities) to polyhomogeneous distributions and their index sets change in a way dictated by the exponent matrix. Note that it follows from the definition of a b-map that every boundary face $F$ of $X$ (meaning an intersection of boundary hypersurfaces), can be associated to a face $\overline{\beta}(F)$ of $Y$ defined to be the unique face with $\beta(x) \in
\overline{\beta}(F)^\circ$ for every $x \in F^\circ$. A b-map $\beta \colon X {\longrightarrow}Y$ is a **b-fibration** if:
- $\beta$ does not increase the codimension of faces, i.e. for each boundary face $F$ of $X$, the associated face $\overline{\beta}(F)$ in $Y$ satisfies that $\operatorname{codim}(F) \le
\operatorname{codim}(\overline{\beta}(F))$.
- Restricted to the interior of any face $F^\circ$, $\beta \colon
F^\circ {\longrightarrow}(\overline{\beta}(F))^\circ$ is a fibration of open manifolds in the standard sense.
According to a theorem of Melrose [@Melrose1992] which we state below, a b-fibration pushes forward phg densities to phg densities in a manner we describe now. First, on a manifold with corners we choose a non-vanishing b-density $\mu$, meaning a section of $|\Lambda|^n({{}^bT^*}X)$, the density bundle of the b-cotangent bundle. The b-tangent bundle ${{}^bT}X$ is the bundle whose smooth sections are $\mathcal{V}_b$, the vector fields tangent to the boundary. The bundle ${{}^bT^*}X$ is the dual bundle of ${{}^bT}X$, and near a face $F = \cap_{i = 1}^{\delta} H_i$ where $\rho_i$ are bdf’s and $y$ are coordinates on $F$ then, the sections of ${{}^bT^*}X$ take the form $$\sum_i \xi_i \frac{d \rho_i}{\rho_i} + \eta\ dy.$$ It follows that near any intersection $F = \cap_{j \in J} H_{j_q}$ of boundary hypersurfaces for $J \subset \mathcal{I}$ where $\mathcal{I}$ indexes $\mathcal{M}(X)$ (i.e. any face of $X$) that a non-vanishing b-density takes the form $$\label{eq:b-density}
\mu =\left|a \frac{ dy \prod_{j \in J} d\rho_{j}}{\prod_{j \in J} \rho_{j}}\right|$$ for some smooth non-vanishing function $a$ on $X$. A polyhomogeneous b-density $u \in \mathcal{A}^{\mathcal{E}}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}(X) \otimes |\Lambda|^n({{}^bT^*}X)$ can be written as $f \mu$ for a phg function $f$ and the index set of $u$ is by definition the index set of $f$.
\[thm:pushforward\] Let $u \in \mathcal{A}^{\mathcal{E}}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}(X) \otimes |\Lambda|^n({{}^bT^*}X)$ be a polyhomogeneous b-density on $X$ with index set $\mathcal{E}$, let $f \colon X {\longrightarrow}Y$ be a b-fibration with exponent matrix $e$, and define the pushforward $f_* u$ to be the distribution on smooth functions $v \in C_{comp}^\infty(Y)$ acting by ${\langle}f_* u, v {\rangle}_Y = {\langle}u,
f^* v {\rangle}_X$. Then provided for each $H \in \mathcal{M}(X)$ we have $$\label{eq:integrability}
e(H, H') = 0 \ \forall H' \in
\mathcal{M}(Y) \quad\implies\quad \mathcal{E}(H) > 0,$$ then $f_* u \in \mathcal{A}^{\mathcal{E}'}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}(Y) \otimes
|\Lambda|^n({{}^bT^*}Y)$ where $$\mathcal{E}'(H) = \overline{\bigcup}_{H'} \{ (\frac{z}{e(H', H)}, p) :
(z, p) \in \mathcal{E}(H) \},$$ with the (extended) union taken over $H'$ with $e(H', H) > 0$.
The extended union, defined in [@tapsit], contains the standard union and possibly more log terms.
Heat trace asymptotics {#sec:heat-trace-asymptotics}
----------------------
We now use Theorem \[thm:pushforward\] to prove the heat trace formula in Corollary \[thm:heat-trace\] above. The heat trace is equal to $$\label{eq:heat-trace-formula}
\operatorname{Tr}(e^{-t \Delta}) = \int_M H_t(w, w) \operatorname{dVol}_g = {\sigma}_* ((\iota^* H_t) \operatorname{dVol}),$$ where $\iota \colon M \times [0, \infty) {\longrightarrow}M
\times M \times [0, \infty)$ is the diagonal inclusion and ${\sigma}\colon M \times [0, \infty) {\longrightarrow}[0, \infty)$ is the projection onto the right factor. The natural space here on which to consider $H_t$ is ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}}$, and thus to evalute this pushforward we must see how ${\sigma}$ and $\iota$ act on the natural blown up spaces. The following may be easily verified.
1. The closure $({M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}})_\Delta := \operatorname{cl}(\iota(M^\circ \times (0, \infty)))$ is a manifold with corners with $4$ boundary hypersurfaces, $\operatorname{sf}, \operatorname{ff_1}^d,
\operatorname{ff}^d, \operatorname{tf}^d$, equal to the intersection of $\operatorname{cl}(\iota(M^\circ
\times (0, \infty)))$ with $\operatorname{rf}\cap \operatorname{lf}, \operatorname{ff_1}, \operatorname{ff},$ and $\operatorname{tf}$, respectively
2. The map ${\sigma}$ extends form the interior $M^\circ \times (0,
\infty)$ to a b-fibration ${\sigma}\colon ({M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}})_\Delta {\longrightarrow}[0,
\infty)$ with exponent matrix $$e_{\sigma}(\operatorname{sf}) = 0 , e_{\sigma}(\operatorname{ff_1}^d) = 2,
e_{\sigma}(\operatorname{ff}^d) = 2k , e_{\sigma}(\operatorname{tf}^d) = 2.$$
To apply the pushforward theorem, we note that the volume density $$\mu = |\operatorname{dVol}_g \frac{dt}{t} |
= x^{kf + 1} \frac{|dx dy dz dt|}{xt}$$ is equal on $({M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}})_\Delta$ to $$\mu = a \ (\rho_{\operatorname{sf}} \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^d}
\rho_{\operatorname{ff}^d})^{kf + 1} \mu_0,$$ where $\mu_0$ is a non-vanishing b-density on $({M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}})_\Delta$. Thus $(\iota^*H) \mu$ is phg on $({M^2_{\operatorname{heat}}})_\Delta$ with index family $\mathcal{E}^d$ satisfying $$\begin{gathered}
\inf \mathcal{E}^d(\operatorname{sf}) = 3, \quad
\inf \mathcal{E}^d(\operatorname{ff_1}^d) = - {b}, \\
\inf \mathcal{E}^d(\operatorname{ff}^d) = k(f - n) + 1, \quad \mathcal{E}^d(\operatorname{tf}^d) = \{-n, -
n + 1, \dots \} .
\end{gathered}$$ Note that $\operatorname{Tr}e^{- t\Delta} \frac{dt}{t}= {\sigma}_* ((\iota^* H_t)
\mu)$. The integrability condition must be checked only for $\operatorname{sf}$ and thus holds by Theorem \[thm:heatkernel\], and we apply the pushforward theorem to obtain that $\operatorname{Tr}e^{- t\Delta}$ is polyhomogeneous with index set $$\begin{gathered}
\{ (\zeta_1/2, p_1) \colon (\zeta_1, p_1) \in \mathcal{E}^d(\operatorname{ff_1}^d) \}
\ {\overline{\cup}} \ \{ (\zeta_2/(2k), p_2) \colon (\zeta_2, p_2) \in
\mathcal{E}^d(\operatorname{ff}^d) \} \\ \ {\overline{\cup}} \ \{ (\zeta_3/2, p_3) \colon
(\zeta_3, p_3) \in \mathcal{E}^d(\operatorname{tf}^d) \}.\end{gathered}$$ In particular, $$\begin{split}
F(t) = (\sum_{j = 0}^f a_j t^{-n/2 + j/2} )+ c_0 t^{-({b}+
1)/2 + 1/(2k)} + O(t^{-({b}+ 1)/2 + 1/(2k) + \epsilon}),
\end{split}$$ for some $\epsilon > 0$. As discussed in [@MV2012 Section 3.3], the heat kernel in fact lies in an even calculus and thus the terms for odd $j$ in this sum are equal to $0$, giving the trace formula . The fact that the leading order term is the volume is standard.
Triple Space {#sec:triple-space}
============
We will now analyze composition properties for “Volterra” type convolution operators as described in . To do so, following [@tapsit; @Grieser-Hunsicker], we construct a “triple space,” which we denote by ${M^3_{\operatorname{heat}}}$, which is designed specifically to accomodate the process of composing operators which have the structure of the error terms in . The structure of our triple space is analogous to that constructed by Grieser and Hunsicker in [@Grieser-Hunsicker], with slightly different homogeneities and with the added complication that there are time variables involved.
Note that, given $A_i$, $i = 1, 2$, we want is to make sense of the integral $$\label{eq:voltera-composition}
\int_M\! \int_0^{t'} A_1(w, w', t') A_2(w', {\widetilde{w}}, t - t') \operatorname{dVol}_g(w') dt'.$$ Define the wedge $$\label{eq:wedge}
W := {\left\{ t - t' \geq 0 \right\} } \subset \mathbb{R}^+_{t}
\times \mathbb{R}^+_{t'},$$ and define the left, center, and right projections $$\begin{split}
\pi_L : M \times M \times M \times W &{\longrightarrow}M \times M \times [0, \infty)_{{\mathfrak{t}}} \\
(w, w', {\widetilde{w}}, t, t') &\longmapsto (w, w', t') \\
\pi_C : M \times M \times M \times W &{\longrightarrow}M \times M \times [0, \infty)_{{\mathfrak{t}}} \\
(w, w', {\widetilde{w}}, t, t') &\longmapsto (w, {\widetilde{w}}, t) \\
\pi_R : M \times M \times M \times W &{\longrightarrow}M \times M \times [0, \infty)_{{\mathfrak{t}}}\\
(w, w', {\widetilde{w}}, t, t') &\longmapsto (w', {\widetilde{w}}, t - t').
\end{split}$$ Then, formally, the integral in says that the integral kernel of $A_1 A_2$ (as an operator acting by convolution in time) is $$\label{eq:fake-pushforward}
(A_1 A_2)(w, {\widetilde{w}}, t) = (\pi_C)_*(\pi^*_L A_1)(\pi^*_R A_2),$$ where $(\pi_C)_*$ denotes the pushforward, i.e. the integral along the fibers of $\pi_C$ (which, by the way we have set up the problem, requires the choice of a metric on the fibers which we come to shortly.) Analysis of becomes tractable if the space $M^3 \times W$ is blown up so that the pushforward theorem described in Section \[sec:pushforward\] applies.
Note that $M^3 \times W$ is a manifold with corners with $5$ boundary hypersurfaces $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:triple-initial-bhs}
\operatorname{L}= \{x = 0 \}, \quad \operatorname{C}= \{x' = 0 \}, \quad
\operatorname{R}= \{{\widetilde{x}} = 0 \}\\
\operatorname{tb'}_1 = \{ t' = 0 \}, \quad \operatorname{tb'}_2 = \{ t - t' = 0 \}\end{gathered}$$ It is easy to check that, in the language of Appendix \[sec:mwc\], the maps $\pi_\bullet$ with $\bullet \in \{ L, C, R \}$ are b-maps from $M^3
\times W$ to $M^2 \times [0, \infty)_t$ and the exponent matrices are also easy to compute, $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:initial-exponent-matrices}
e_{\pi_L}( \bullet , \bullet') = \left\{
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & \bullet = \operatorname{L}, \bullet' = \operatorname{lf}\\
1 & \bullet = \operatorname{C}, \bullet' = \operatorname{rf}\\
1 & \bullet = \operatorname{tb}'_1, \bullet' = \operatorname{tb}\\
0 & \mbox{ otherwise }
\end{array}\right., \
e_{\pi_C}( \bullet , \bullet') = \left\{
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & \bullet = \operatorname{L}, \bullet' = \operatorname{lf}\\
1 & \bullet = \operatorname{R}, \bullet' = \operatorname{rf}\\
0 & \mbox{ otherwise }
\end{array}\right., \\
e_{\pi_R}( \bullet , \bullet') = \left\{
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & \bullet = \operatorname{C}, \bullet' = \operatorname{lf}\\
1 & \bullet = \operatorname{R}, \bullet' = \operatorname{rf}\\
1 & \bullet = \operatorname{tb}'_2, \bullet' = \operatorname{tb}\\
0 & \mbox{ otherwise }
\end{array}\right..\end{gathered}$$ We blow up $M^3 \times W$ to form a space ${\widetilde{\beta}} \colon {M^3_{\operatorname{heat}}}{\longrightarrow}M^3 \times
W$ in a sequence of steps as follows.
First, consider the three pullbacks of the submanifold $\mathcal{B}_0 = \{ x = {\widetilde{x}} ,
y = {\widetilde{y}} , {\widetilde{t}} = 0\}\subset M^2 \times
[0, \infty)_{{\widetilde{t}}}$ defined in $$\label{eq:triple-first-blowdown}
\pi_L^{-1}(\mathcal{B}_0), \quad \pi_C^{-1}(\mathcal{B}_0), \quad \pi_R^{-1}(\mathcal{B}_0).$$ These three sets intersect pair-wise in the triple intersection: $$\label{eq:triple-first-blowdown-intersection}
\pi^{-1}_L(\mathcal{B}_0) \cap \pi^{-1}_C(\mathcal{B}_0) =
\pi^{-1}_C(\mathcal{B}_0) \cap \pi^{-1}_R(\mathcal{B}_0) =
\pi^{-1}_L(\mathcal{B}_0) \cap \pi^{-1}_R(\mathcal{B}_0) = \mathcal{S} ,$$ where $$\label{eq:51}
\mathcal{S} = {\left\{ x = x' ={\widetilde{x}} = t = t' = y - y' = y' - {\widetilde{y}} =
0 \right\} }.$$ We blow up the set $\mathcal{S}$, with appropriate homogeneities, specifically letting $$\label{eq:52}
{M^3_{\operatorname{heat}, 0}}= [M^3 \times W ; \mathcal{S} ]_{inhom},$$ with $t \sim
x^{2} \sim (x')^2 \sim {\widetilde{x}}^{2} \sim |y - y' |^{2} \sim |y' - {\widetilde{y}}|^2$, and let ${\widetilde{\beta}}_0 \colon {M^3_{\operatorname{heat}, 0}}{\longrightarrow}M^3 \times W$ denote the blowdown map. Call the introduced boundary hypersurface $\operatorname{ff_1}^\cap$. Near to $\operatorname{ff_1}^\cap$, we have polar coordinates $$\label{eq:triple-polar-first-intersection}
\begin{split}
\rho_{\cap} &= {\left(}t + x^{2} + (x')^2 + {\widetilde{x}}^{2} + |y -
y'|^{2} + |y' - {\widetilde{y}}|^2 {\right)}^{1/2}, \\
\phi^\cap &= {\left(}\frac{t'}{\rho_{\cap}^{2}} , \frac{t - t'}{\rho_{\cap}^{2}},
\frac{x}{\rho_{\cap}}, \frac{x'}{\rho_{\cap}}
\frac{{\widetilde{x}}}{\rho_{\cap}}, \frac{y - y'}{\rho_{\cap}}, \frac{y' - {\widetilde{y}}}{\rho_{\cap}}
{\right)}\\
&=: (\phi^\cap_{t'}, \phi^\cap_{t - t'}, \phi^\cap_{x}, \phi^\cap_{x'},
\phi^\cap_{{\widetilde{x}}}, \phi^\cap_{y - y'}, \phi^\cap_{y' - {\widetilde{y}}}),
\mbox{ along with } y', z, z', {\widetilde{z}}.
\end{split}$$ The asymmetry of the $y, y', {\widetilde{y}}$ in the coordinates is spurious in the sense that if one defines $\phi^\cap_{y - {\widetilde{y}}} = (y -
{\widetilde{y}})/\rho_{\cap}$, then any two of the $\phi^\cap_{y - y'}, \phi^\cap_{y' - {\widetilde{y}}}$ can be used in $\phi^\cap$ by redefining $\rho_{\cap}$ using e.g. $|y - y'|^2$ and $|y - {\widetilde{y}}|^2$ (and then using $\phi^\cap_{y - y'}, \phi^\cap_{y' - {\widetilde{y}}}$). Either set of coordinates is defined in a colar neighborhood of $\operatorname{ff_1}^\cap$.
We then blow up the closures of the lifts $$\mathcal{S}_{\bullet} := \operatorname{cl}((\pi_{\bullet} \circ
{\widetilde{\beta}}_0)^{-1}(\mathcal{B}_0) \setminus \operatorname{ff_1}^\cap),$$ i.e. the rest of the lifts of the $\mathcal{B}_0$ via the three projections, where $\bullet \in {\left\{ L, C, R \right\} }$. These are disjoint subsets and we blow them up in any order, setting $$\label{eq:triple-first-blowup}
{M^3_{\operatorname{heat}, 1}}= [{M^3_{\operatorname{heat}, 0}}; \cup_{\bullet = L, C, R} \mathcal{S}_\bullet ]_{inhom},$$ with the appropriate homogeneties, e.g. for $\mathcal{S}_L$ we have $t' \sim
x^{2} \sim (x')^2 \sim |y - y'|^2$. Again, we have a blowdown map $$\label{eq:Mheat1-blowdown}
{\widetilde{\beta}}_1 \colon {M^3_{\operatorname{heat}, 1}}{\longrightarrow}M \times M \times M \times W.$$ The new faces we call ${\operatorname{ff}_1^\bullet}$ with $\bullet \in \{ L, C, R \}$. Coordinates at ${\operatorname{ff}_1^L}$ can be determined as follows. Note that $\mathcal{S}_L$ is given in the coordinates by $\phi^\cap_{t'} = \phi^\cap_x =
\phi^\cap_{x'} = \phi^\cap_{y - y'} = 0$, and that in a neighborhood of $\mathcal{S}_L$ away from $\operatorname{ff_1}^\cap$, $\phi^\cap_{t'} \sim t'$. Thus, to match homogeneities with the blowups of the double space, we want to blow this up so that the following give polar coordinates near the intersection of ${\operatorname{ff}_1^L}$ and $\operatorname{ff_1}^\cap$: $$\label{eq:triple-polar-first-Left}
\begin{split}
\rho^L &= {\left(}\phi^\cap_{t'} + (\phi^\cap)^2_x +
(\phi^\cap)^2_{x'} + |(\phi^\cap)_{y - y'}|^2 {\right)}^{1/2}, \\
\phi^L &= {\left(}\frac{\phi^\cap_{t'}}{(\rho^L)^{2}} ,
\frac{\phi^\cap_{x}}{\rho^L}, \frac{\phi^\cap_{x'}}{\rho^L},
\frac{\phi^\cap_{y - y'}}{\rho^L} {\right)}\\
&=: (\phi^L_{t'}, \phi^L_{x}, \phi^L_{x'},
\phi^L_{y - y'}),
\mbox{ along with } y', z, z', {\widetilde{z}}, \rho_{\cap}, \phi^\cap_{{\widetilde{x}}},
\phi^\cap_{y' - {\widetilde{y}}}, \phi^\cap_{t - t'}
\end{split}$$ with functions as in . It is also possible to use simpler projective coordinates, as we will see below. Coordinates near ${\operatorname{ff}_1^R}$ can be derived similarly by switching $\phi^\cap_{t'}$ with $\phi^\cap_{t - t'}$ and $\phi^\cap_x$ with $\phi^\cap_{{\widetilde{x}}}$. The situation at ${\operatorname{ff}_1^C}$ is slightly different since, writing $\phi^\cap_t = \phi^\cap_{t'} + \phi^\cap_{t - t'}$, the pullback of $\phi^\cap_t$ on ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}, 1}}$ via $\pi_C$ vanishes at $\phi^\cap_{t'} =
0 = \phi^\cap_{t - t'}$, and thus $\mathcal{S}_C$ is codimension $1$ higher than $\mathcal{S}_\bullet$ for $\bullet = L, R$.
Here we blow up so that the following give coordinates $$\label{eq:triple-polar-first-center}
\begin{split}
\rho^C &= {\left(}\phi^\cap_{t} + (\phi^\cap)^2_x +
(\phi^\cap)^2_{{\widetilde{x}}} + |\phi^\cap_{y - {\widetilde{y}}}|^2 {\right)}^{1/2}, \\
(\phi^\cap)^C &= {\left(}\frac{\phi^\cap_{t'}}{(\rho^C)^{2}},
\frac{\phi^\cap_{t - t'}}{(\rho^C)^{2}} ,
\frac{\phi^\cap_{x}}{\rho^C}, \frac{\phi^\cap_{{\widetilde{x}}}}{\rho^C},
\frac{\phi^\cap_{y - {\widetilde{y}}}}{\rho^C} {\right)}\\
&=: (\phi^C_{t'}, \phi^C_{t - t'}, \phi^C_{x}, \phi^C_{{\widetilde{x}}},
\phi^C_{y - {\widetilde{y}}}),
\mbox{ along with } y', z, z', {\widetilde{z}}, \rho_{\cap}, \phi^\cap_{x'},
\phi^\cap_{y' - {\widetilde{y}}}.
\end{split}$$
With terminology as in Appendix \[sec:pushforward\], the maps $\pi_\bullet$ extend from the interior to b-maps $$\label{eq:cone-triple-space-projections}
{\widetilde{\pi}}_{\bullet} \colon {M^3_{\operatorname{heat}, 1}}{\longrightarrow}{M^2_{\operatorname{heat}, 1}}$$ for $\bullet \in \{L, C, R\}$ with exponent matrices $e_{{\widetilde{\pi}}_{\bullet}}$ satisfying $$\label{eq:first-exponent-matrix}
\begin{split}
e_{{\widetilde{\pi}}_{\bullet}}(\operatorname{ff}_1^\cap, \operatorname{ff_1}) &= 1,
e_{{\widetilde{\pi}}_{\bullet}}(\operatorname{ff}_1^{\bullet'}, \operatorname{ff_1}) = \delta_{\bullet,
\bullet'}, e_{{\widetilde{\pi}}_C}({\operatorname{ff}_1^L}, \operatorname{lf}) = 1,
e_{\pi_C}({\operatorname{ff}_1^R}, \operatorname{rf}) = 1, \\
e_{{\widetilde{\pi}}_R}({\operatorname{ff}_1^L}, \operatorname{lf}) &= 1, e_{{\widetilde{\pi}}_L}({\operatorname{ff}_1^R}, \operatorname{rf}) = 1,
e_{{\widetilde{\pi}}_R}({\operatorname{ff}_1^C}, \operatorname{tb}) > 0 , e_{{\widetilde{\pi}}_L}({\operatorname{ff}_1^C}, \operatorname{tb}) > 0,
\end{split}$$ where $\delta_{\bullet, \bullet'} = 1$ if $\bullet = \bullet'$ and zero otherwise. When $\bullet \in \{\operatorname{L}, \operatorname{C}, \operatorname{R}, \operatorname{tb}'_1,
\operatorname{tb}'_2 \} $, i.e. when it is the pullback of a boundary hypersurface of $M \times M \times M \times W$ via the blowdown map, then the exponent matrix satisfies with ${\widetilde{\pi}}$ replacing $\pi$.
Moreover, ${\widetilde{\pi}}_C$ is a b-fibration in the sense of Appendix \[sec:pushforward\].
The significance of the inequalites in involving $\operatorname{tb}$ is that all the distributions under consideration vanish to infinite order at $\operatorname{tb}$, and thus the pullbacks of these distributions via $\pi_R$ will vanish to infinite order at ${\operatorname{ff}_1^C}$, and the same for $\pi_L$.
We verify the lemma for for ${\widetilde{\pi}}_C$ and leave the other nearly identical calculations to the reader. That ${\widetilde{\pi}}_C$ extends to a b-map follows easily by writing the pulling back the coordinates in and writing them in terms of those in . In particular, note that the pullback $$\label{eq:38}
{\widetilde{\pi}}_C^* \rho = \rho_{\cap} \rho^C,$$ so the exponent matrix claim holds. The rest of the definitions of b-fibration are easy to check.
The extended map ${\widetilde{\pi}}_{L}$ is *not* a b-fibration as it maps the interior of $\operatorname{ff}_1^C$ to the interior of the face $\operatorname{tb}\cap
\operatorname{lf}$ due to the fact that $t = 0$ on $W$ implies that $t' = 0$ also, thus the map increases the codimension of a face. The same holds for ${\widetilde{\pi}}_R$, i.e. ${\widetilde{\pi}}_R({\operatorname{ff}_1^C}) \subset \operatorname{tb}\cap \operatorname{rf}$.
Next we must blow up the lifts of $\mathcal{B}_1$ in . Since by , ${\widetilde{\pi}}_\bullet$ only maps $\operatorname{ff}_1^{\bullet'}$ to $\operatorname{ff}_1$ if $\bullet = \bullet'$, any of the pair-wise intersections is again equal to the triple intersection $$\begin{gathered}
\mathcal{S}' = {\widetilde{\pi}}_L^{-1}(\mathcal{B}_1) \cap {\widetilde{\pi}}_C
^{-1}(\mathcal{B}_1) = {\widetilde{\pi}}_C
^{-1}(\mathcal{B}_1) \cap {\widetilde{\pi}}_R
^{-1}(\mathcal{B}_1)
= {\widetilde{\pi}}_L
^{-1}(\mathcal{B}_1) \cap {\widetilde{\pi}}_R
^{-1}(\mathcal{B}_1) .\end{gathered}$$ Indeed, each is a subset of $\operatorname{ff}_1^\cap$, and in the polar coordinates defined on the interior of $\operatorname{ff}_1^\cap$, using the definition of $\mathcal{B}_1$ in $$\label{eq:triple-intersection-second-round}
\mathcal{S}' = {\left\{ \rho = \phi^\cap_{t'} = \phi^\cap_{t - t'} = 0, \phi^\cap_x = \phi^\cap_{x'} =
\phi^\cap_{{\widetilde{x}}}, \phi^\cap_{y - y'} = \phi^\cap_{y - {\widetilde{y}}} = 0 \right\} },$$ with no restrictions on $y', z, z', {\widetilde{z}} $. We form a space $[{M^3_{\operatorname{heat}, 1}}; \mathcal{S}']_{inhom}$ with appropriate homogeneities. To understand this space, note first that near $\mathcal{S}'$ we can use projective coordinates on $\operatorname{ff_1}^\cap$, concretely we can take for example ${\widetilde{x}}$ to be a boundary defining function of $\operatorname{ff_1}\cap$ and coordinates ${\widetilde{x}}, t'/{\widetilde{x}}^2, (t - t')/{\widetilde{x}}^2, x/{\widetilde{x}},
x'/{\widetilde{x}}, (y - y')/{\widetilde{x}}, (y' - {\widetilde{y}})/{\widetilde{x}}$ to replace the polar coordinates in . Then the homogeneities are determined by those in the $\operatorname{ff}$ blowdown of the double space, and one has coordinates $$\label{eq:polarsecondnmodel-triple}
\begin{split}
\overline{\rho}_{\cap} &= {\left(}{\widetilde{x}}^{2(k - 1)} + \frac{t}{{\widetilde{x}}^2} +
(\frac{x - {\widetilde{x}}}{{\widetilde{x}}})^2 + (\frac{x' - {\widetilde{x}}}{{\widetilde{x}}})^2
+ (\frac{|y - {\widetilde{y}}|}{{\widetilde{x}}})^{2} + (\frac{|y' -
{\widetilde{y}}|}{{\widetilde{x}}})^{2} {\right)}^{1/2(k-1)}, \\
\overline{\phi} &:= (\overline{\phi}_{{\widetilde{x}}}, \overline{\phi}_{t'},
\overline{\phi}_{t - t'},
\overline{\phi}_{x - {\widetilde{x}}}, \overline{\phi}_{x' - {\widetilde{x}}},
\overline{\phi}_{y - {\widetilde{y}}},
\overline{\phi}_{y' - {\widetilde{y}}}) \\
& = {\left(}\frac{{\widetilde{x}}}{\overline{\rho}_\cap} ,
\frac{t'}{{\widetilde{x}}^2\overline{\rho}_\cap^{2(k-1)}}, \frac{t -
t'}{{\widetilde{x}}^2\overline{\rho}_\cap^{2(k-1)}}
\frac{x - {\widetilde{x}}}{{\widetilde{x}}\overline{\rho}_\cap^{(k-1)}}, \frac{x' -
{\widetilde{x}}}{{\widetilde{x}}\overline{\rho}_\cap^{(k-1)}}
\frac{y - {\widetilde{y}}}{{\widetilde{x}}\overline{\rho}_\cap^{(k-1)}}, \frac{y' - {\widetilde{y}}}{{\widetilde{x}}\overline{\rho}_\cap^{(k-1)}}
{\right)}\mbox{ along with }
{\widetilde{y}}, z, z', {\widetilde{z}}.
\end{split}$$ One can also take coordinates in which $x, x', {\widetilde{x}}$ are permuted, and the same with $y, y', {\widetilde{y}}$. $$\mbox{ We let $\operatorname{ff}^\cap$ denote the introduced boundary hypersurface.}$$
The lifts of the ${\widetilde{\pi}}_\bullet^{-1}(\mathcal{B}_1)$ minus their intersections now have disjoint closures. For example, we have $${\widetilde{\pi}}_{\operatorname{L}}^{-1}(\mathcal{B}_1) \cap \operatorname{ff_1}^\cap \setminus \operatorname{ff}^\cap =
\{ \overline{\phi}_{t'} = \overline{\phi}_{x - x'} =
\overline{\phi}_{y - y'} = 0 \}$$ while $${\widetilde{\pi}}_{\operatorname{C}}^{-1}(\mathcal{B}_1) \cap \operatorname{ff_1}^\cap \setminus \operatorname{ff}^\cap =
\{
\overline{\phi}_{t} = \overline{\phi}_{x -{\widetilde{x}}} =
\overline{\phi}_{y - {\widetilde{y}}} = 0 \},$$ where $ \overline{\phi}_{t} = \overline{\phi}_{t'} +
\overline{\phi}_{t - t'}$ and $\overline{\phi}_{x -{\widetilde{x}}} =
\overline{\phi}_{x -x'} + \overline{\phi}_{x' -{\widetilde{x}}}$ and for ${\widetilde{\pi}}_{\operatorname{R}}$ we have $\overline{\psi}_{x'} = \psi_{t - t'}
= 0, \psi_{y'} = 0$; since $|\overline{\phi}| = 1$, these sets are disjoint. Furthermore, the pullbacks satisfy that $${\widetilde{\pi}}_{\bullet}^{-1}(\mathcal{B}_1) \cap \operatorname{ff}_1^{\bullet'} =
\delta_{\bullet, \bullet'},$$ for $\bullet, \bullet' \in \{ R, C, L \}$, and each intersection is straightforward to write down, e.g. with coordinates as in , $${\widetilde{\pi}}_{\operatorname{C}}^{-1}(\mathcal{B}_1) \cap {\operatorname{ff}_1^C}=
\{ \rho^C = \phi^C_{t'} = \phi^C_{t - t'} =
\phi^C_{x} - \phi^C_{{\widetilde{x}}} = 0,
\phi^C_{y - {\widetilde{y}}} = 0\} .$$ We will blow up first the ${\widetilde{\pi}}_\bullet^{-1}(\mathcal{B}_1) \cap \operatorname{ff}_1^\cap$ and then the ${\widetilde{\pi}}_\bullet^{-1}(\mathcal{B}_1) \cap \operatorname{ff}_1^\bullet$ with for $\bullet \in
\{L, C, R\}$.
In the interior of $\operatorname{ff}_1^\bullet$ with $\bullet \in \{ L, R\}$ the blow ups of the pullbacks of $\mathcal{B}_1$ are particularly easy to understand as there we can just pullback the projective coordinates in and use these together with the other uneffected coordinates to obtain projective coordinates e.g.near $\pi_{\operatorname{L}} \circ {\widetilde{\beta}}_0^{-1}(\mathcal{B}_1) \cap {\operatorname{ff}_1^L}$ valid near the interior of the introduced boundary hypersurface. $$\label{eq:projectivesecondmodle-interior-side-triple-right}
x', \quad \sigma = \frac{s - 1}{(x')^{k-1}} = \frac{x -
x'}{(x')^{k}}, \quad \eta' = \frac{y -
y'}{(x')^{k}}, \quad T' = \frac{t'}{(x')^{2k}},$$ together with ${\widetilde{w}}, t$ on the introduced boundary hypersurface. In the interior of $\operatorname{ff}_1^C$, one needs only to remember that the vanishing of the pullback of the $\phi_t$ coordinate implies the vanishing of both $\phi_{t'}$ and $\phi_{t - t'}$. One can use ${\widetilde{x}}$ as a boundary defining function and then two projective time coordinates $T' = t'/{\widetilde{x}}^{2k}$ and ${\widetilde{T}} = (t - t')/{\widetilde{x}}^{2k}$. In the interior of $\operatorname{ff}_1^{\cap}$ but away from $\operatorname{ff}^\cap$, we want the same homogeneities, but now the pullback of ${\widetilde{x'}}$ in the interior of $\operatorname{ff}^\cap$ is proportional to $\rho^\cap$ and in the interior of the introduced blow up we will have coordinates as in with all the functions replaced by their $\phi$ couterparts, e.g. $x'$ replaced by $\phi_{x'}$ and $\frac{y - {\widetilde{y}}}{(x')^{k}}$ replaced by $\psi_{y - y' }/\phi_{x'}$.
We focus at the intersection $\operatorname{ff_1}^\cap \cap \operatorname{ff_1}^\bullet$, first with $\bullet = C$. Near $\mathcal{S}_C$, we can simplify things slightly by using projective coordinates, derived from by noting that $\phi^\cap_{{\widetilde{x}}}$ is non-zero at $\operatorname{ff_1}^\cap \cap \operatorname{ff_1}^\bullet \cap
\ \mathcal{S}_C$ and can thus be used as a boundary defining function. Specifically, take $${\widetilde{{\mathcal{X}}}} = \phi^\cap_{{\widetilde{x}}},\ {\mathcal{X}}=
\frac{x}{{\widetilde{x}}},\ {\mathcal{T}}=
\frac{t}{{\widetilde{x}}^2},\ {\mathcal{Y}}= \frac{y - {\widetilde{y}}}{{\widetilde{x}}},$$ together with the other (non-polar) coordinates in . Blowing up to introduce a face $\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, C}$, have $$\begin{split}
{\mathcal{P}}&= ({\mathcal{T}}+ \rho_\cap^{2(k - 1)} + ({\mathcal{X}}- 1)^2 + |{\mathcal{Y}}|^2
)^{1/(2(k -1))}, \\
{\Psi}&= ({\mathcal{T}}/{\mathcal{P}}^{2(k-1)} , \rho_\cap/{\mathcal{P}}, ({\mathcal{X}}- 1)/{\mathcal{P}}^{k-1} , {\mathcal{Y}}/{\mathcal{P}}^{k-1}
),
\end{split}$$ but it follows that $\mathcal{S}_1 \cap \operatorname{ff_1}^C$ intersects $\operatorname{ff}^{\cap,
C}$ at ${\Psi}= (0, 1, 0, 0)$ and thus $\rho^\cap$ can be used as a boundary defining function. Again working near $\mathcal{S}_C$ we can take $\rho_\cap$ as a boundary defining function for $\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, C}$ and use projective coordinates $ \rho_\cap , {\mathcal{T}}/\rho_\cap^{2(k-1)}, ({\mathcal{X}}- 1)/\rho_{\cap}^{k-1} , {\mathcal{Y}}/\rho_{\cap}^{k-1} $. Using these we blow up $\mathcal{S}_1 \cap \operatorname{ff_1}^C$ with $$\begin{split}
{\overline{\mathcal{P}}}&= (\frac{{\mathcal{T}}}{\rho_{\cap}^{2(k-1)}} +
(\phi^{\cap}_{{\widetilde{x}}})^{2(k - 1)} + \frac{({\mathcal{X}}-
1)^2}{\rho_{\cap}^{k-1}}+ \frac{|{\mathcal{Y}}|^2}{\rho_{\cap}^{k-1}}
)^{1/(2(k -1))}, \\
{\overline{\Psi}}&= (\frac{{\mathcal{T}}}{({\overline{\mathcal{P}}}\rho_\cap)^{2(k-1)}} , \frac{\phi^{\cap}_{{\widetilde{x}}}}{{\overline{\mathcal{P}}}} , \frac{{\mathcal{X}}- 1}{({\overline{\mathcal{P}}}\rho_\cap)^{k-1}} , \frac{{\mathcal{Y}}}{({\overline{\mathcal{P}}}\rho_\cap)^{k-1}}
) \\
&= (\frac{t}{{\widetilde{x}}^2({\overline{\mathcal{P}}}\rho_\cap)^{2(k-1)}} ,
\frac{{\widetilde{x}}}{{\overline{\mathcal{P}}}\rho_\cap} , \frac{x- {\widetilde{x}}}{{\widetilde{x}}({\overline{\mathcal{P}}}\rho_\cap)^{k-1}} ,
\frac{y - {\widetilde{y}}}{{\widetilde{x}}({\overline{\mathcal{P}}}\rho_\cap)^{k-1}}
),
\end{split}$$ and this is the final blow up of $\mathcal{S}_C$. The blowups for $\mathcal{S}_{L}, \mathcal{S}_R$ are similar and left to the reader.
The above construction yields a space and blowdown map $$\label{eq:real-triple-blowdown}
{\widetilde{\beta}} \colon {M^3_{\operatorname{heat}}}{\longrightarrow}M \times M \times M \times W,$$ such that the maps ${\widetilde{\pi}}_\bullet$ from extend to b-maps ${{\overline{\pi}}}_\bullet \colon {M^3_{\operatorname{heat}}}{\longrightarrow}{M^2_{\operatorname{heat}, 2}}$ with exponent matrix satisfying , (with $\pi$ and ${\widetilde{\pi}}$ replaced by ${{\overline{\pi}}}$), and $$\label{eq:second-exponent-matrix}
\begin{split}
e_{{{\overline{\pi}}}_{\bullet}}(\operatorname{ff}^\cap, \operatorname{ff}) = 1, \quad
e_{{{\overline{\pi}}}_{\bullet}}(\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, \bullet'}, \operatorname{ff}) =
e_{{{\overline{\pi}}}_{\bullet}}(\operatorname{ff}^{\bullet'}, \operatorname{ff}) &= \delta_{\bullet,
\bullet'} \\
e_{{{\overline{\pi}}}_{L}}(\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, R}, \operatorname{ff_1}) = e_{{{\overline{\pi}}}_{R}}(\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, L},
\operatorname{ff_1}) = e_{{{\overline{\pi}}}_{C}}(\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, R}, \operatorname{ff_1}) =
e_{{{\overline{\pi}}}_{C}}(\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, L}, \operatorname{ff_1}) &= 1 \\
e_{{{\overline{\pi}}}_{L}}(\operatorname{ff}^{R}, \operatorname{rf}) = e_{{{\overline{\pi}}}_{R}}(\operatorname{ff}^{L},
\operatorname{lf}) = e_{{{\overline{\pi}}}_{C}}(\operatorname{ff}^{R}, \operatorname{rf}) =
e_{{{\overline{\pi}}}_{C}}(\operatorname{ff}^{L}, \operatorname{lf}) &= 1 \\
e_{{{\overline{\pi}}}_{L}}(\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, C}, \operatorname{tb}), e_{{{\overline{\pi}}}_{L}}(\operatorname{ff}^{C}, \operatorname{tb}),
e_{{{\overline{\pi}}}_{R}}(\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, C}, \operatorname{tb}), e_{{{\overline{\pi}}}_{R}}(\operatorname{ff}^{C}, \operatorname{tb})
&\ge 1.
\end{split}$$ Moreover, apart from components of $e_{{{\overline{\pi}}}_{\bullet}}(\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, C},
\bullet')$ and $e_{{{\overline{\pi}}}_{\bullet}}(\operatorname{ff}^{C}, \bullet')$ with $\bullet
\in \{L, R \}$, all other components are zero.
Again, ${{\overline{\pi}}}_C$ is a b-fibration.
Again, we focus on ${{\overline{\pi}}}_C$. To check that ${\widetilde{\pi}}_C$ extends to a $b-map$, we pull back the polar coordinates $\overline{\rho},
\overline{\phi}, {\widetilde{y}}, z, {\widetilde{z}},$ from defined at $\operatorname{ff}$ in ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}, 2}}$. First, we compute $$\begin{split}
{\widetilde{\pi}}_C^* {\overline{\rho}} &= {\widetilde{\pi}}_C^*({\left(}(t/{\widetilde{x}}^2) + {\widetilde{x}}^{2(k - 1)} + (s - 1)^2
+ (|y - {\widetilde{y}}|/{\widetilde{x}})^{2} {\right)}^{1/2(k-1)}) \\
&= {\left(}{\mathcal{T}}+ {\widetilde{x}}^{2(k - 1)} + ({\mathcal{X}}- 1)^2
+ |{\mathcal{Y}}|^{2} {\right)}^{1/2(k-1)} \\
&= {\overline{\mathcal{P}}}\rho_\cap,
\end{split}$$ and then note that $$\begin{split}
{\widetilde{\pi}}_C^* {\overline{\phi}} &= {\widetilde{\pi}}_C^*{\left(}\frac{t}{{\widetilde{x}}^2\overline{\rho}^{2(k-1)}},
\frac{{\widetilde{x}}}{\overline{\rho}} , \frac{x -
{\widetilde{x}}}{{\widetilde{x}}\overline{\rho}^{(k-1)}}, \frac{y -
{\widetilde{y}}}{{\widetilde{x}}\overline{\rho}^{(k-1)}} {\right)}\\
&= {\left(}\frac{t}{{\widetilde{x}}^2({\overline{\mathcal{P}}}\rho_{\cap})^{2(k-1)}},
\frac{{\widetilde{x}}}{{\overline{\mathcal{P}}}\rho_{\cap}} , \frac{x -
{\widetilde{x}}}{{\widetilde{x}}({\overline{\mathcal{P}}}\rho_{\cap})^{(k-1)}}, \frac{y -
{\widetilde{y}}}{{\widetilde{x}}({\overline{\mathcal{P}}}\rho_{\cap})^{(k-1)}} {\right)}\\
&= {\overline{\Psi}}.
\end{split}$$ This establishes both claims for ${{\overline{\pi}}}_C$. The $R, L$ case are left to the reader.
\[thm:composition\] For $i = 1, 2$, let $A_i \in \mathcal{A}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}^{\mathcal{E}_i}({M^2_{\operatorname{heat}, 2}})$ with the index sets $\mathcal{E}_i$ satisfying $\mathcal{E}_i(\operatorname{ff_1})
\ge - 3 - {b}- kf$, $\mathcal{E}_i(\operatorname{ff}) \ge - kn - 2k$, $\mathcal{E}_i(\operatorname{lf}) = \mathcal{E}_i(\operatorname{tb}) = \varnothing$ and $\mathcal{E}_i(\operatorname{rf})$ satisfying . Then $A_3 := \iint_0^t A_1(w, w', t') A_2(w', {\widetilde{w}}, t - t')
\operatorname{dVol}_{w'} dt'$ lies in $\mathcal{A}_{\operatorname{\mathrm {phg}}}^{\mathcal{E}_3}({M^2_{\operatorname{heat}, 2}})$ where for any $\epsilon > 0$, $$\label{eq:composition-index-sets}
\begin{split}
\inf \mathcal{E}_3(\operatorname{ff_1}) &\ge \inf \mathcal{E}_1(\operatorname{ff_1}) +
\inf \mathcal{E}_2(\operatorname{ff_1}) + 3 + {b}+ kf - \epsilon, \\
\inf \mathcal{E}_3(\operatorname{ff}) &\ge \inf \mathcal{E}_1(\operatorname{ff}) +
\inf \mathcal{E}_2(\operatorname{ff}) + kn + 2k - \epsilon.
\end{split}$$
The constants $kn + 2k$ and $3 + {b}+ kf$ in should be interpreted, for instance in the case of $\operatorname{ff}$, as saying that the (Volterra type) composition of two operators given by Schwartz kernels as in the theorem has Schwartz kernel whose leading order asymptotic behavior at $\operatorname{ff}$ increases *relative to the rate* $-kn - 2k$, in particular if both the composed operators grow like $-kn - 2k$ then so does the composition. These are, incidentally, the exact rates of blowup of the heat kernel times $t^{-1}$ at the faces $\operatorname{ff}$ and $\operatorname{ff_1}$, and furthermore the fact that the errors $t^{-1}Q$ in vanish one order faster than $t^{-1} H$ means, as described above, that taking powers makes them vanish at increasing rates at both $\operatorname{ff}$ and $\operatorname{ff_1}$.
We write $A_3$ as the pushforward of a b-density and then apply the Pushforward Theorem from Section \[sec:pushforward\]. First we define a non-vanishing b-density $\mu_0$ on $M \times M \times M
\times W$ as follows. We let $\nu$ be a non-vanishing b-density on $M$ satisfying $\nu = a|\frac{dx dy
dz}{x}|$ for a smooth nonvanishing function $a$ near the boundary, and consider $$\mu_0 = \nu \ \nu' \ {\widetilde{\nu}} \ | \frac{dt' dt}{t' (t - t')} |$$ where $\nu', {\widetilde{\nu}}$ are equal to $\nu$ in the primed and tilded coordinates, respectively. Since the blowdown map ${\widetilde{\beta}}$ from is a b-map, ${\widetilde{\beta}}^* \mu_0$ is a b-density on ${M^3_{\operatorname{heat}}}$, and one checks that $${\widetilde{\beta}}^* \mu_0 = G {\overline{\mu}}_0,\label{eq:G}$$ for a non-vanishing b-density ${\overline{\mu}}_0$ on ${M^3_{\operatorname{heat}}}$ and $G \in
C^\infty({M^3_{\operatorname{heat}}})$ satisfying that for some non-vanishing smooth function $G'$, $$\begin{split}
G &= G' (\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^L}\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^C}\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^R})^{{b}}
\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^\cap}^{2 {b}}
(\rho_{\operatorname{ff}^L}\rho_{\operatorname{ff}^C}\rho_{\operatorname{ff}^R})^{k{b}+ k - 1} \\
&\qquad \times (\rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{\cap,L}}\rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, C}}\rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, R}})^{(k
+1) {b}+ k - 1} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{\cap}}^{2k {b}+ 2(k-1)}.
\end{split}$$ Then we can write the desired pushforward as a pushforward of a b-density, specifically $$\label{eq:thing-you-want-to-compute}
\begin{split}
A_3 \ (\nu \ {\widetilde{\nu}} \ |\frac{dt}{t}|) &= (\pi_C)_* {\left(}\pi_L^* A_1
\pi_R^*A_2 \cdot ((t'/t) (t - t')) F(w') \mu_0 {\right)}\\
&= ({{\overline{\pi}}}_C)_* {\left(}{{\overline{\pi}}}_L^* A_1
{{\overline{\pi}}}_R^*A_2 \cdot {\widetilde{\beta}}^* ( (t'/t) (t - t') F(w') \mu_0 ) {\right)}\end{split}$$ where $F$ is the function defined by $\operatorname{dVol}_g= F \nu$ and in particular $$F = a \ x^{kf + 1}$$ where $a$ is a non-vanishing polyhomogeneous function on $M$, and $\nu, {\widetilde{\nu}}$ are the pullbacks of the density $\nu$ above to the left and right spacial factors of $M \times M \times \mathbb{R}^+$. To find the asymptotics of $A_3$ itself we must compute the asymptotics of the densities on the left hand side of ; Letting $\beta_2$ again denote the blowdown map ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}, 2}}{\longrightarrow}M \times M \times [0, \infty)$ in , we check that $$\beta_2^*((\pi_L')^*\nu \ (\pi_R')^* \nu \frac{dt}{t})=
\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}}^{{b}} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}}^{{b}k + k - 1 } \mu_2,$$ where $\mu_2$ is a non-vanishing b-density on ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}, 2}}$. Thus from , if the distribution $({{\overline{\pi}}}_C)_* ( {{\overline{\pi}}}_L^* A_1
{{\overline{\pi}}}_R^*A_2 \cdot {\widetilde{\beta}}^* ( (t'/t) (t - t') F(w') \mu_0 ) )$ is polyhomogeneous with index set $\mathcal{E}_3'$ then $A_3$ is phg with index set $\mathcal{E}_3$ satisfying $$\label{eq:real-index-set}
\mathcal{E}_3(\operatorname{ff_1}) = \mathcal{E}_3'(\operatorname{ff_1}) - {b}, \quad
\mathcal{E}_3(\operatorname{ff}) = \mathcal{E}_3'(\operatorname{ff}) - (k {b}+ k - 1),$$ and $\mathcal{E}_3(\bullet) = \mathcal{E}_3'(\bullet)$ otherwise.
Thus the index family of ${{\overline{\pi}}}_L^* A_1
{{\overline{\pi}}}_R^*A_2 \cdot {\widetilde{\beta}}^* ( (t'/t) (t - t') F(w') )$ must be determined. To determine ${{\overline{\pi}}}_L^* A_1$, we see that, at a bhs $H$ of ${M^3_{\operatorname{heat}}}$, the index set of ${{\overline{\pi}}}_L^* A_1$ is simply the index set of $A_1$ at the bhs $H'$ of ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}, 2}}$ at which $H$ is incident. Thus from our work above we see that ${{\overline{\pi}}}_L^* A_1$ has index set ${\overline{\mathcal{E}}}_1$ satisfying $$\begin{split}
{\overline{\mathcal{E}}}_1(\operatorname{L}) &= {\mathcal{E}}_1(\operatorname{lf}) = \varnothing
\\
{\overline{\mathcal{E}}}_1(\operatorname{C}) = {\overline{\mathcal{E}}}_1(\operatorname{ff_1}^R) =
{\overline{\mathcal{E}}}_1(\operatorname{ff}^R)
&= \mathcal{E}_1(\operatorname{rf}) \\
{\overline{\mathcal{E}}}_1(\operatorname{tb}'_1) = {\overline{\mathcal{E}}}_1(\operatorname{ff_1}^C) =
{\overline{\mathcal{E}}}_1(\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, C}) =
{\overline{\mathcal{E}}}_1(\operatorname{ff}^{C}) &= \mathcal{E}_1(\operatorname{tb}) = \varnothing
\\
{\overline{\mathcal{E}}}_1(\operatorname{ff_1}^\cap) = {\overline{\mathcal{E}}}_1(\operatorname{ff_1}^L) =
{\overline{\mathcal{E}}}_1(\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, R})
&= \mathcal{E}_1(\operatorname{ff_1}) \\
{\overline{\mathcal{E}}}_1(\operatorname{ff}^\cap) = {\overline{\mathcal{E}}}_1(\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, L}) =
{\overline{\mathcal{E}}}_1(\operatorname{ff}^L) &= \mathcal{E}_1(\operatorname{ff}) \\
{\overline{\mathcal{E}}}_1(\operatorname{R}) & = \mathbb{Z},
\end{split}$$ the last line coming from the fact that ${{\overline{\pi}}}_L^* A_1$ is independent of ${\widetilde{x}}$, in particular is smooth up to $\operatorname{R}$. The index set ${\overline{\mathcal{E}}}_2$ of ${{\overline{\pi}}}_R^* A_2$ has the same expression in terms of $\mathcal{E}_2$ but with all ‘R’s switched with ‘L’s, all $\operatorname{lf}$’s with $\operatorname{rf}$’s, and all $1$’s with $2$’s (except of course for the $1$ in the subscript of $\operatorname{ff_1}$). For example, (c.f. the second line above) ${\overline{\mathcal{E}}}_2(\operatorname{C}), {\overline{\mathcal{E}}}_2(\operatorname{ff_1}^L),
{\overline{\mathcal{E}}}_2(\operatorname{ff}^L)$ are all equal to $\mathcal{E}_2(\operatorname{lf})$, which is assumed to be $\varnothing$. If we define the operation $\mathcal{E}_1 \oplus \mathcal{E}_2$ on index sets to denote the index set whose elements are sums of elements of the two index sets, It follows that ${{\overline{\pi}}}_L^* A_1 \
{{\overline{\pi}}}_R^* A_2$ is polyhomogeneous with index set $\mathcal{F}$ satisfying $$\label{eq:4}
\begin{split}
\{ \mathcal{F}(\operatorname{C}) , \mathcal{F}(\operatorname{L}) , \mathcal{F}(\operatorname{ff_1}^L) ,
\mathcal{F}(\operatorname{ff}^L) ,
\mathcal{F}(\operatorname{tb}'_1) , \mathcal{F}(\operatorname{tb}'_2) , \mathcal{F}(\operatorname{ff_1}^C) ,
\mathcal{F}(\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, C}) ,
\mathcal{F}(\operatorname{ff}^{C}) \} & = \varnothing
\\
\mathcal{F}(\operatorname{ff_1}^\cap) = \mathcal{E}_1(\operatorname{ff_1}) \oplus
\mathcal{E}_2(\operatorname{ff_1}), \quad \mathcal{F}(\operatorname{ff}^\cap) = \mathcal{E}_1(\operatorname{ff}) \oplus
\mathcal{E}_2(\operatorname{ff}), \quad \mathcal{F}(\operatorname{R})
= \mathcal{E}_2(\operatorname{rf}) &\\
\mathcal{F}(\operatorname{ff_1}^R) = \mathcal{E}_1(\operatorname{rf}) \oplus
\mathcal{E}_2(\operatorname{ff_1}), \quad \mathcal{F}(\operatorname{ff}^R) = \mathcal{E}_1(\operatorname{rf})
\oplus \mathcal{E}_2(\operatorname{ff}) & \\
\mathcal{F}(\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, R}) = \mathcal{E}_1(\operatorname{ff_1}) \oplus
\mathcal{E}_2(\operatorname{ff}), \quad \mathcal{F}(\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, L}) = \mathcal{E}_1(\operatorname{ff}) \oplus \mathcal{E}_2(\operatorname{ff_1})&.
\end{split}$$
Now we compute the asymptotics of the term ${\widetilde{\beta}}^* ( ((t'/t) (t - t')) F(w') \mu_0 )
= {\widetilde{\beta}}^* ( ((t'/t) (t - t')) F(w')) G {\overline{\mu}}_0 $ with $G$ in . First, write ${\widetilde{\beta}}^* ( (t
(t - t')) F(w')) = {\overline{\pi}}_L^*({\mathfrak{t}}) {\overline{\pi}}_R^*({\mathfrak{t}})
{\overline{\pi}}^*_R(F)$ where $F$ is thought of as a function of the left factor of $M \times M \times [0, \infty)$. Recalling $\rho$, ${\overline{\rho}}$ from and , respectively, and letting $a$ denote a polyhomogeneous function which is smooth and non-vanishing up to boundary hypersurfaces $\bullet$ for which $\mathcal{F}(\bullet) \neq \varnothing$ (and whose value will change from line to line), we compute $$\begin{split}
{\widetilde{\beta}}^* ( \frac{t' (t - t')}{t} F(w'))
&= a \ \frac{{\overline{\pi}}_L^*(\rho^2 {\overline{\rho}}^{2k}) {\overline{\pi}}_R^*(\rho^2
{\overline{\rho}}^{2k})}{{\overline{\pi}}^*_C(\rho^2 {\overline{\rho}}^{2k})}
{\overline{\pi}}^*_R((\rho_{\operatorname{lf}} \rho {\overline{\rho}})^{kf + 1}) \\
&= a \ \frac{(\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^\cap} \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^L} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, R}})^2
(\rho_{\operatorname{ff}^\cap} \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^{\cap, L}} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{L}})^{2k}}{(\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^\cap} \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^C} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, R}}\rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, L}})^2
(\rho_{\operatorname{ff}^\cap} \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^{\cap, C}} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{C}})^{2k}}
\\
&\quad \times (\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^\cap} \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^R} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, L}})^2
(\rho_{\operatorname{ff}^\cap} \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^{\cap, R}} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{R}})^{2k}
\\
&\quad \times (\rho_C \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^L} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}^L} \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^{\cap}}
\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^R} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, L}} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}^\cap}
\rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, R}} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{R}})^{kf + 1} \\
&= a \ ( \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^L})^2
(\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^{\cap, L}} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{L}})^{2k}
(\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^\cap} \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^R})^2
(\rho_{\operatorname{ff}^\cap} \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^{\cap, R}} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{R}})^{2k}
\\
&\quad \times (\rho_C \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^L} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}^L} \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^{\cap}}
\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^R} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, L}} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}^\cap}
\rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, R}} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{R}})^{kf + 1} \\
&= a \ (\rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^\cap} \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^R})^2(\rho_{\operatorname{ff}^\cap} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, L}} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, R}}
\rho_{\operatorname{ff}^R})^{2k} \\
&\quad \times ( \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^R} \rho_{\operatorname{ff_1}^{\cap}}
\rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{\cap}} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, R}}
\rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, L}} \rho_{\operatorname{ff}^{R}})^{kf + 1}.
\end{split}$$ Putting this all together, we see that ${{\overline{\pi}}}_L^* A_1
{{\overline{\pi}}}_R^*A_2 \cdot {\widetilde{\beta}}^* ( ((t'/t) (t - t')) F(w') \mu_0 )$ is polyhomogeneous with index set ${\overline{\mathcal{F}}}$ $$\label{eq:high-quality-mathematics}
\begin{split}
{\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{ff_1}^\cap) &= \mathcal{E}_1(\operatorname{ff_1}) \oplus
\mathcal{E}_2(\operatorname{ff_1}) + (3 + kf + 2b), \\ {\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{ff}^\cap) &= \mathcal{E}_1(\operatorname{ff}) \oplus
\mathcal{E}_2(\operatorname{ff}) + (1 + 2k + kf + 2kb), \\ {\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{R})
&= \mathcal{E}_2(\operatorname{rf}) \\
{\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{ff_1}^R) &= \mathcal{E}_1(\operatorname{rf}) \oplus
\mathcal{E}_2(\operatorname{ff_1}) + (3 + kf + b), \\ {\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{ff}^R) &= \mathcal{E}_1(\operatorname{rf})
\oplus \mathcal{E}_2(\operatorname{ff}) + (1 + 2k + kf +kb) \\
{\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, R}) &= \mathcal{E}_1(\operatorname{ff_1}) \oplus
\mathcal{E}_2(\operatorname{ff}) + (1 + 2k + kf + (k + 1)b), \\
{\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, L}) &= \mathcal{E}_1(\operatorname{ff}) \oplus
\mathcal{E}_2(\operatorname{ff_1}) + (1 + 2k + kf + (k + 1)b),
\end{split}$$ and ${\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\bullet) = \varnothing$ for all other values of $\bullet$.
Now we apply Theorem \[thm:pushforward\] to analyze $ ({\overline{\pi}}_C)_* {\left(}\pi_L^* A_1 \pi_R^*A_2 \cdot ((t'/t) (t - t')) F(w') \mu_0 {\right)}$ from . To check that the conditions of the theorem hold, we first recall that ${\overline{\pi}}_C$ is a b-fibration. Also, note that $e_{{\overline{\pi}}_C}(\operatorname{C}, H') = e_{{\overline{\pi}}_C}(\operatorname{tb}_1', H') =
e_{{\overline{\pi}}_C}(\operatorname{tb}_2', H') = 0$ for all $H' \in
\mathcal{M}({M^2_{\operatorname{heat}, 2}})$, and so we must check the inte grability condition there, but by below we have ${\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{C}) = {\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{tb}_1') =
{\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{tb}_2') = \varnothing$, so the integrability condition holds. Thus $ A_3 (\pi_L')^*\nu \ (\pi_R')^* \nu$ is phg on ${M^2_{\operatorname{heat}, 2}}$ with index set $\mathcal{E}_3'$ satisfying $$\label{eq:6}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{E}_3'(\operatorname{lf})&= {\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{L}) \ {\overline{\cup}} \
{\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{ff_1}^L) \ {\overline{\cup}} \ {\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{ff}^L) = \varnothing\\
\mathcal{E}_3'(\operatorname{rf})&= {\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{R}) \ {\overline{\cup}} \
{\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{ff_1}^R) \ {\overline{\cup}} \ {\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{ff}^R)\\
\mathcal{E}_3'(\operatorname{ff_1})&= {\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{ff_1}^\cap) \ {\overline{\cup}} \
{\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{ff_1}^\cap) \ {\overline{\cup}} \ {\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{ff}^{\cap,
L}) \ {\overline{\cup}} \ {\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, R})\\
\mathcal{E}_3'(\operatorname{ff})&= {\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{ff}^\cap) \ {\overline{\cup}} \
{\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{ff}^{\cap, C}) \ {\overline{\cup}} \
{\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{ff}^{C}) = {\overline{\mathcal{F}}}(\operatorname{ff}^\cap)\\
\mathcal{E}_3'(\operatorname{tb})&= \varnothing,
\end{split}$$ where we used from below that various bhs’s have infinite order vanishing. From this we see that the bounds in Proposition \[thm:composition\] hold, in particular that for any $\epsilon > 0$, $$\begin{split}
\inf \mathcal{E}_3'(\operatorname{ff_1}) \ge \inf \mathcal{E}_1(\operatorname{ff_1}) + \inf
\mathcal{E}_2(\operatorname{ff_1}) + 3 + kf + 2b - \epsilon,\\
\mathcal{E}_3'(\operatorname{ff}) =
\inf \mathcal{E}_1(\operatorname{ff}) + \inf \mathcal{E}_2(\operatorname{ff}) + 1 + k + kn - \epsilon,
\end{split}$$ and thus by the acutal index set $\mathcal{E}_3$ of $A_3$ satisfies , and the proof is complete.
[10]{}
M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegun. , volume 55 of [*National Bureau of Standards Applied Mathematics Series*]{}. For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1964.
P. Albin, [É]{}. Leichtnam, R. Mazzeo, and P. Piazza. The signature package on [W]{}itt spaces. , 45(2):241–310, 2012.
P. Albin, [É]{}. Leichtnam, R. Mazzeo, and P. Piazza. Hodge theory on [C]{}heeger spaces. 2013. Available online.
P. Albin and F. Rochon. Families index for manifolds with hyperbolic cusp singularities. , (4):625–697, 2009.
N. Berline, E. Getzler, and M. Vergne. . Grundlehren Text Editions. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2004. Corrected reprint of the 1992 original.
J. Br[ü]{}ning and R. Seeley. The expansion of the resolvent near a singular stratum of conical type. , 95(2):255–290, 1991.
J. Cheeger. On the spectral geometry of spaces with cone-like singularities. , 76(5):2103–2106, 1979.
J. Cheeger. On the [H]{}odge theory of [R]{}iemannian pseudomanifolds. In [*Geometry of the [L]{}aplace operator ([P]{}roc. [S]{}ympos. [P]{}ure [M]{}ath., [U]{}niv. [H]{}awaii, [H]{}onolulu, [H]{}awaii, 1979)*]{}, Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., XXXVI, pages 91–146. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, R.I., 1980.
J. Cheeger. Spectral geometry of singular [R]{}iemannian spaces. , 18(4):575–657 (1984), 1983.
C. Debord, J.-M. Lescure, and F. Rochon. Pseudodifferential operators on manifolds with fibred corners. available online at arXiv:1112.4575, 2011.
J. B. Gil, T. Krainer, and G. A. Mendoza. On the closure of elliptic wedge operators. In [*Microlocal methods in mathematical physics and global analysis*]{}, Trends Math., pages 55–58. Birkhäuser/Springer, Basel, 2013.
M. Goresky and R. MacPherson. Intersection homology theory. , 19(2):135–162, 1980.
M. Goresky and R. MacPherson. Intersection homology. [II]{}. , 72(1):77–129, 1983.
D. Grieser. Notes on heat kernel asymptotics. , 2004. http://www.staff.uni-oldenburg.de/daniel.grieser/wwwlehre/Schriebe/heat.pdf.
D. Grieser and E. Hunsicker. Pseudodidfferential operator calculus for generalized $\mathbb{Q}$-rank 1 locally symmetric spaces, i. , 257:3748–3801, 2009.
J. Harris and I. Morrison. , volume 187 of [*Graduate Texts in Mathematics*]{}. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1998.
T. Hausel, E. Hunsicker, and R. Mazzeo. Hodge cohomology of gravitational instantons. , 122(3):485–548, 2004.
L. H[ö]{}rmander. . Classics in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1983.
E. Hunsicker and R. Rochon. Hodge cohomology of iterated fibred cusp metrics on witt spaces. available online at arXiv:1206.0984, 2012.
L. Ji, R. Mazzeo, W. Müller, and A. Vasy. Spectral theory for the weil-petersson laplacian on the riemann moduli space. , 89(4):867–894, 2014.
C. Kottke and R. Melrose. Generalized blow-up of corners and fiber products. In [*Microlocal methods in mathematical physics and global analysis*]{}, Trends Math., pages 59–62. Birkhäuser/Springer, Basel, 2013.
M. Lesch. , volume 136 of [*Teubner-Texte sur Math.*]{} B.G. Teubner, Stuttgart, Leipzig, 1997.
K. Liu, X. Sun, and S.-T. Yau. New results on the geometry of the moduli space of [R]{}iemann surfaces. , 51(4):632–651, 2008.
K. Liu, X. Sun, and S.-T. Yau. Goodness of canonical metrics on the moduli space of [R]{}iemann surfaces. , 10(2):223–243, 2014.
R. Mazzeo. Elliptic theory of differential edge operators. [I]{}. , 16(10):1615–1664, 1991.
R. Mazzeo and J. Swoboda. Asymptotics of the [W]{}eil-[P]{}etersson metric. available online at arXiv:1503.02365, 2015.
R. Mazzeo and B. Vertman. Analytic torsion on manifolds with edges. , 231(2):1000–1040, 2012.
R. Melrose and X. Zhu. forthcoming work. 2015.
R. B. Melrose. . Available online.
R. B. Melrose. Calculus of conormal distributions on manifolds with corners. , 1992:51–61, 1992.
R. B. Melrose. , volume 4 of [ *Research Notes in Mathematics*]{}. A K Peters Ltd., Wellesley, MA, 1993.
E. A. Mooers. Heat kernel asymptotics on manifolds with conic singularities. , 78:1–36, 1999.
M. Reed and B. Simon. . Academic Press Inc. \[Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publishers\], New York, second edition, 1980. Functional analysis.
B.-W. Schulze. Pseudo-differential calculus on manifolds with geometric singularities. In [*Pseudo-differential operators: partial differential equations and time-frequency analysis*]{}, volume 52 of [*Fields Inst. Commun.*]{}, pages 37–83. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2007.
M. E. Taylor. , volume 116 of [*Applied Mathematical Sciences*]{}. Springer, New York, second edition, 2011.
S. Wolpert. On the [W]{}eil-[P]{}etersson geometry of the moduli space of curves. , 107(4):969–997, 1985.
S. Yamada. On the geometry of [W]{}eil-[P]{}etersson completion of [T]{}eichmüller spaces. , 11(2-3):327–344, 2004.
S. Zucker. cohomology of warped products and arithmetic groups. , 70(2):169–218, 1982/83.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
We review recent progress in the study of the vertex-cover problem (VC). VC belongs to the class of NP-complete graph theoretical problems, which plays a central role in theoretical computer science. On ensembles of random graphs, VC exhibits an coverable-uncoverable phase transition. Very close to this transition, depending on the solution algorithm, easy-hard transitions in the typical running time of the algorithms occur.
We explain a statistical mechanics approach, which works by mapping VC to a hard-core lattice gas, and then applying techniques like the replica trick or the cavity approach. Using these methods, the phase diagram of VC could be obtained exactly for connectivities $c<e$, where VC is replica symmetric. Recently, this result could be confirmed using traditional mathematical techniques. For $c>e$, the solution of VC exhibits full replica symmetry breaking.
The statistical mechanics approach can also be used to study analytically the typical running time of simple complete and incomplete algorithms for VC. Finally, we describe recent results for VC when studied on other ensembles of finite- and infinite-dimensional graphs.
address: 'Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of Göttingen, Bunsenstr. 9, 37073 Göttingen, Germany'
author:
- 'Alexander K. Hartmann and Martin Weigt'
title: 'Statistical Mechanics of the vertex-cover problem'
---
Introduction
============
Starting in the 80s of the last century, there are growing relations between the fields of statistical physics and (theoretical) computer science. This is true in particular for the study of disordered glassy systems in physics and the research on optimization problems in computer science [@hemmen1985]. Both fields can profit strongly from each other. In one way computer science helps physics: Recently developed efficient optimization algorithms [@opt-phys2001] help to study the low-temperature behavior of physical models, like spin glasses, random field systems or solid-on-solid models. On the other hand also developments in statistical physics have helped to develop or improve existing optimization algorithms. The most prominent example is the invention of the simulated annealing method [@kirkpatrick1983], which has been applied to a variety of optimization problems.
In recent years another variant of how physics can help computer science has emerged. Computational problems can be sorted into different classes. From the viewpoint of a person wanting to solve problems, a very convenient class is the class P: It collects all problems which can be solved on a computer in a running time, which grows even in the worst case only polynomially with the size of the problem. These problems are called [*easy*]{}. In theoretical computer science [@lewis1981; @papadimitriou1994; @sipser1997] these problems are analyzed using model computers, e.g. the [*Turing machine*]{} (TM) [@turing1936]. A [*deterministic*]{} TM can solve the same problems like a conventional (von Neumann) computer. But not all problems can be solved polynomially. There are problems, for which for sure no polynomial algorithm exists. These problems are called [*hard*]{}. But most of these problems have only academic applications. The most interesting problems lie on the interface between polynomial and exponential running time. They belong to the class of [*nondeterministic polynomial*]{} problems (NP) [@garey1979]. This means that a [*nondeterministic*]{} TM can solve any problem from NP in polynomial time. This works in the following way: First, the nondeterministic abilities of the TM are used to generate a solution. Then the TM proves deterministically that the solution is correct. For purely deterministic computers, all algorithms for solving problems from NP known so far need in the worst case an exponentially growing running time. Hence, it appears that the problems from NP are hard as well. But so far there is no [*proof*]{} that the problems from NP are indeed hard. This is the so called [ *P-NP problem*]{}, one of the great open questions in computer science [^1]. Expressed in colloquial language we have to answer the question: “What is it that makes a problem hard ?”
A notable advance [@review1; @review2] towards the answer of this question has recently been achieved by realizing that worst case and typical case are different. This means that for some problems there are ensembles of problems which can be solved typically in polynomial time, while the worst case is still exponential. In particular, there are suitably parametrized ensembles of random problem instances, where in one region of parameter space the instances are easy while in another region the instances are hard [@mitchell1992; @selman1994]. The typically hardest to solve instances are often found [*at*]{} the boundaries separating these regions. The effects found at the boundaries have much in common with phase transitions in physical systems [@yeomans1992; @goldenfeld1992]. Recently methods from statistical physics [@mezard1987], like the replica trick or the cavity approach, have been applied to classical problems from computer science. The most prominent one is the satisfiability problem (SAT) [@garey1979]. SAT is the most famous and central of all problems in theoretical computer science: In 1971, it was the first one which was shown by Cook [@cook1971] to be [*NP-complete*]{}, which means that all problems from NP can be mapped onto SAT using polynomial algorithms. Hence, SAT is at least as hard as any problem in NP. Using the statistical mechanics approach it is possible to obtain results which have not been found before using classical mathematical methods [@monasson1997; @monasson1999; @brioli2000; @ricci2001]. Furthermore this approach allows to invent new algorithms which are sometimes substantially faster than previously know algorithms [@mezard2002].
In this paper, we review the recent progress in the field by concentrating on the vertex-cover problem (VC), which belongs to the six “classical” NP-complete problems in theoretical computer science [@garey1979]. VC is a problem defined on graphs. We first introduce VC and show that it is NP-complete. Then we present some algorithms which can be used to solve NP. In the succeeding section, we present results characterizing the phase transition, which occurs when studying VC on ensembles of random graphs. Next, we describe the results obtained for the phase diagram using statistical mechanics methods. In section six we show how the typical running time of algorithms can be analyzed analytically. Next, we consider other ensembles of random graphs, especially scale-free graphs and graphs consisting of a collection of connected cliques. Finally, we summarize and give an outlook.
The vertex-cover problem
========================
In this section, we will introduce the terminology, show that VC is NP-complete and review some rigorous results about vertex cover which have been obtained previously by applying mathematical techniques.
Vertex cover and related problems {#sec:vc}
---------------------------------
Let us start with the definition of vertex covers. We consider a graph $G=(V,E)$ with $N$ vertices $i\in \{1,2,...,N\}$ and undirected edges $\{i,j\}\in E\subset V\times V$ connecting pairs of vertices. Please note that $\{i,j\}$ and $\{j,i\}$ both denote the same edge.
Definition 1: [*A vertex cover $V_{vc}$ is a subset $V_{vc}\subset
V$ of vertices such that for all edges $\{i,j\}\in E$ at least one of the endpoints is in $V_{vc}$, i.e. $i\in V_{vc}$ or $j\in V_{vc}$.*]{}
Later on also subsets $V^\prime$ are considered, which are not covers. Anyway, we call all vertices in $V^\prime$ [*covered*]{}, all others [*uncovered*]{}. Also edges from $E\cap ([V^\prime\times V] \cup[ V
\times V^\prime])$ are called covered. This means that $V^\prime$ is a vertex cover, iff all edges are covered.
There are three different variants of VC:
- The [*minimal vertex-cover*]{} problem, which consists in finding a vertex cover $V_{vc}$ of minimal cardinality, and calculate the minimal fraction $x_{\rm c}(G)=|V_{vc}|/N$ needed to cover the whole graph.
- The [*decision variant*]{} of this problem is: “Given a number $X=xN$, is there a vertex cover $V_{vc}$ of size $X$?”.
- If there is no vertex cover of size $X$, one can study the related [*optimization problem*]{}: Find a set $V^\prime$ with $|V^\prime|=X$ which minimizes the number of uncovered edges. In other words, we try to distribute $X$ covering marks on the $N$ vertices in an optimal way, such that the following [*energy*]{} of configurations is minimized: $$\hspace*{-1.8cm}
E(G,x)=\min \{ \mbox{number of {\em uncovered}\/ edges when
covering } xN \
\mbox{vertices} \} \label{eq:coverEnergy}$$ This means, the graph is coverable using $X=xN$ vertices iff the ground state energy is zero.
VC is equivalent to other problems:
- An [*independent set*]{} is a subset of vertices which are pairwise disconnected in the graph $G$. Due to the above-mentioned properties, any set $V\setminus V_{vc}$ thus forms an independent set, and maximal independent sets are complementary to minimal vertex covers.
- A [*clique*]{} is a fully connected subset of vertices, and thus an independent set in the complementary graph $\overline{G}$ where vertices $i$ and $j$ are connected whenever $\{i,j\}\notin E$ and vice versa.
NP-completeness
---------------
Here, we show the NP-completeness of VC [@garey1979]. For this purpose, we first introduce the 3-satisfiability problem (3-SAT), which is know to be NP-complete. Then we show how 3-SAT can be mapped onto VC in polynomial time.
3-SAT is a problem concerning Boolean formulas. A Boolean formula $F$ in $K=3$ [*conjunctive normal form*]{} (CNF) has the following structure: It is a formula over $N$ boolean variables $\{x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_N\}$ which contains $M$ [*clauses*]{} $C_i$: $F=C_1\wedge C_2\wedge \ldots \wedge C_M$. Each clause is a disjunction of three literals $C_p=l_p^1\vee l_p^2\vee l_p^3$, where each literal is either a variable ($l^i_p=x_j$) or a negated variable ($l^i_p=\overline{x_j}$). The 3-SAT problem is:
“Given a 3-CNF formula $F$, is there an assignment of the variables $\{x_1,\ldots,x_N\}\in\{0,1\}^N$ such that $F$ evaluates to [ *true*]{}, i.e., is $F$ [*satisfiable*]{}? “
3-SAT is a special variant of SAT and has been proven to be NP-complete before [@garey1979]. The proof of the NP-completeness of VC works by reducing 3-SAT to VC in polynomial time.
First, we show VC$\in$NP: It is very easy to decide for a given subset $V^\prime$ of vertices, whether all edges are covered, i.e. whether $V^\prime$ is a vertex cover, by just iterating over all edges.
Hence, it remains to show that 3-SAT is polynomially reducible to VC, (one writes 3-SAT $\le_p$ VC).
Let $F=C_1\wedge \ldots\wedge C_m$ be a 3-SAT formula with variables $X=\{x_1,\ldots, x_n\}$ and $C_p=l_p^1\vee l_p^2 \vee l_p^3$ for all $p$.
We have to create a graph $G$ and a threshold $K$, such that $G$ has a VC of size lower than or equal to $K$, iff $F$ is satisfiable. For this purpose, we set:
- $V_1\equiv \{v_1,\overline{v}_1, \ldots, v_n, \overline{v}_n\}$, ($|V_1|=2n$) and $E_1=\{
\{v_1,\overline{v}_1\},\{v_2,\overline{v}_2\}, \ldots,
\{v_n,\overline{v}_n\}\}$, i.e. for each variable occurring in $F$ we create a pair of vertices and an edge connecting it.
To cover the edges in $E_1$, we have to include at least one vertex per pair in the covering set. In this part of the graph, each cover corresponds to an assignment of the variables with the following idea behind it: If for variable $x_i=1$, then $v_i$ should be covered, while if $x_i=0$ then $\overline{v}_i$ is to be covered. It will become clear soon, why this correspondence has been chosen.
- For each clause in $F$ we introduce three vertices connected in form of a triangle: $V_2\equiv \{
a_1^1,a_1^2,a_1^3,a_2^1,a_2^2,a_2^3,\ldots a_m^1,a_m^2,a_m^3\}$ and $E_2 =\{ \{a_1^1,a_1^2\}$, $ \{a_1^2,a_1^3\}$, $ \{a_1^3,a_1^1\}$, $
\{a_2^1,a_2^2\}$, $ \{a_2^2,a_2^3\}$, $ \{a_2^3,a_2^1\}$, $ \ldots,
\{a_n^1,a_n^2\}$, $ \{a_n^2,a_n^3\}$, $ \{a_n^3,a_n^1\} \}$,
Per triangle, i.e. per clause, we have to include at least two vertices in a VC. We intent that in a cover of minimum size, the [*uncovered*]{} vertex corresponds to a literal which is satisfied. This will be induced by the edges generated in the following.
- Finally, for each position $i$ in a clause $p$, vertex $a_p^i$ is connected with the vertex representing the literal $l_p^i$ appearing at that position of the clause: $E_3\equiv $ $\{
\{a_p^i,v_j\} | p=1,\ldots,m,\, i=1,2,3\, \mbox{ if } l_p^i=x_j\}
\cup \{ \{a_p^i,\overline{v}_j\} | p=1,\ldots,m,\, i=1,2,3\, \mbox{
if } l_p^i=\overline{x}_j\}$. Hence, $E_3$ contains edges each connecting one vertex from $V_1$ with one vertex from $V_2$.
- The graph $G$ is the combination of the above introduced vertices and edges: $G=(V,E)$, $V=V_1\cup V_2$, $E=E_1\cup E_2 \cup
E_3$.
- The size of the vertex cover to be constructed is set to $K\equiv n+2m$.
In the following example, we show how the transformation works for a small 3-SAT formula:
[**Example**]{} We consider $F=(x_1 \vee \overline{x}_3 \vee
\overline{x}_4)$ $\wedge$ $(\overline{x}_1 \vee x_2, \overline{x}_4)$. The resulting graph $G(V,E)$ is displayed in Fig. \[figVCgraph\]
The number of vertices generated by this transformation is $O(n+m)$, i.e. linear in the sum of the number of clauses and the number of variables of $F$. Since the number of variables is bounded by three times the number clauses, the construction of the graph is linear in the length of $F$, i.e. in particular polynomial. It remains to show: $F$ satisfiable if and only if there exists a vertex cover $V^\prime$ of $G$ with size $|V^\prime|\le K$.
Now let $F$ be satisfiable and $\{X_i\}, X_i=0,1$ a satisfying assignment. We set $V_1^{\prime} = \{v_i | X_i=1\}\cup
\{\overline{v}_i| X_i=0\}$. Obviously $|V_1^{\prime}|=n$ and all edges in $E_1$ are covered. For each clause $C_p$, since it is satisfied by $\{X_i\}$, there is one satisfied literal $l_p^{i(p)}$. We set $V_2^{\prime}=\{a_p^i | p=1,\ldots,m;\, i\neq i(p) \}$. We have included 2 vertices per clause in $V_2$ (by excluding $a_p^{i(p)}$), i.e. 2 vertices per triangle in $E_2$. Thus, $|V_2^{\prime}|=2m$ and all edges of $E_2$ are covered. Furthermore, since $l_p^{i(p)}$ is satisfied, the vertex corresponding to the literal is in $V_1$, hence all edges contained in $E_3$ are covered as well. To summarize $V^{\prime} =V_1^{\prime} \cup V_2^{\prime}$ is a VC of $G$ and $|V^{\prime}|=n+2m\le K$.
Conversely, let be $V^{\prime}\subset V$ be a VC of $G$ and $|V^{\prime}|\le K$. Since a VC must include at least one vertex per edge from $E_1$ and at least two vertices per triangle from $E_2$, we know $|V^{\prime}|\ge n+2m=K$, hence we have $|V^{\prime}|=K$, i.e. [*exactly one*]{} vertex per pair $x_i,\overline{x_i}$ and [ *exactly two*]{} vertices per triplet $a_p^1,a_p^2,a_p^3$ is included in $V^{\prime}$. Now we set $X_i=1$ if $x_i\in V^{\prime}$ and $X_i=0$ if $x_i\not\in V^{\prime}$. Since each triangle (each corresponding to a clause), has one vertex $a_p^i(p)\not\in V^{\prime}$, we know that the vertex from $V_1$ connected with it is covered. Hence, the literal corresponding to this vertex is satisfied. Therefore, for each clause, we have a satisfied literal, hence $F$ is satisfied and $\{X_i\}$ is a satisfying assignment.
Vertex covers of random graphs {#sec:bound}
------------------------------
In order to speak of median or average cases, and of phase transitions, we have to introduce a probability distribution over graphs. This can be done best by using the concept of [*random graphs*]{} as already introduced about 40 years ago by Erdös and Rényi [@ErRe]. A random graph $G_{N,p}$ is a graph with $N$ vertices $V=\{1,...,N\}$, where any pair of vertices is connected randomly and independently by an edge with probability $p$. So the expected number of edges becomes $p {N\choose 2} = pN^2/2+O(N)$, and the average connectivity of a vertex equals $p(N-1)$.
We are interested in the large-$N$ limit of [*finite-connectivity graphs*]{}, where $p=c/N$ with constant $c$. Then the average connectivity $c+O(N^{-1})$ stays finite. In this case, we also expect the size of minimal vertex covers to depend only on $c$, $x_{\rm c}(G)=x_{\rm c}(c)$ for almost all random graphs $G_{N,c/N}$.
Next we are going to present some previously derived rigorous bounds on $x_{\rm c}(c)$. A general one for arbitrary, [*i.e.*]{} non-random graphs $G$ was given by Harant [@Ha] who generalized an old result of Caro and Wei [@CaWe]. Translated into our notation, he showed that $$\label{bound_harant}
x_{\rm c}(G)\leq 1-\frac{1}{N}\frac{\left(\sum_{i\in V}\frac{1}{d_i+1}
\right)^2}{
\sum_{i\in V}\frac{1}{d_i+1} - \sum_{(i,j)\in E}
\frac{(d_i-d_j)^2}{(d_i+1)(d_j+1)}}$$ where $d_i$ is the connectivity (or degree) of vertex $i$. This can easily be converted into an upper bound on $x_{\rm c}(c)$ which holds almost surely for $N\to\infty$.
The vertex cover problem and the above-mentioned related problems were also studied in the case of random graphs, and even completely solved in the case of infinite connectivity graphs, where any edge is drawn with finite probability $p$, such that the expected number of edges is $p {N\choose 2}=0(N^2)$. There the minimal VC has cardinality $(N-2\ln_{1/(1-p)}N-O(\ln \ln N))$ [@BoEr]. Bounds in the finite-connectivity region of random graphs with $N$ vertices and $cN$ edges were given by Gazmuri [@Ga]. He has shown that $$\label{bound_gazmuri}
x_l(c) < x_{\rm c}(c) < 1- \frac{\ln c}{c}$$ where the lower bound is given by the unique solution of $$\label{low}
0= x_l(c) \ln x_l(c) + (1- x_l(c)) \ln (1- x_l(c))
- \frac{c}{2} (1- x_l(c))^2\ .$$ This bound coincides with the so-called annealed bound in statistical physics. The correct asymptotics for large $c$ was given by Frieze [@Fr]: $$\label{asympt}
x_{\rm c}(c) = 1 - \frac{2}{c}(\ln c - \ln\ln c +1 - \ln2 )
+o\left(\frac{1}{c}\right)$$ with corrections of $o(1/c)$ decaying faster than $1/c$.
Few studies have investigated VC on other ensembles of graphs. They are reviewed in Sec. \[sec:otherEnsembles\].
Algorithms
==========
There are two types of algorithms: incomplete and complete ones. Complete algorithms guarantee to find the optimum or true solution, hence the solution space is searched in principle completely. For incomplete algorithms, it is not ensured that the true solution or the global optimum is found. But they are very often sufficient for practical applications.
Incomplete Algorithms {#sec:heuristics}
---------------------
First, we present a greedy heuristic for finding small vertex covers, i.e. approximation for the solutions of problem P1. The basic idea of the heuristic is to cover as many edges as possible by using as few vertices as necessary. Thus, it is favorable to cover vertices with a high degree. This step can be iterated, while the degree of the vertices is adjusted dynamically by removing edges and vertices which are covered. This leads to the following algorithm, which returns an approximation of the minimum vertex cover $V_{vc}$, the size $|V_{vc}|$ is an upper bound of the true minimum vertex-cover size:
[min-cover($G$)]{} initialize $V_{vc}=\emptyset$;\
there are uncovered edges [**do**]{}\
\
take one vertex $i$ with the largest current degree $d_i$;\
mark $i$ as covered: $V_{vc} = V_{vc} \cup \{i\}$;\
remove all incident edges $\{i,j\}$ from $E$;\
remove vertex $i$ from $V$;\
;\
return($V_{vc}$);\
It is easy to invent examples where the heuristic fails to find the true minimum VC, e.g. a star graph having one center vertex to which $k>2$ arms of length 2 are attached.
This most simple heuristics has been generalized by one of the authors within the framework of a random vertex selection [@weigt2002], which is characterized by a parameter $k$ called [*depth*]{}. Each vertex $i$ is selected with a probability $w_{d(i)}$ which depends on the (current) degree $d(i)$ of the vertex. Then, within the generalized heuristic, a subgraph $G^{(k)}(i)=(V^{(k)}(i),E^{(k)}(i))$ is taken, where $V^{(k)}(i)$ contains all vertices which have at most chemical distance $k$ from $i$. Here the chemical distance of two vertices $j$ and $i$ counts the number of edges of the shortest path from $i$ to $j$. $E^{(k)}(i)$ contains the edges connecting the vertices from $V^{(k)}(i)$. Then $G^{(k)}(i)$ is covered starting by covering all vertices with distance $k$ from $i$ and then iteratively selecting vertices $j$ among the remaining with maximal distance from $i$, uncovering $j$ and covering all neighbors of $j$. The results of an analysis of the dynamics of this algorithm are reviewed in Sec. \[sec:generalizedHeuristic\].
The special case $k=1$ and $w_d=1$ has been analyzed by Gazmuri [@Ga] for deriving the bound (\[bound\_gazmuri\]). The greedy heuristic presented before corresponds to the case $k=0$ and $w_d=\delta_{d,d_{\rm max}}$, where $d_{\rm max}$ is the current maximum degree in the graph. This case, where $w_d$ is dynamically adjusted, have not be analyzed so far.
An alternative are incomplete algorithms based on conventional Monte Carlo (MC) simulations in the grand-canonical ensemble, characterized by a chemical potential $\mu$. Here we present a variant [@hclg2003], where one restricts the dynamics to true covers and allows movements of the covering marks as well as fluctuations of the size of the cover. First one selects an initial configuration, for example by using the above heuristics or by covering all vertices. For each MC step, a vertex $i$ is selected randomly. With probability $p$ (e.g. $p=0.5$) a MOVE (M) step is performed, and with probability $1-p$ an EXCHANGE (EX) step:
- If vertex $i$ is covered and has exactly one uncovered neighbor, the covering mark is moved to the neighbor. In all other cases, the configuration remains unchanged.
- If the site is uncovered, a covering mark is inserted with probability $\exp(-\mu)$. If the site is covered, and all neighboring sites are covered, the covering mark is removed from $i$.
Note that in this way detailed balance is fulfilled. Ground states, i.e. minimum-size vertex covers can be obtained by starting with a small chemical potential, which is slowly increased. The chemical potential thus plays the same role in the algorithm as the decreasing temperature in simulated annealing [@kirkpatrick1983]. Like the latter algorithm, MC simulations can reach a globally optimal vertex cover only on exponential time scales. On the other hand the Monte Carlo approach allows to study dynamic properties of the model, which can be regarded as a hard-core lattice gas [@hclg2003], see also below.
The efficiency of randomized incomplete algorithms can be increased by introducing [*restarts*]{} [@gomes2000]. The basic idea is to let the randomized algorithm run for a fixed number $\Delta T$ of steps. If no solution is found in this time, the algorithm is restarted from the beginning but with a different seed of the random number generator. The basic idea behind this concept is that during a run the system may be trapped in a local minimum, hence the chance of finding a solution is increased when starting again.
Complete Algorithms {#sec:algorithms}
-------------------
Next, we present two complete algorithms: They guarantee to find the exact answer, even if the time required will, in general, grow exponentially with the graph size.
First we turn to the problem, where we are interested only in minimum-size vertex covers (problem P1). Since each vertex can be either covered or uncovered, the most direct approach is to enumerate all possible $2^N$ configuration, store all those being VCs, and finally select one of those having minimal VC cardinality. Obviously, the time-complexity of this approach is $O(2^N)$. Early attempts [@balas1973; @nemhauser1975] have the same worst-case running time. The approach of Tarjan and Trojanowski [@tarjan77] presented here has an $O(2^{N/2})$ time complexity. It uses a divide-and-conquer approach. First, all connected components of the graph are obtained. Then the minimum-size vertex covers for all components are calculated separately by recursive calls. The treatment of each connected component is based on the following idea. Let $i\in V$ a vertex, $A(i)\subset V$ its neighbors in $G$ and for any subset $S\subset V$ let $G(S)=(S, E(S))$ the subgraph induced by $S$, i.e. $E(S)=E\cap (S\times S)$. Then the minimum-size vertex cover is either $\{i\}$ combined with the minimum-size vertex cover of $G(V\setminus\{i\})$ or $A(i)$ combined with the minimum-size vertex cover of $G(V\setminus\{i\}\setminus A(i))$.
Furthermore, the algorithm uses the concept of [ *domination*]{}. This means basically that one considers small subgraphs $S$. Among all possible VCs of the subgraph one disregards all those, which provably cannot lead to better VCs of the full graph – mainly because they cover only few or none of the edges connecting vertices from $S$ to $V\setminus S$. We explain the simplest example for domination. In this case leaves are dominated, i.e. vertices $i$ having only one single neighbor $j$. Here, for a minimum-size vertex cover one must cover either $i$ or $j$. Since $i$ has only one neighbor, but $j$ may have more, we can immediately cover $j$ and remove the vertices $i,j$ and all incident edges. This is the basic idea of the leaf-removal algorithm of Bauer and Golinelli [@bauer2001]. Note that this corresponds to the case depth $k=1$, $w_d=\delta_{d,1}$ of the generalized heuristic discussed in the last section.
The full algorithm is still deterministic but more general than leaf removal: For each connected component, the vertex $i_0$ having the smallest degree is determined. Degree $d_{i_0}=0$ corresponds to an isolated vertex, which is not covered. Degree $d_{i_0}=1$ corresponds to a leave which is treated as discussed above. Furthermore, the algorithm treats explicitly the cases of degree $d_{i_0}=$2,3 and 4. For higher lowest degrees $d_{i_0}>4$, basically the subproblems for $i_0$ covered and $i_0$ uncovered must be treated completely. But during the recursive calls generated in this way, the cases with smaller minimum degree might appear again. The full detailed five page presentation of the algorithm with all cases and subcases can be found in Ref. [@tarjan77]. Due to the application of domination the algorithm runs faster but it is unable to find more than [*one*]{} minimal VC, hence it cannot be used to enumerate all solutions.
A simpler to implement algorithm [@Shindo90] exhibits a worse time complexity $O(2^{n/2.863})$, but the authors claim that within their computer experiments it was faster than the method of Tarjan and Trojanowski.
If one is not only interested in one single minimum VC but in enumerating all, the divide-and-conquer method does not work and branch-and-bound approaches [@lawler66; @lueling1992] must be applied. Also for the case where the number of covering marks $X$ is given and one looks for all configuration of minimum energy (problem P3), a branch-and-bound method is feasible. We will present an algorithm for this latter case. The algorithm enumerating all minimum-size VCs (problem P1) works in the same spirit.
The branch-and-bound approach differs from the previous method by the fact that the concept of domination cannot be used. The basic idea is to build the full configuration tree. While doing this, the algorithm makes certain choices where to put covering marks. If no VC of the desired size is found, some covering marks have to be removed and to be placed elsewhere, i.e. the algorithm has to backtrack. This is done in a systematic way allowing to investigate the full configuration space. This $O(2^N)$ running time is reduced by omitting subtrees of the full tree by using a [*bound*]{}: Trees where for sure no minimum-energy configuration is located can be omitted. The bound applied in the following algorithm uses the [*current*]{} vertex degree $d(i)$, which is the number of uncovered neighbors at a specific stage of the calculation. By covering a vertex $i$ the total number of uncovered edges is reduced by exactly $d(i)$. If several vertices $j_1,j_2,\ldots,j_k$ are covered, the number of uncovered edges is [*at most*]{} reduced by $d(j_1)+d(j_2)+\ldots +d(j_k)$. Assume that at a certain stage within the backtracking tree, there are $uncov$ edges uncovered and still $k$ vertices to cover. Then a lower bound $M$ for the minimum number of uncovered edges in the subtree is given by $$M=\max\left[0,uncov-\max_{j_1,\ldots,j_k}d(j_1)+\ldots+d(j_k)\right]\ .$$ The algorithm can avoid branching into a subtree if $M$ is strictly larger than the number $opt$ of uncovered edges in the best solution found so far. For the order the vertices are selected to be (un-)covered within the algorithm, the following heuristic is applied: the order of the vertices is given by their current degree. Thus, the first descent into the tree is equivalent to the greedy heuristic presented before. Later, it will be become clear from the results that this heuristic is indeed not a bad strategy.
The following representation summarizes the algorithm for enumerating all configurations exhibiting a minimum number of uncovered edges. Let $G=(V,E)$ be a graph, $k$ the number of vertices to cover and $uncov$ the number of edges to cover. Initially $k=X$ and $uncov=|E|$. The variable $opt$ is initialized with $opt=|E|$ and contains the minimum number of uncovered edges found so far. The value of $opt$ is passed via call by reference. At the beginning all vertices $i\in V$ are marked as [*free*]{}. The marks are considered to be passed via call by reference as well (not shown explicitly). Additionally it is assumed that somewhere a set of (optimum) solutions can be stored.
[min-cover($G,k,uncov,opt$)]{} k=0 [**then**]{} $\{$leaf of tree reached?$\}$\
\
$uncov<opt$ [**then** ]{}$\{$new minimum found?$\}$\
\
$opt:=uncov$;\
clear set of stored configurations;\
;\
store configuration;\
;\
bound condition is true (see text) [**then**]{}\
;\
let $i\in V$ a vertex marked as [*free* ]{} of maximal current degree;\
mark $i$ as [*covered*]{};\
$k:=k-1$;\
adjust degrees of all neighbors $j$ of $i$: $d(j):=d(j)-1$;\
($G,k,uncov-d(i),opt$) $\{$branch into ’left’ subtree$\}$;\
mark $i$ as [*uncovered*]{};\
$k:=k+1$;\
(re)adjust degrees of all neighbors $j$ of $i$: $d(j):=d(j)+1$;\
($G,k,uncov,opt$) $\{$branch into ’right’ subtree$\}$;\
mark $i$ as [*free*]{};\
In the actual implementation, the algorithm does not descend further into the tree as well, when no uncovered edges are left. In this case the vertex covers of the corresponding subtree consist of the vertices covered so far and all possible selections of $k$ vertices among all uncovered vertices.
Finally we note that using the concepts of restarts one can also turn a complete backtracking algorithm into a (possibly) faster incomplete one. An application to VC has been studied by Montanari and Zecchina [@montanari2002]. The algorithm must be randomized, for applying restarts. Hence the choice which vertex is treated next is performed in some random way, similar to the generalized heuristic presented above. By applying many restarts, rare events become important: On one hand, the latter may have exponentially smaller search trees, i.e. in this case the algorithm by chance does not need to backtrack as long as usually. On the other hand, events of this type are exponentially rare. Balancing the exponential gain due to the smaller search tree against the exponential loss due to large number of restarts required to find such an event, an optimal backtracking (i.e. running) time per restart can be found. The analysis of a restart algorithm for VC [@montanari2002] is reviewed in Sec. \[sec:restarts\].
The cov-uncov transition {#sec:transition}
========================
First, the VC variant is considered where the energy is to be minimized for fixed values $x=X/N$ (problem P3). We know that for small values of $x$, the energy density (\[eq:coverEnergy\]) is not zero \[$e(x=0)=E/N=c/2$\], i.e. no vertex covers with $xN$ vertices covered exist. On the other hand, for large values of $x$, the random graphs are almost surely coverable, i.e. $e(x)=0$. In Fig. \[fig:PEX\] the average ground-state energy density and the probability $P_{\rm cov}(x)$ that a graph is coverable with $xN$ vertices are shown for different system sizes $N=25,50,100$. We consider her the average connectivity $c=2.0$, but qualitativley equivalent results are found for other values of $c$ too. The results [@cover; @cover-tcs] were obtained using the branch-and-bound algorithm presented in the last section. The data are averages over $10^3$ ($N=100$) to $10^4$ ($N=25,50$) samples. As expected, the value of $P_{\rm cov}(x)$ increases with the fraction of [*covered*]{} vertices. With growing graph sizes, the curves become steeper. This indicates that in the limit $N\to\infty$, which we are interested in, a sharp threshold $x_{\rm c}\approx 0.39$ appears. Above $x_{\rm c}$ a graph is coverable with probability tending to one in the large-$N$ limit, below $x_c$ it is almost surely uncoverable. Thus, in the language of a physicist, a [*phase transition*]{} from an coverable phase to an uncoverable phase occurs. It is frequently denoted as the [*cov-uncov transition*]{}. Note that the value $x_{\rm c}$ of the critical threshold depends on the average connectivity $c$. The result for the phase boundary $x_{\rm c}$ as a function of $c$ obtained from simulations is shown later on.
In Fig. \[fig:TimeX\] the median running time of the branch-and-bound algorithm is shown as a function of the fraction $x$ of covered vertices. The running time is measured in terms of the number of nodes which are visited in the backtracking tree. Again graphs with $c=2.0$ were considered and an average over the same realizations as before has been performed. A sharp peak can be observed near the transition $x_{\rm c}$: The hardest instances are typically found in the vicinity of the phase transition. Note that also for values $x<x_{\rm c}$ the running time increases exponentially, as can been seen from the inset of Fig. \[fig:TimeX\]. For values $x$ considerably larger than the critical value $x_{\rm c}$, the running time is linear. The reason is that the heuristic is already able to find a VC, i.e. the algorithm terminates after the first descent into the backtracking tree[^2].
Note that continuous phase transitions in physical systems are usually indicated by a divergence of measurable quantities such as the specific heat, magnetic susceptibilities or relaxation times. The peak appearing in the time complexity may be considered as a similar indicator, but is not really equivalent, because the resolution time diverges everywhere, only the rate of divergence is much stronger near the phase transition.
For small values of $x$ in the uncoverable region, the running time is also faster than near the phase transition, but still exponential. This is due to the fact that a configuration with a minimum number of [*uncovered*]{} edges has to be obtained. If only the question whether a VC exists or not is to be answered, the algorithm can be easily improved[^3], such that for small values of $x$ again a polynomial running time will be obtained.
The phase diagram
=================
The phase diagram gives the value of the critical threshold $x_{\rm
c}(c)$ as a function of the connectivity $c$. For low connectivities $c<1$ almost all vertices are contained in finite trees $T_k$ of size $k$ [@ErRe; @Bo]. Then one can calculate $x_{\rm
c}(c)$ using a cluster expansion, i.e. by explicitly calculating $x_{\rm c}(T_k)$ for small $k$ and weighting the results with the contribution of each tree $T_k$ to the ensemble of random graphs. In Ref. [@cover-tcs] this expansion has been performed up to tree size $k=7$, resulting in very good agreement with the numerical data for small connectivities $c<0.3$.
Using a statistical-mechanics approach it is even possible to derive an [*exact*]{} solution, which is furthermore valid even beyond the percolation threshold $c=1$. We will show that this solution is valid up to $c=e$, where $e$ is the Eulerian constant. The statistical-mechanics treatment is presented in the next subsection. In the second subsection, we will present the results, compare it to numerical findings and explain the structure of the phase diagram as well as the solution space structure, finding four different percolation transitions occurring in VC on random graphs.
Mapping VC to a hard-core lattice gas
-------------------------------------
To study VC using concepts and methods of statistical mechanics, one has to map the problem onto a physical system. One possibility is to identify each vertex with an Ising spin and the two states [ *covered/uncovered*]{} correspond to the two spin orientations $\pm 1$ [@cover]. Then the system can be studied in the canonical ensemble and the natural choice for the Hamiltonian is to identify the energy with the number of uncovered edges (\[eq:coverEnergy\]).
Here we present a different mapping, using the equivalence between VC and a hard-core lattice gas [@cover-long]. Any subset $U\subset
V$ of the vertex set can be encoded bijectively as a configuration of $N$ binary occupation numbers: $$\label{eq:mapping}
x_i := \left\{
\begin{array}{lll}
0 & \mbox{if} & i\in U\\
1 & \mbox{if} & i\notin U
\end{array}
\right.$$ The strange choice of setting $x_i$ to zero for vertices in $U$ becomes clear if we look to the vertex-cover constraint: An edge is covered by the elements in $U$ iff at most one of the two end-points has $x=1$. So the variables $x_i$ can be interpreted as occupation numbers of vertices by the center of a particle. The covering constraint translates into a hard sphere constraint for particles of chemical radius one: If a vertex is occupied, [*i.e.*]{} $x_i=1$, then all neighboring vertices have to be empty. We thus introduce a characteristic function $$\label{eq:chi}
\chi(x_1,...,x_N)=\prod_{\{i,j\}\in E} (1-x_i x_j)$$ which equals one whenever $\vec x = (x_1,...,x_N)$ corresponds to a vertex cover, and zero else. Having in mind this interpretation, we write down the grand partition function $$\label{eq:xi}
\Xi = \sum_{\{x_i=0,1\}} \exp\left(\mu \sum_i x_i\right) \ \chi(\vec x)$$ with $\mu$ being a chemical potential which can be used to control the particle number, or the cardinality of $U$.
For regular lattices, this model is well studied as a lattice model for the fluid-solid transition, for an overview and the famous corner-transfer matrix solution of the two-dimensional hard-hexagon model by Baxter [@Ba]. Recently, lattice-gas models with various kinds of disorder have been considered in connection to glasses [@glass1; @glass2; @glass3; @hclg2003] and granular matter [@granular1; @granular2; @granular3; @granular4; @granular5; @granular6].
Denoting the grand canonical average as $$\label{eq:mean}
\langle f(\vec x) \rangle_\mu=\Xi^{-1} \sum_{\{x_i=0,1\}}
\exp\left(\mu \sum_i x_i\right) \ \chi(\vec x)\ f(\vec x)$$ we can calculate the average occupation density $$\label{eq:N}
\nu(\mu) = \frac{1}{N}\left\langle \sum_i x_i \right\rangle_\mu
= \frac{\partial}{\partial\mu} \frac{\ln\Xi}{N}\ .$$
Minimal vertex covers correspond to densest particle packings. Considering the weights in (\[eq:xi\]), it becomes obvious that the density $\nu(\mu)$ is an increasing function of the chemical potential $\mu$. Densest packings, or minimal vertex covers, are thus obtained in the limit $\mu\to\infty$: $$\label{eq:mulimit}
x_c(c) = 1-\lim_{\mu\to\infty} \nu(\mu)\ .$$
The main step within the statistical-mechanics approach is to calculate the grand partition function (\[eq:xi\]). Here we state only the main steps of the calculation without showing intermediate stage results, details can be found in Ref. [@cover-long]. The results of Fig. \[fig:PEX\] indicate that the model becomes self-averaging in the thermodynamic limit, i.e. densities of thermodynamic potentials are expected to become independent on the specific choice of the quenched disorder (the edge set $E$). Technically we thus have to calculate the disorder average of the thermodynamic potential, or the logarithm of the partition function. The latter can be calculated using the the replica trick [@mezard1987], $$\label{eq:rep}
\overline{\ln \Xi} = \lim_{n\to 0} \frac{\overline{\Xi^n}-1}{n}$$ where the over-bar denotes the disorder average over the random-graph ensemble with fixed average connectivity $c$. Taking $n$ to be a positive integer at the beginning, the original system is replaced by $n$ identical copies (including identical edge sets). In this case, the disorder average is easily obtained, and the $n\to 0$ limit has to be achieved later by some kind of analytical continuation in $n$. The properties of the model can be derived from the $2^n$ order parameters [@monasson1998] $$\label{eq:op}
c(\vec\xi) = \frac{1}{N} \sum_i \prod_a \delta_{\xi^a,x_i^a}$$ which give the fraction of vertices having the replicated occupation number $\vec x_i = \vec\xi\in \{0,1\}^n$. Using this order parameter, we rewrite the partition function as a functional integral over all possible normalized distributions $c(\vec\xi)$, $\left(\sum_{\vec\xi}
c(\vec\xi)=1\right)$. This integral can be evaluated using the saddle-point method, i.e. one has to optimize over all possible normalized functions $c(\vec\xi)$. This cannot be performed in full generality, hence one has to make an ansatz for $c(\vec\xi)$.
The simplest possibility is the so-called replica-symmetric (RS) ansatz, which in our case assumes that the order parameter $c(\vec\xi)$ depends on $\vec\xi$ only via $\sum_a\xi_a$, i.e. different replicas cannot be distinguished, and the full permutation symmetry of the $n$ replicas is unbroken also on the order-parameter level. This leads to a specific representation of $c(\vec\xi)$ for which the replica limit $n\to 0$ can be taken. The resulting saddle-point equation can now be solved analytically in the limit of the chemical potential $\mu\to\infty$. The results are presented and discussed in the next subsection.
Before doing this, let us discuss the validity of the replica-symmetric ansatz. As it turns out [@cover-long] by considering the local stability of the corresponding saddle-point solution, this ansatz is valid up to average graph connectivities $c<e$. At this point full [*replica symmetry breaking*]{} (RSB) occurs: Whereas the solution space has a simple geometrical structure below $c=e$, where all solutions are collected in a single cluster in configuration space, a hierarchical splitting into many solution clusters appears continuously at this breaking point.
Despite many efforts, the technical problem of handling RSB in finite-connectivity systems is still open. Most attempts [@DoMo; @MoDo; @WoSh; @GoLa] try to apply the first step of Parisi’s RSB scheme (1RSB) [@mezard1987] which, however, is technically well-understood only in the case of infinite-connectivity spin glasses. Due to a more complex structure of the order parameter in finite connectivity systems, a complete analytical solution is still missing. Recently, based on the connection to combinatorial optimization, the interest in this question was renewed [@monasson1998], and some promising approximation schemes [@monasson1998; @brioli2000] have been developed. Even more recently, a break-through was obtained in context of the cavity method [@MePa2]: Being more involved than the replica method in infinite-connectivity systems, the cavity approach becomes very elegant for finite connectivities. It allows for a straight-forward derivation of self-consistent order-parameter equations at a level, which is equivalent to 1RSB, and these equations can be efficiently solved numerically using a population dynamical algorithm. The cavity method has been recently [@zhou2003] applied to VC by Zhou. He found that, although 1RSB reproduces the numerical results above $c=e$ much better than the replica symmetric solution and satisfies numerically the bounds presented in Sec. \[sec:bound\] (see below), the 1-RSB solution is still not correct above $c=e$. Full RSB has to be included, which is a completely open technical issue. For this reason, we refer the reader to Refs. [@cover-long; @zhou2003] for the technical details and proceed with the presentation of the results, mainly for RS.
Phase boundary and percolation transitions
------------------------------------------
In this section, we describe the analytical results of the statistical mechanics treatment, compare it to numerical simulations and discuss the morphology of the phase diagram which can be characterized by the occurrence of four percolation transitions.
For the density in the limit of infinite chemical potential one obtains for the RS case $$\label{eq:density}
\nu(\mu\to\infty)
= \frac{1}{N}\left\langle\sum_i x_i \right\rangle_{\mu\to\infty}
= \frac{2W(c)+W(c)^2}{2c}\ ,$$ where $W(c)$ is the Lambert-$W$-function defined by $W(c)\exp(W(c))=c$. This translates to a minimal vertex-cover size given by $$\label{eq:xc}
x_c(c) = 1- \frac{2W(c)+W(c)^2}{2c}\ .$$
To calculate the phase boundary numerically, it is sufficient to construct a single minimal vertex cover. Hence one can apply the divide-and-conquer algorithm or the version of the branch-and-bound algorithm where $X$ is not fixed. To compare with the analytical results one has to perform the thermodynamic limit $N\to\infty$ numerically. This can be achieved by calculating an average value $x_{\rm c}(N)$ for different graph sizes $N$, as it is shown for $c=2.0$ in the inset of Fig. \[figXCCN\]. Using the heuristic fit function $$x_{\rm c}(N)=x_{\rm c}+aN^{-b} \label{eq:cover:fit}$$ the value of $x_c(\infty)=x_c$ can be estimated from numerical data for finite graphs. As can be seen from the inset, the fit matches well.
In Fig. \[figXCCN\], this result is compared to numerical simulations [@cover]. Extremely good coincidence is found for small connectivities $c<e$. Up to this value however, we expect the replica-symmetric result to be exact. This is astonishing, as the solution does not show any signature of the graph-percolation transition of the underlying random graph at $c=1$. Please note that due to the application of statistical mechanics methods like the replica trick and the replica-symmetric ansatz, the treatment presented above is not mathematically rigorous. Anyway, for $c<e$, the result (\[eq:xc\]) was recently proven to be exact [@bauer2001a] in a constructive way by analyzing a specific VC algorithm. For $c>e$ systematic deviations between the numerical data and the RS estimate (\[eq:xc\]) are visible. For large $c$, Eq. (\[eq:xc\]) even violates the bounds given in section \[sec:bound\] and the exactly known asymptotics (\[asympt\]), this is due to the appearance of RSB.
The results [@zhou2003] of the cavity-method (corresponding to 1RSB) (not shown) are better than the RS solution since they are numerically compatible with the asymptotics of \[asympt\] and within the bounds of Eqs. (\[bound\_gazmuri\]),(\[low\]). But still the 1RSB solution is significantly different from the numerical extrapolations in the region $c>e$.
An important quantity for the understanding of the phase diagram is the so called [*backbone*]{}: Usually the minimal VCs are exponentially numerous. Some vertices are therefore covered in some solutions, but they are uncovered in other solutions. But there are other vertices having the same state in [*all*]{} solutions, being either always covered or always uncovered. These vertices are frozen in a physical sense. These vertices are called backbone vertices, we may distinguish two different types due to the two possible covering states. From the replica symmetric solution, one can read of the off immediately [@cover-long] the fractions of vertices belonging to these two backbone types: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:bb}
b_{uncov}(c) &=& \frac{W(c)}{c} \nonumber\\
b_{cov}(c) &=& 1-\frac{W(c)+W(c)^2}{c} \ .\end{aligned}$$ The resulting total fraction of backbone vertices of minimum-size VCs is shown in Fig. \[figBCC\]. Numerically, the backbone can be calculated by enumerating all minimum-size vertex covers of each realization for different sizes $N$ and extrapolating for $N\to\infty$ in a similar fashion like Eq. (\[eq:cover:fit\]). For $c<e$ again a very good agreement is visible. For $c>e$, the failure of the RS approach is here even better visible than when studying the threshold $x_{\rm c}(c)$. Also two results obtained within the 1-RSB approach (using different ansatzes) are shown, but they deviate even stronger from the numerical results.
A detailed analysis [@cover-long] shows that vertices having a small degree are usually uncovered backbone vertices, while the high-degree vertices usually form the covered backbone. This justifies a posteriori the use of heuristic algorithm presented in Sec. \[sec:heuristics\].
Further results can be obtained when studying the subgraphs induced by the backbone and the non-backbone [@cover-long]. It turns out that the structure of the non-backbone graphs in the low connectivity regime $c<e$ can be described as having a collection of pairs, which are the simplest graphs having no backbone, as building blocks. These pairs are connected by additional random edges, see e.g. Fig. \[fig:nonbb\]. The non-backbone subgraphs show a percolation transition at $c_{\rm bb}=\exp(1/\sqrt{2})/\sqrt{2}$ with $1<c_{bb}<e$. Hence the onset of RSB at $c=e$ [*cannot*]{} be explained by this percolation transition. A similar study for the backbone subgraphs shows that it percolates already at the original percolation threshold $c=1$.
Nevertheless, Bauer and Golinelli have indeed related the onset of RSB to a fourth percolation transition [@bauer2001]. They have applied the leaf-removal algorithm to find minimum-size VCs. The remaining graph is denoted as the [ *core*]{} of the graph. Bauer and Golinelli find that, below $c=e$, the core splits into small disconnected components of logarithmic size, while above $c=e$ the core percolates and unifies a finite fraction of all vertices in its largest connected component. Hence, core percolation seems to be responsible for the onset of RSB!
Analyzing algorithms
====================
In theoretical computer science the time complexity of an algorithm is defined as the asymptotic ($N\to\infty$) worst-case running time measured on a model computer. In real-world applications one is usually not confronted with this worst case, but with some kind of [ *typical*]{} case. As we have seen in Sec. \[sec:transition\] there might be regions in parameter space (i.e. graph connectivity and VC size in our case), where VC is typically solved in polynomial time, while it is typically hard for other parameter regions. Hence, one would like to observe the easy-hard transition between these regions within an analytical analysis as well. This would allow for a better understanding of the underlying mechanisms, hence a step towards finding the source of computational hardness. We will show that also here a statistical mechanics treatment, in particular the knowledge of the phase diagram as calculated before, leads to some interesting insight.
First, we present the average-case analysis of a simple branch-and-bound algorithm for the decision problem P2. Within the algorithm a simple heuristics is used to select the next vertex to treat. Next, it is outlined how fluctuations and the influence of restarts can be incorporated into the analysis. In the third subsection the analysis of generalized linear-time heuristic algorithms is summarized.
Analysis of a simple branch-and-bound algorithm
-----------------------------------------------
The algorithm under consideration is a simplified version of the algorithm presented in Sec. \[sec:algorithms\]. The reason for this simplification is that it allows for an analytical approach. In the course of the developments of more sophisticated methods during the next years which are based on the basic understanding gained for simple algorithms, it should be possible to analyze more elaborated algorithms, too.
The simplified branch-and-bound algorithm does [*not*]{} use the greedy heuristic, instead the vertices are selected randomly among the [*free*]{} vertices. Please note that this corresponds to the case $w_d=1$ in the generalized heuristic of Sec. \[sec:heuristics\]. Furthermore the depth $k=0$ is used, i.e. when uncovering a vertex, its neighbors are not covered immediately. This is also necessary for simplifying the analysis. Finally, a simpler bound is used: The algorithm continues to branch into subtrees as long as covering marks are available and as long no vertex cover has been found.
The type of analysis presented here was first applied to the 3-SAT problem by Cocco and Monasson [@cocco2001]. The application to VC is presented in Ref. [@cover-time]. The analysis of the algorithm consists of two parts: first, the analysis of the first descent into the tree and, second, the calculation of full running time, which includes backtracking if no cover was found in the first descent. The running time is measured in terms of the number of nodes visited in the backtracking tree.
[*The first descent into the tree:*]{} Previously, probabilistic analysis of descent algorithms have been applied to establish rigorous bounds on phase boundaries [@ChFr; @review1; @review2; @Ga]. The analysis of the first descent into the backtracking tree is straight forward for the algorithm presented here, as it forms a Markov process of random graphs. In every time step, one vertex and all its incident edges are covered and can be regarded as removed from the graph. As the order of appearance of the vertices is not correlated to its geometrical structure, the graph remains a random graph. After $T$ steps, we consequently find a graph $G_{N-T,c/N}$ having $N-T$ vertices. As the edge probability remains unchanged, the average connectivity decreases from c to $(1-T/N)c$.
For large $N$, it is reasonable to work with the [*rescaled time*]{} $t=T/N$, which becomes continuous in the thermodynamic limit. In this notation, our generated graph reads $G_{(1-t)N,c/N}$. An isolated vertex is now found with probability $(1-c/N)^{(1-t)N-1}\simeq
\exp\{-(1-t)c\}$, so the expected number of free covering marks becomes $X(t)=X- N\int_0^t dt^{'}(1- \exp\{-(1-t^{'})c\})$. The first descent thus describes a trajectory in the $c-x$-plane, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:traj}
c(t) &=& (1-t)c \\ x(t) &=& \frac{x-t}{1-t} +
\frac{e^{-(1-t)c}-e^{-c}}{(1-t)c}. \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ The results are presented in Fig. \[figTraj\]. One observes a perfect agreement of the analytical result and the trajectory generated for a large graph.
[*Analysis of the full algorithm:*]{} To understand how the algorithm works, we study the trajectories together with the phase diagram. We can observe three regions, the shape of the search tree is schematically represented in Fig. \[fig:tree\]:
- [*Easy and coverable:*]{} The algorithm works in linear, i.e. polynomial time, if the first descent already finds a VC. This is the case for large starting value of $x$. Then $x(t)$ reaches the value one at a certain rescaled time $t<1$, and the graph is proven to be coverable after having visited $tN$ nodes of the backtracking tree. The critical value $x_{\rm b}(c)$ above this happens can be obtained from (\[eq:traj\]) by setting $x(t)=1$ and resolving with respect to $x$ in the limit $t\to 1$: $$\label{eq:bound}
x_{\rm b}(c) = 1+\frac{e^{-c}-1}{c}$$
- [*Hard and coverable:*]{} For $x_{\rm c}(c)<x<x_{\rm b}(c)$ the graph is typically coverable, but during the first descent $x(t)$ vanishes already before having covered all edges. The trajectory crosses the phase transition line at a certain rescaled time $\tilde{t}$ at $(\tilde{c},\tilde{x})$. There the generated random subgraph of $\tilde{N}=(1-\tilde{t})N$ vertices and average connectivity $\tilde{c}$ becomes uncoverable by the remaining $\tilde{x}\tilde{N}$ covering marks. To determine that the generated subproblem is not coverable, the algorithm has basically to visit the full backtracking tree for the subproblem. Hence, exponential solution times have to be expected. This means $x_{\rm b}(c)>x_{\rm
c}(c)$ denotes the easy-hard transition of the algorithm. After backtracking the region of the uncoverable subproblem, the algorithms proceeds until a solution is found.
- [*Hard and uncoverable:*]{} For $x<x_{\rm c}(c)$, the graph is typically uncoverable. Thus, again the algorithm has to build a full backtracking tree until it is proven that no VC exists. Hence, again the running time is exponential.
For more sophisticated algorithms, also a phase IV can appear which is easy and uncoverable. This happens if the used bound is able to prove already in the very beginning that no VC of the allowed size exists, and no exponential backtracking is required. The simple algorithm considered in [@cover-time] does not show this phase.
To calculate the running time of the algorithm one has to calculate the size of the backtracking tree generated during the calculation. This size is determined by the numbers $\tilde{N},\tilde{c}$ and $\tilde{x}$ characterizing the uncoverable subproblem which is typically generated. This calculation can be performed using an annealed approximation and by applying a saddle-point argument (i.e. the running time is exponentially dominated by the largest uncoverable subproblem generated). Details can be found in Ref. [@cover-time]. The result is displayed in Fig. \[figTime\], where it is compared with numerical simulations.
Note that the algorithm exhibits a peak of the running time exactly at the phase boundary. This can be directly understood by looking again at Fig. \[figTraj\]: For $x>x_{\rm c}(c)$ the uncoverable subproblems, which have to be backtracked fully, are smaller than the full graph. For $x<x_{\rm c}(c)$, the number of covering marks is so small that the generated backtracking trees are smaller due to the trivial bound included in the algorithm. Thus, directly [*at*]{} the phase boundary the size of the backtracking tree is maximal.
Fluctuations and random restarts {#sec:restarts}
--------------------------------
In the analysis summarized above, the algorithm was assumed to follow the [*typical*]{}, or average, trajectory in phase space, and the generated subproblems become uncoverable exactly when the trajectory crosses the cov-uncov phase boundary. These assumptions hold with a probability tending to one in the thermodynamic limit, so they are perfectly justified if we consider a single run of the algorithm.
There are, however, exponentially rare deviations from these two assumptions, which can be exploited by running the algorithm described above only up to some cutoff backtracking time, and restarting it using a new seed for the random-number generator if no solution was found. In general we will need exponentially frequent restarts of the algorithm, but these can be over-compensated by an exponential time gain due to the restricted backtracking time. According to Montanari and Zecchina [@montanari2002], the relevant rare events are:
- Also in the uncoverable phase, there exists an exponentially small fraction of coverable instances. Following the first descent into the backtracking tree in these rare cases, the system will stay coverable up to a point well inside the uncoverable phase. The largest generated uncoverable sub-instance will be smaller, and the backtracking time consequently shorter. The exponential gain due to the smaller backtracking tree has to be balanced against the exponential number of restarts needed to find this smaller tree. Analytically, these events can be described in a replica calculation generalizing the one which was used to calculate the phase boundary.
- Right from the beginning, the algorithm may follow a different trajectory in parameter space, also hitting the phase boundary at a later point. Again, macroscopic deviations from the typical trajectory are exponentially rare, but they can be exploited by exponentially frequent restarts. This can be understood analytically within the path-integral formalism introduced by Montanari and Zecchina [@montanari2002], by calculating the probability of an arbitrary trajectory $(c(t),x(t))$ starting at $(c_0,x_0)$.
Most astonishingly, Montanari and Zecchina [@montanari2002] found that the optimal time between restarts is only linear in $N$, i.e. that mainly no backtracking is needed, because the heuristic is able to find a solution even in the first descent - even if this happens with small probability. These analytical results were beautifully confirmed by numerical simulations.
In a more general case [@gomes2000] this can be different: A non-trivial optimum in the restart time can be observed numerically for more sophisticated algorithms.
Generalized heuristics {#sec:generalizedHeuristic}
----------------------
Within the two analysis presented above only a simple heuristic was considered. The generalized heuristic presented in Sec. \[sec:heuristics\] was analyzed by one of the authors [@weigt2002], again for an ensemble of diluted random graphs characterized by an average connectivity $c$. The concentration of the analysis was laid on the heuristic itself, not on the interplay with a backtracking algorithm. The basic idea is similar to the first descent analysis presented in the preceding section: one follows the dynamics of the algorithm analytically in a suitably chosen parameter space. For the algorithm studied in the preceding analysis, the degree distribution $p_d$ of the graphs is unchanged for all times, i.e it remains the usual random graph distribution (Poissonian). Only the average connectivity $c(t)$ is time dependent, leading to a simple differential equation. For the generalized analysis the degree distribution itself is time dependent, i.e. one obtains an infinite set of differential equations for $p_d(t)$. The other difference is that in the preceding section the relative number $x$ of covering marks was given as input to the algorithm (problem P3), while in this case the algorithms runs until all edges are covered (problem P1). The final result of the analysis gives relative size $x_{\rm f}(c)$ of the resulting VC. This allows to compare different variants of the heuristic: Algorithms with smaller $x_{\rm f}(c)$ perform better.
The central idea in the improved heuristic is to select vertices according to degree-dependent weights $w_d \sim d^\alpha$. This allows, e.g., for the preferential selection of high-connectivity vertices as used in the complete algorithm described in Sec. \[sec:algorithms\]. In addition, the inclusion of more than one vertex was allowed by going to depth-$k$ algorithms as already described. The main results of [@weigt2002] are the following:
- For depth $k=0$, the algorithmic performance increased with growing $\alpha$, i.e. with a stronger preference to selecting high-connectivity vertices initially. Asymptotically, the constructed vertex covers were found to be of size $x_f(c)\simeq 1-
2\alpha/(c+2\alpha)$. The correct asymptotics of minimal VCs is reached to leading order only in the limit $\alpha\to\infty$, which is the case implemented in Sec. \[sec:algorithms\].
- For higher depth $k>1$, the correct asymptotics is already reached for $\alpha=0$, i.e. for a completely random selection of vertices. This includes also the algorithm studied by Gazmuri [@Ga], which is characterized by $k=1$ and $\alpha=0$. Still, for low connectivities the constructed VCs are pretty large compared to the minimal ones.
- The best performance was found for a generalized leaf-removal with $w_d=A\delta_{d,1}+1$. In the limit $A\gg 1$, this algorithm unifies the perfect result of leaf removal for small connectivities $c<e$ with the correct asymptotic performance of depth-1 algorithms.
For technical details we refer to [@weigt2002].
VC on other random ensembles {#sec:otherEnsembles}
============================
So far we have presented result for the ensemble of Erdös-Rényi random graphs [@ErRe]. VC has recently been studied on two other ensembles, on random graphs with power-law distribution for the degrees including correlations between vertex degrees, and on graphs where the basic graph-forming elements are cliques.
Vázquez and Weigt [@vazquez2003] have introduced a generalized Bethe-Peierls approach, which allows to study VC and other lattice-gas like models on graphs with arbitrary degree distributions $p_d$. Furthermore correlations $e_{d,d^\prime}$ between the degrees of connected vertices are allowed: The quantity $e_{d,d^\prime}$ measures the probability that for a randomly selected edge, the first end-vertex has degree $d$, and the second one has degree $d'$. The RS result is evaluated for power-law distributions $p_d\sim d^{-\gamma}$ ($\gamma >2$) and with correlations $e_{dd^\prime}=q_d[r\delta_{d,d^\prime}+(1-r)q_{d^\prime} ]$ where $q_d=(d+1)p_{d+1}/c$ is the probability that for a random edge a vertex attached to the edge has degree $d+1$. The parameter $r$ can be used to interpolate between the uncorrelated ($r=0$) regime and the regime where each vertex is only connected to vertices of the same degree ($r=1$). The analytical result for the threshold $x_c(r)$ is compared with numerical results obtained from the application of a generalized leaf-removal. The leaf-removal process can be used to determine the onset of RSB: It appears when the number of treated vertices having minimal degree larger than 1 during the run of the algorithm becomes of order of the graph size. The main result is that for small values of $r$ (e.g. $r<0.7$ for $\gamma=2.5$) the problem is always easy, i.e. the leaf-removal finds the correct answer. In other words: Uncorrelated power-law graphs are coverable in polynomial time. In this region a good coincidence between the analytical and numerical results could be observed. Results in the RSB region for large $r$ are not available so far.
A different approach to obtain hard ensembles is followed in Ref. [@hclg2003]. There, graphs are constructed from basic units consisting of $p$-cliques, i.e. fully connected subgraphs of $p$ vertices. The full graph is obtained by randomly joining $K$ cliques in every vertex. VC on such graphs, or the corresponding lattice-gas model, can be solved using the cavity approach. For $p,K\geq 3$, a discontinuous 1RSB transition is found at some VC size being extensively larger than the minimal VC size. This means that the problem is computationally hard, even if one would be satisfied with a solution of order $O(1)$ away from the optimum. Furthermore, when studying the dynamics using a Monte Carlo algorithm in the grand-canonical ensemble (see Sec. \[sec:heuristics\]), a dynamical transition to a glassy phase [@Go] appears: The system gets trapped in metastable states, and equilibration times are exponentially large in $N$. For this reason, VC on the modified graph ensemble represents a good mean-field model for structural glass formers. It has, in particular, only two-particle interactions in contrast to previous hard-core lattice gas models [@FrMeRiWeZe; @BiMe; @LeDe] for glasses.
Summary and outlook
===================
We have introduced the vertex-cover problem, which is one of the fundamental NP-complete problems in theoretical computer science. We have reviewed different incomplete and complete algorithms for solving VC. Although VC is considered to be computationally hard, on an ensemble of random graphs, it exhibits an easy-hard transition when looking for vertex covers of given size. This make the problem very valuable for studies aiming for the understanding of the origin of computational hardness.
Using concepts and methods of statistical physics, many properties of the model can be understood which are well beyond the horizon of traditional approaches in theoretical computer science. In the low-connectivity region ($c<e$, i.e. even above the percolation threshold $c=1$), it is possible to calculate the phase boundary exactly using the replica trick or the cavity approach. Above $c=e$ full RSB sets in continuously. The morphology of the phase diagram and the onset of RSB can be related to different percolation transitions occurring in the graph and in the solution space structure of vertex covers.
Furthermore it is possible to analyze analytically simple backtracking algorithms by following the parameter flow in the phase diagram and to calculate the easy-hard transition threshold. It is possible to understand better how an algorithm solves a coverable problem by including fluctuations in the analysis. Also more complex heuristics, so far without including backtracking, can be analyzed.
One central point of the future research will be to study special ensembles of graphs, which are very hard to solve. Examples are graphs with correlations or graphs having small complete subgraphs. In particular, one is interested in finite-dimensional regular graphs (i.e. lattices) exhibiting one-step RSB, which would make them a good model for structural glass formers.
Another direction of the future research will be the analysis of more complicated algorithms, i.e. backtracking algorithms with better heuristics or including bounds. Finally, the research aims to apply statistical mechanics methods to invent more efficient algorithms, similar to the recent development of the survey-propagation algorithm by Mézard, Parisi and Zecchina [@mezard2002] which originates in the cavity approach.
We would like to thank W Barthel, M Leone, R Monasson, F Ricci-Tersenghi, A Vázquez, R Zecchina, and H Zhou for fruitful cooperations and numerous interesting discussions. Furthermore, we would like to thank the editors of this special issue, E Marinari, H Nishimori and F Ricci-Tersenghi, for inviting us to write a review article. AKH acknowledges financial support from the VolkswagenStifung, Germany.\
[99]{}
van Hemmen L and Morgenstern I (ed.), [*Heidelberg Colloqium on Glassy Dynamics*]{}, (Springer, Heidelberg 1986)
Hartmann A K and Rieger H, [*Optimization Algorithms in Physics*]{}, (Wiley-VCH, Berlin, 2001)
Kirkpatrick S, Gelatt C D and Vecchi M P, [*Science*]{} [**220**]{}, 671 (1983)
Lewis H R and Papadimitriou C H, [*Elements of the Theory of Computaion*]{}, (Prentice-Hall, London 1981)
Papadimitriou P, [*Computational Complexity*]{}, (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1994)
Sipser M, [*Introduction to the Theory of Computation*]{}, (PWS, Boston, MA, 1997)
Turing A M, Proc. London Math. Soc. [**42**]{}, 230; [**43**]{} 544 (1936)
Garey M R and Johnson D S, [ Computers and Intractability]{}, (Freeman, San Francisco, 1979)
Hogg T, Huberman B A and Williams C (eds.), Frontiers in problem solving: phase transitions and complexity, [ *Artif. Intell.*]{} [**81**]{} (I+II) (1996)
Dubois O, Monasson R, Selman B and Zecchina R (eds.), special issue of [ J. Theor. Comp. Sci.]{} [**265**]{} (2001)
Mitchell D, Selman B and Levesque H, in [ *Proc. 10th Natl. Conf. Artif. Intell. (AAAI-92)*]{}, 440 (AAAI Press/MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1992)
Selman B and Kirkpatrick S, Science [**264**]{}, 1297 (1994).
Yeomans J M, [*Statistical mechanics of Phase transitions*]{}, (Oxford University Press, 1992)
Goldenfeld N, [*Lectures on Phase Transitions and the Renormalization Group*]{}, (Addison Wesley, Reading, MA, 1992)
Mézard M, Parisi G and Virasoro M A, [*Spin glasses and beyond*]{}, (World Scientific, Singapore 1987)
Cook S A, Proc. 3rd ACM Symp. on the Theory of Computing, 151 (Association for Computer Machinery, New York, 1971)
Monasson R, Zecchina R , [ Phys. Rev.]{} [ E56]{}, 1357 (1997)
Monasson R, Zecchina R, Kirkpatrick S, Selman B and Troyansky L, [ Nature]{} [**400**]{}, 133 (1999)
Biroli G, Monasson R and Weigt M, [ Europ. Phys. J. B]{} [**14**]{}, 551 (2000)
Ricci-Tersenghi F, Weigt M and Zecchina R, Phys. Rev. E [**63**]{}, 026702 (2001)
Mézard M, Parisi G and Zecchina R, Science [**297**]{}, 812 (2002)
Erdös P and Rényi A, [ Publ. Math. Inst. Hung. Acad. Sci.]{} [**5**]{},17 (1960)
Bollobas B, [ Random Graphs]{} (Academic Press 1985)
Harant J, [ Discr. Math.]{} [**188**]{}, 239 (1998)
Caro C, [ Technical Report]{}, Tel Aviv University (1979); Wei V K, [ Bell Lab. Technical Memorandum]{} 81-11217-9 (1981)
Bollobás B and Erdös P, [ Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc.]{} [**80**]{}, 419 (1976)
Gazmuri P G, [Networks]{} [**14**]{}, 367 (1984)
Frieze A M, [Discr. Math.]{} [**81**]{}, 171 (1990)
Weigt M, Eur. Phys. J. B [**28**]{}, 369 (2002)
Weigt M and Hartmann A K, Europhys. Lett. [**62**]{}, 533 (2003)
Gomes C P, Selman B, Crato N and Kautz K, J. of Autoamted Reasoning [**24**]{}, 67 (2000); Gomes C P, Selman B and Kautz K, Proc. AAAI-98, 431 (Madison, WI, 1998)
Balas E and Samuelson A, Management Sci. Res. Rep. [**325**]{}, (Carnegie-Mellon Univ., Pittsburgh, PA, 1973)
Nemhauser G L and Trotter L E, Math. Programming [**8**]{}, 232 (1975)
Tarjan R E and Trojanowski A E, [ SIAM J. Comp.]{} [**6**]{}, 537 (1977)
Bauer M and Golinelli O, Eur. Phys. J. B [**24**]{}, 339 (2001)
M. Shindo and E. Tomita, [ Syst. Comp. Jap.]{} [ **21**]{}, 1 (1990)
Lawler E L and Wood D E, [ Oper. Res.]{} [**14**]{}, 699 (1966)
Lüling R and Monien B, Sixth International Parallel Processing Symposium, IEEE Comput. Soc. Press, Los Alamitos, USA, 543 (1992)
Montanari A and Zecchina R, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**88**]{}, 178701 (2002)
Weigt M and Hartmann A K, [Phys. Rev. Lett.]{} [ **84**]{}, 6118 (2000)
Hartmann A K and Weigt M, [ J. Theor. Comp. Sci.]{} [**265**]{}, 199 (2001)
Weigt M and Hartmann A K, [Phys. Rev. E]{} [ **63**]{}, 056127 (2001)
Baxter R J, [ Exactly Solved Models in Statistical Mechanics]{}, (Academic Press London, 1982)
Russo F M, [ Phys. Lett. A]{} [**239**]{}, 17 (1998)
Scarpetta S, de Candidia A and Coniglio A, [ Phys. Rev. E]{} [**55**]{}, 4943 (1997)
Ricci-Tersenghi F, Stariolo D A, Arenzon J J, [ Phys. Rev. Lett.]{} [**84**]{}, 4473 (2000), [ Phys. Rev. E]{} [ **62**]{}, 5978 (2000)
Nicodemi M, Coniglio A and Herrmann H J, [ Phys. Rev. E]{} [**55**]{}, 3962 (1997); [ J. Phys. A]{} [**30**]{}, L379 (1997)
Nicodemi M [ J. Phys.]{} [**I7**]{}, 1365 (1998)
Caglioti E, Herrmann H J, Loreto V and Nicodemi M, [ Phys. Rev. Lett.]{} [**79**]{}, 1575 (1997) Nicodemi M and Coniglio A, [ Phys. Rev. Lett.]{} [**82**]{}, 916 (1999), [ J. Phys. C]{} [**12**]{}, 6601 (2000) Monasson R and Pouliquen O, [ Physica A]{} [ **236**]{}, 395 (1997) Barrat A and Loreto V, [ J. Phys. A]{} [**33**]{}, 4401 (2000)
Monasson R, [ J. Phys. A]{} [**31**]{}, 513 (1998)
De Dominicis C and Mottishaw P, [ J. Phys.]{} [ A20]{}, L1267 (1987) Mottishaw P and De Dominicis C, [ J. Phys.]{} [ A20]{}, L375 (1987) Wong K Y M and Sherrington D, [ J. Phys.]{} [ A21]{}, L459 (1988) Goldschmidt Y Y and Lai P Y, [ J. Phys.]{} [ A23]{}, L775 (1990) Mézard M and Parisi G, Eur. Phys. J. B [**20**]{}, 217 (2001)
Zhou H, preprint cond-mat/0302289 (2003)
Bauer M and Golinelli O, Phys. Rev. Lett. [ **86**]{}, 2621 (2001)
Cocco S and Monasson R, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**86**]{}, 1654 (2001)
Weigt M and Hartmann A K, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**86**]{}, 1658 (2001)
Chao M T and Franco J, [*SIAM J. Comput.*]{} [ **15**]{}, 1106 (1986)
Vázquez A and Weigt M, Phys. Rev. E [**67**]{}, 027101 (2003)
For review see, Götze W, [*Liquids, freezing and glass transition*]{}, Les Houches (1989), Hansen J P, Levesque D, Zinn-Justin J (eds.), North Holland; Angell C A, Science [**267**]{}, 1924 (1995)
Franz S, Mézard M, Ricci-Tersenghi F, Weigt M and Zecchina R, Europhys. Lett. [**55**]{}, 465 (2001); Franz S, Leone M, Ricci-Tersenghi F and Zecchina R, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**87**]{}, 127209 (2001)
Biroli G and Mézard M, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**88**]{}, 025501 (2002)
Dean D S and Lefèvre A, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**86**]{}, 5639 (2001); Berg J and Mehta A, Europhys. Lett. [**56**]{}, 784 (2001); Advances in Complex Systems, 4(4), 309 (2001); Lefèvre A and Dean D S, Phys. Rev. B [**65**]{}, 220403 (2002)
[^1]: The Clay Mathematics Institute of Cambridge, Massachusetts (CMI) has designated a \$1 million price for the solution of the P-NP problem.
[^2]: The algorithm used here terminates after a full cover of the graph has been found since it is ot necessary to enumerate all solutions
[^3]: Set $best:=0$ initially.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
Experimental setup
==================
Spontaneous parametric downconversion source
--------------------------------------------
The photon pair source is based on a $2 {\ \mathrm}{cm}$ long Potassium Titanyl Phosphate (KTP) crystal, phase-matched for degenerate collinear type-II downconversion from $532 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ to $1064 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ and pumped with $\sim 400 {\ \mathrm}{mW}$ of $532 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ laser light from a Millenia diode pumped solid state laser (beam diameter $2.3 {\ \mathrm}{mm}$). This beam still has some background radiation at $1064 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$, which is short-pass filtered (Semrock FF01-529/24-25 and Thorlabs FL532-10). After the crystal, the pump light is filtered out using a long pass filter (Semrock BLP01-635R-25). The spectra in both arms after the polarizing beam splitter are shown in [Fig. \[fig:downconversion\]]{}. The spectral width is set by the length of the crystal in combination with the phase-matching condition. Care is taken to use the optimal focusing condition [@fedrizzi2007wavelength] by choosing the lenses such that the crystal length is about 2 times the Rayleigh range for the pump beam, and 3.5 times the Rayleigh range for the signal and idler beam. In our case we use a focusing lens with $f = 250 {\ \mathrm}{mm}$ and a collection lens with $f = 175 {\ \mathrm}{mm}$.
Correlation measurements on APDs (Perkin Elmer SPCM-AQRH) with an efficiency of $\sim 1.5\%$ gave single count rates of $1.45 {\ \mathrm}{MHz}$ and $1.6 {\ \mathrm}{MHz}$ and a pair rate of $8050 {\ \mathrm}{Hz}$, giving an estimated pair production-rate of $\frac{N_1N_2}{N_c} = 288 {\ \mathrm}{MHz}$.
Sample fabrication
------------------
The samples are fabricated on a sapphire substrate purchased from Scontel with $\sim 5 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ NbN sputtered with the substrate heated to $\sim 800$. Contacts are defined by e-beam writing in a $\sim 250 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ thick PMMA layer followed by evaporation and lift-off of chrome ($15 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$) / gold ($50 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$). The SSPDs are patterned by e-beam in a $70 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ thick hydrogen silsesquioxane (HSQ) layer, developed in TMAH ($5 {\ \mathrm}{sec}$) and $\mathrm{MF322:H_2O}$ 1:9 ($15 {\ \mathrm}{sec}$) and used as an etching mask for an $\mathrm{SF_6}$ reactive ion etch (RIE). Usually the HSQ is removed by a $2 {\ \mathrm}{sec}$ dip in BHF, but for the quantum interference sample the remaining layer ($\sim 40 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ after etching) was left on as it seemed to damage some devices, probably due to dirt under the NbN film. A thin insulating layer of $\sim 10 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ $\mathrm{Al_2O_3}$ is deposited by Atomic Layer Deposition (ALD). The waveguides require a three layer mask because the substrate is not conductive at this point. Therefore we spin a $\sim 450 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ layer of Shipley S1805 photo-resist, sputter a $\sim 10 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ layer of tungsten and spin a layer $\sim 90 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ PMMA. The waveguide pattern is e-beam written in the PMMA. After developing in MIBK:IPA 1:3, the tungsten is removed with an $\mathrm{SF_6}$ RIE and the S1805 using an $\mathrm{O_2}$ plasma. This makes sure the substrate is very clean, so a $150 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ gold layer can be evaporated without using a sticking layer, which would make the plasmonic modes much more lossy. Lift-off is performed in warm acetone and followed by an $\mathrm{HNO_3}$ dip ($5 {\ \mathrm}{sec}$) to remove resist residues. The waveguides are covered with $\sim 10 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ ALD $\mathrm{Al_2O_3}$. The last step is to add a thick $\mathrm{Al_2O_3}$ layer to make the environment more symmetric. This is done by sputtering a $\sim 7 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ layer of chrome and spinning a $\sim 900 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ thick layer of PMMA. After e-beam writing and developing the chromium layer is removed by wet etching and a $\sim 550 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ layer of $\mathrm{Al_2O_3}$ is sputtered. Finally, lift-off is performed in acetone and the remaining chromium is removed by wet etching.
Measurement setup
-----------------
The SSPDs are biased using a home-made bias tee with built-in RC filters. The high frequency output is amplified by a $1 {\ \mathrm}{GHz}$ bandwidth minicircuits ZFL-1000LN+ followed by a $1.45 {\ \mathrm}{GHz}$ RF-Bay LNA-1450. For pulse counting measurements the signal is converted to TTL pulses using a comparator circuit and sent to a frequency divider. The divide-by-2 output is connected to a National Instruments USB-6216 card for counting. Correlations are measured by directly sending the generated TTL pulses to a Picoharp 300 time correlated single photon counter.
The sample is mounted on an Attocube XYZ slip-stick piezo positioner stage. For the measurements in Fig. 3 of the main text, actually the sample is raster scanned and the focused laser spot is fixed.
Additional measurements
=======================
Polarization dependence {#sec:poldep}
-----------------------
To characterize the plasmon excitation efficiency we have measured the dependence of the detector signals as a function of the polarization angle of a linearly polarized laser beam illuminating one input at a time. The result of this measurement is shown in [Fig. \[fig:poldep\]]{}. There is a clear optimum excitation angle, different for both of the inputs which are designed to be oriented at a 75 angle with respect to each other. However, both the fact that the visibility is not 100% and the fact that the two detectors do not show an identical polarization dependence indicates that we are exciting multiple modes. We are mostly interested in the strongly confined mode, but the long-range surface plasmon modes (LRSP, see section \[sec:simulations\]) are also excited. We can estimate the population of the LRSP modes from the difference in the optimum polarization angle, which is on average 11 (in 2 devices that we have measured). The population of other modes then corresponds to a fraction of ${{\mathrm{sin} \left( 11 \right)}} \approx 0.19$.
Cross coupling factor
---------------------
The cross coupling factor $c$ is estimated by successively illuminating the left and right input with a focused laser spot and optimizing the detector count-rates at both positions. Considering $c$ to be identical for left-to-right and right-to-left coupling, the count rates are given by $C_l = I_l(1 - c)\eta_l$ and $C_r = I_lc\eta_r$ when exciting plasmons in arm $l$ with intensity $I_l$. When exciting the right arm the count rates are given by $C'_l = I_rc\eta_l$ and $C'_r = I_r(1 - c)\eta_r$. From these equations the coupling factor can be obtained, as well as the relative detector and plasmon excitation efficiencies. We have measured the coupling factor on many devices with different coupling length $L$ and show the results in [Fig. \[fig:splitratio\]]{}a. The characteristic length for a 50/50 splitter based on two waveguides with a $100 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ gap is estimated to be $L_{\sfrac{\pi}{2}} \approx 1.6 {\ \mathrm}{\mu m}$ from the dashed line. Important to note is that a splitter can be realized in which almost all of the power is coupled from one arm to the opposite arm, confirming that these devices function as directional couplers. The dashed curve indicates that this should happen for $L \approx 1.2 {\ \mathrm}{\mu m}$. Although we did not fabricate devices of exactly that length, the measurements with $L \approx 1.6 {\ \mathrm}{\mu m}$ show a cross coupling close to one. The devices with $L = 0$ have no extra coupling length, so only consist of the waveguides smoothly coming together until the gap size and separating again. This already results in a significant coupling between them. They seem to show more uniform cross coupling behavior when comparing to the other, longer devices. The spread in cross coupling for these longer devices is caused by the fact that it is hard to create a uniform gap of $100 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ between two waveguides over a length of micrometers. The irregularities, for example due to the grain structure and other fabrication imperfections, will result in a spread of cross coupling factors.
--------------------------- --
**[(a)]{} & **[(b)]{}****
--------------------------- --
A more accurate measurement of the cross coupling factor can be performed using the photon pair source. We set a large delay between the photons forming a pair and send one of them to the left input and the other to the right input. By performing a time-resolved correlation measurement we can observe the correlated clicks of the left and right detector. These will only show correlated events when either both plasmons forming a pair stay in the arm where they were excited, or when both of them cross to the opposite arm. Because of the large time delay between the plasmons these events can be distinguished in time, as can be seen in the upper and lower trace in [Fig. \[fig:splitratio\]]{}b. The area of the peak due to plasmons coupling to the opposite arm scales with $c^2$, the other one with $(1 - c)^2$. The fact that the peaks are almost equal in area confirms that $c$ is close to $0.5$ and therefore that this is a 50/50 coupler.
Classical interference
======================
To perform a classical interference experiment we first convert the SSPD signal pulses to an analog signal. A comparator is used to amplify and stretch each detection pulse to a 5V, $\sim 50 {\ \mathrm}{ns}$ long signal. A low pass filter with a cut-off frequency of about $5 {\ \mathrm}{kHz}$ is used to form the output. The two input waveguides are then simultaneously excited using two separate laser spots, originating from the same laser but with a periodic phase modulation (70 Hz) applied to one of the beams using a mirror on a piezo-electric stage. The resulting detector signals are shown in [Fig. \[fig:classical\]]{} and clearly show a classical interference signal, although with reduced visibility $V = 0.747$ for detector 1 and $V = 0.592$ for detector 2. The reduced and unequal visibility in the signals is due to the excitation of the LRSP modes and imperfect mode overlap in the coupling area. For the interference visibility in the quantum experiment we expect an upper bound given by the average of the classical visibilities, or $V = 0.669$. It should be noted that the two detector signals are $\pi$ out of phase, which means that the ideal beam splitter phase relations are properly maintained.
Quantum interference visibility
===============================
Our limited quantum interference visibility can be explained by the population of the LRSP modes that our waveguides supports (section \[sec:simulations\]). In section \[sec:poldep\] we estimated the population of these 2 modes to be $P \approx 0.19$. The input state of our beam splitter can now be described as: $$\begin{aligned}
{|\psi\rangle} &=& (\sqrt{1 - P} {|S_1\rangle} + \sqrt{P} {|L_1\rangle}) \times (\sqrt{1 - P} {|S_2\rangle} + \sqrt{P} {|L_2\rangle}) \\
&=& (1 - P) {|S_1S_2\rangle} + P {|L_1L_2\rangle} + \sqrt{P(1 - P)}({|L_1S_2\rangle} + {|S_1L_2\rangle})\end{aligned}$$ where $S_i$ and $L_i$ respectively indicate the strongly confined and LRSP mode in input $i$. Now only the first term will result in quantum interference, with an intensity $I = (1 - P)^2$. Against a background of $1 - I$ this directly results in a visibility $V = \sfrac{(max - min)}{(max + min)} = \sfrac{I}{(2 - I)} \approx 0.49$. The imperfect overlap of the single waveguide mode with the supermodes in the coupling region (see section \[sec:simulations\]) will degrade the interference visibility further by 8%, bringing the total expected visibility $V$ down to $0.45$, very close to the value we observe in our experiment.
A Hong-Ou-Mandel like interference dip with a visibility of up to 0.5 can be obtained for classical fields if they are coherent. This HOM-*like* effect can be used to measure the visibility of the first order correlation function [@ou1989fourth]. In the present experiment, however, the two beams from the downconversion process are mutually incoherent because we operate in the spontaneous, or low-photon number, regime [@joobeur1994spatiotemporal]. Therefore the HOM-*like* effect can not account for our observations. From the time-resolved correlation measurements we also conclude that the bunching only occurs at very short time-scales, whereas the HOM-*like* effect would result in bunching on the time-scale of the phase-fluctuations. By showing that we can observe classical interference at $70 {\ \mathrm}{Hz}$ we prove that the phase-fluctuations in our setup are much slower than the bunching time-scale of less than a nanosecond that we observe (still limited by our detectors).
Another clear aspect of the quantum mechanical nature of the plasmons in this experiment can be found in the correlation statistics: the two beams combined yield statistics very different from the product of the statistics of the individual beams. Whereas each of the beams obeys Poissonian photon statistics, the cross correlation shows very strong bunching. This is essentially a manifestation of photon-number entanglement between the two beams and no classical field can mimic this property [@mandel1986non]. The heralded states we use make sure that if a photon is detected in one of the beams a partner photon is present in the other, which is therefore projected in the Fock-state $|1\rangle$, one of the clearest non-classical states.
--------------------------- --
**[(a)]{} & **[(b)]{}****
--------------------------- --
----------------------------------------------- -- --
**[(a)]{} & **[(b)]{} & **[(c)]{}\
& &\
**[(d)]{} & **[(e)]{} & **[(f)]{}************
----------------------------------------------- -- --
Simulations {#sec:simulations}
===========
Single waveguide
----------------
An optical mode solver is used to find the eigenmodes of a single gold waveguide ($\epsilon = -52.0595 + 3.385i$, thickness $150 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$) on top of a sapphire substrate ($\epsilon = 3.06$). The structure is covered with a $500 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ dielectric layer of the same index on top; above that is air. The dispersion relation and propagation lengths ($\delta = \frac{\lambda}{4 \pi Im(n)}$) are shown in [Fig. \[fig:dispersion\]]{}a and b respectively. Below a width of $\sim 1 {\ \mathrm}{\mu m}$ there is only one strongly confined mode, with a high effective index and correspondingly a relatively short propagation length. This mode will be referred to as the Short Range Surface Plasmon (SRSP) mode. The last two remaining modes with a decreasing effective index for narrower waveguides are long-range surface plasmon (LRSP) modes which are not well-confined [@jung2007theoretical].
As input waveguides for our beam splitter structure we selected a $300 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ wide waveguide. The different components of the SRSP mode are shown in [Fig. \[fig:single\_mode\]]{}. Note that the mode solver code gives the magnetic field components of the eigenmodes and the electric field components are derived from those. This requires taking derivatives on the discrete grid and the resulting electric fields are not as smooth as the magnetic fields, i.e. contain some large-valued pixels which causes the scaling to look somewhat odd.
A problem of small waveguides is that they result in high losses, in this case a propagation length of $\sim 7.5 {\ \mathrm}{\mu m}$. After the beam we increase the width to 600 nm to give a slightly increased propagation length of $\sim 9 {\ \mathrm}{\mu m}$. This ensures that a larger fraction of the power is absorbed by the SSPD instead of the gold waveguide.
Mode areas
----------
The waveguides we use offer confinement just below the diffraction limit of sapphire waveguides. To justify this statement we have calculated the effective mode area $\mathrm{A_{eff}}$, as is commonly used in fiber optics [@agrawal2001fiber]: $$\mathrm{A_{eff}} = \frac{ \left( \int |H|^2 dr \right)^2}{\int |H|^4 dr}$$ We plot the effective area for a square gold waveguide and a gold waveguide of 150 nm thick in Fig. \[fig:mode\_area\]. We compare this to a dielectric waveguide made out of silicon (n = 3.6) embedded in $\mathrm{SiO_2}$ and to another one made of $\mathrm{Al_2O_3}$ (n = 1.75) embedded in air. We see that our structure results in a mode area that is just below the smallest possible mode in $\mathrm{Al_2O_3}$. The plasmonic structure size required to reach a mode area comparable to the diffraction limit of an $\mathrm{Al_2O_3}$ waveguide is about 2 times as small, as a result of the plasmonic mode being confined to the surface and not within the dielectric. Silicon, with its much higher dielectric constant allows for still smaller modes. What is important to note, however, is that the plasmonic modes offer a way to decrease the mode area further below the diffraction limit by reducing the waveguide size, although this mode will be lossier as well. Our calculated mode areas present an upper limit, as the electric energy is slightly more confined than the magnetic energy. Because the electric fields are deduced and therefore less accurate quantities in our simulations, we chose to use the magnetic energy density only to estimate $\mathrm{A_{eff}}$.
----------------------------------------------- -- --
**[(a)]{} & **[(b)]{} & **[(c)]{}\
& &\
**[(d)]{} & **[(e)]{} & **[(f)]{}************
----------------------------------------------- -- --
----------------------------------------------- -- --
**[(a)]{} & **[(b)]{} & **[(c)]{}\
& &\
**[(d)]{} & **[(e)]{} & **[(f)]{}************
----------------------------------------------- -- --
Coupled waveguides
------------------
The coupling region consists of $250 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ wide, $150 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$ thick waveguides with a gap of 100 or 150 nm. The mode profiles of the symmetric and anti-symmetric modes for a structure with a 150 nm gap are shown in [Fig. \[fig:coupled\_symm\]]{} and [Fig. \[fig:coupled\_antisymm\]]{}. We have calculated overlap integrals with the single mode of a 250 nm wide waveguide, and find an overlap of $\mathrm{f_1} = 0.6962$ and $\mathrm{f_2 = \pm 0.6617}$ with the symmetric and anti-symmetric mode respectively. This leads to a fraction $\mathrm{f_1}^2 + \mathrm{f_2}^2 = 0.92$ of the energy being transmitted, and a fraction of $0.08$ being scattered. By increasing the distance between the two waveguides it is possible to reduce the amount of scattered light, although this will result in a smaller effective index difference and therefore a longer coupling section. In [Fig. \[fig:coupled\_addsub\]]{}a and b we show the sum and difference of the symmetric and anti-symmetric mode. These images indeed resemble the single waveguide modes ([Fig. \[fig:single\_mode\]]{}b) quite well, but show that the scattered light will mostly be on the far side, opposite of the waveguide that is being excited. This scattered light will lead to a decrease in interference visibility. The calculated 8% scattered light is a lower bound: defects on our waveguides could increase this value. Although it is hard to estimate exactly how large this effect is, the scans presented in the main text show that only the ends of the waveguides are efficient plasmon in-couplers; we therefore do not expect too much out-coupling due to scattering either.
--------------------------- --
**[(a)]{} & **[(b)]{}****
--------------------------- --
Using the complex effective indices of the supermodes we can calculate the expected cross-coupling and loss as a function of the directional coupler length; this is shown in [Fig. \[fig:splitloss\]]{}. This gives a characteristic length $L_{\sfrac{\pi}{2}}$ of $1.36 {\ \mathrm}{\mu m}$ for waveguides with a 100 nm gap, slightly less than the experimental value of $\sim 1.6 {\ \mathrm}{\mu m}$. The difference could be due to the gap size or waveguide width slightly deviating from the design or the real dielectric constants being different than the values used in the simulation.
----------------------------------------------- -- --
**[(a)]{} & **[(b)]{} & **[(c)]{}\
& &\
**[(d)]{} & **[(e)]{} & **[(f)]{}************
----------------------------------------------- -- --
Absorption calculations
-----------------------
To optimize the fraction of optical power absorbed in the SSPD (NbN, $\epsilon = -16.96 + 13.05i$) versus losses in the plasmonic waveguide, we calculate the eigenmodes of several geometries in [Fig. \[fig:loss\_structures\]]{}a-c. The aborbtion loss for these structures is given by $\int{Im(\epsilon)E^2dA}$ and shown in [Fig. \[fig:loss\_structures\]]{}d-f. We performed these simulations for different waveguide widths, but only show the results of a width of $600 {\ \mathrm}{nm}$. We conclude that the optimal geometry is the one with the SSPD running parallel to the waveguide and having the waveguide edges right above the NbN meander stripes.
[1]{}
A. Fedrizzi, T. Herbst, A. Poppe, T. Jennewein, and A. Zeilinger, “A wavelength-tunable fiber-coupled source of narrowband entangled photons,” [*Opt. Express*]{}, vol. 15, no. 23, pp. 15377–15386, 2007.
Z. Y. Ou, E. C. Gage, B. E. Magill, and L. Mandel, “Fourth-order interference technique for determining the coherence time of a light beam,” [*JOSA B*]{}, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 100–103, 1989.
A. Joobeur, B. Saleh, and M. Teich, “Spatiotemporal coherence properties of entangled light beams generated by parametric down-conversion,” [*Phys. Rev. A*]{}, vol. 50, no. 4, p. 3349, 1994.
L. Mandel, “Non-classical states of the electromagnetic field,” [*Phys. Scr. T*]{}, vol. 12, pp. 34–42, 1986.
J. Jung, T. S[ø]{}ndergaard, and S. I. Bozhevolnyi, “Theoretical analysis of square surface plasmon-polariton waveguides for long-range polarization-independent waveguiding,” [*Phys. Rev. B*]{}, vol. 76, no. 3, p. 035434, 2007.
G. P. Agrawal, [*Nonlinear fiber optics*]{}. Academic Press, 2001.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We investigate topological, combinatorial, statistical, and enumeration properties of finite graphs with high Kolmogorov complexity (almost all graphs) using the novel incompressibility method. Example results are: (i) the mean and variance of the number of (possibly overlapping) ordered labeled subgraphs of a labeled graph as a function of its randomness deficiency (how far it falls short of the maximum possible Kolmogorov complexity) and (ii) a new elementary proof for the number of unlabeled graphs.'
author:
- 'Harry Buhrman[^1]'
- 'Ming Li[^2]'
- 'John Tromp[^3]'
- 'Paul Vitányi[^4]'
title: 'Kolmogorov Random Graphs and the Incompressibility Method[^5]'
---
Kolmogorov complexity, incompressiblity method, random graphs, enumeration of graphs, algorithmic information theory
68Q30, 05C80, 05C35, 05C30
Introduction
============
The incompressibility of individual random objects yields a simple but powerful proof technique. The incompressibility method, [@LiVi93], is a new general purpose tool and should be compared with the pigeon hole principle or the probabilistic method. Here we apply the incompressibility method to randomly generated graphs and “individually random” graphs—graphs with high Kolmogorov complexity.
In a typical proof using the incompressibility method, one first chooses an individually random object from the class under discussion. This object is effectively incompressible. The argument invariably says that if a desired property does not hold, then the object can be compressed. This yields the required contradiction. Since a randomly generated object is [*with overwhelming probability*]{} individually random and hence incompressible, one usually obtains the property with high probability.
[**Results**]{} We apply the incompressibility method to obtain combinatorial properties of graphs with high Kolmogorov complexity. These properties are parametrized in terms of a “randomness deficiency” function.[^6] This can be considered as a parametrized version of the incompressibility method. In Section \[sect.topol\] we show that: For every labeled graph on $n$ nodes with high Kolmogorov complexity (also called “Kolmogorov random graph” or “high complexity graph”) the node degree of every vertex is about $n/2$ and there are about $n/4$ node-disjoint paths of length 2 between every pair of nodes. In Section \[sect.statsubgr\], we analyze ‘normality’ properties of Kolmogorov random graphs. In analogy with infinite sequences one can call an infinite labeled graph ‘normal’ if each finite ordered labeled subgraph of size $k$ occurs in the appropriate sense (possibly overlapping) with limiting frequency $2^{-{k \choose 2}}$. It follows from Martin-Löf’s theory of effective tests for randomness [@Ma66] that individually random (high complexity) infinite labeled graphs are normal. Such properties cannot hold precisely for finite graphs, where randomness is necessarily a matter of degree: We determine close quantitative bounds on the normality (frequency of subgraphs) of high complexity finite graphs in terms of their randomness deficiency. Denote the number of unlabeled graphs on $n$ nodes by $g_n$. In Section \[sect.unlabeled\] we demonstrate the use of the incompressibility method and Kolmogorov random graphs by providing a new elementary proof that $g_n \sim 2^{n \choose 2} / n!$. This has previously been obtained by more advanced methods, [@HP73]. Moreover, we give a good estimate of the error term. Part of the proof involves estimating the order (number of automorphisms) $s(G)$ of graphs $G$ as a function of the randomness deficiency of $G$. For example, we show that labeled graphs with randomness deficiency appropriately less than $n$ are rigid (have but one automorphism: the identity automorphism).
[**Related Work**]{} Several properties above (high degree nodes, diameter 2, rigidity) have also been proven by traditional methods to hold with high probability for randomly generated graphs, [@Bo85]. We provide new proofs for these results using the incompressibility method. They are actually proved to hold for the definite class of Kolmogorov random graphs—rather than with high probability for randomly generated graphs. In [@LiVi94b] (also [@LiVi93]) two of us investigated topological properties of labeled graphs with high Kolmogorov complexity and proved them using the incompressibility method to compare ease of such proofs with the probabilistic method [@ES74] and entropy method. In [@Ki92] it was shown that every labeled tree on $n$ nodes with randomness deficiency $O(\log n)$ has maximum node degree of $O( \log n / \log \log n)$. Analysis of Kolmogorov random graphs was used to establish the total interconnect length of Euclidean (real-world) embeddings of computer network topologies [@Vi95], and the size of compact routing tables in computer networks [@BHV95]. Infinite binary sequences that asymptotically have equal numbers of 0’s and 1’s, and more generally, where every block of length $k$ occurs (possibly overlapping) with frequency $1/2^k$ were called “normal” by E. Borel, [@Bo14]. References [@LiVi93; @LiVi94a] investigate the quantitative deviation from normal as a function of the Kolmogorov complexity of a finite binary string. Here we consider analogous question for Kolmogorov random graphs. [^7] Finally, there is a close relation and genuine differences between high-probability properties and properties of incompressible objects, see [@LiVi93], Section 6.2.
Kolmogorov complexity
---------------------
We use the following notation. Let $A$ be a finite set. By $d(A)$ we denote the [*cardinality*]{} of $A$. In particular, $d(\emptyset)=0$. Let $x$ be a finite binary string. Then $l(x)$ denotes the [*length*]{} (number of bits) of $x$. In particular, $l(\epsilon)=0$ where $\epsilon$ denotes the [*empty word*]{}.
Let $x,y,z \in {\cal N}$, where ${\cal N}$ denotes the natural numbers. Identify ${\cal N}$ and $\{0,1\}^*$ according to the correspondence $$(0, \epsilon ), (1,0), (2,1), (3,00), (4,01), \ldots .$$ Hence, the length $l(x)$ of $x$ is the number of bits in the binary string or number $x$. Let $T_0 ,T_1 , \ldots$ be a standard enumeration of all Turing machines. Let $\langle \cdot ,\cdot \rangle$ be a standard one-one mapping from ${\cal N} \times {\cal N}$ to ${\cal N}$, for technical reasons choosen such that $l(\langle x ,y \rangle) = l(y)+O(l(x))$. An example is $\langle x ,y \rangle = 1^{l(x)}0xy$. This can be iterated to $\langle \langle \cdot , \cdot \rangle , \cdot \rangle$.
Informally, the Kolmogorov complexity, [@Ko65], of $x$ is the length of the [*shortest*]{} effective description of $x$. That is, the [*Kolmogorov complexity*]{} $C(x)$ of a finite string $x$ is simply the length of the shortest program, say in FORTRAN (or in Turing machine codes) encoded in binary, which prints $x$ without any input. A similar definition holds conditionally, in the sense that $C(x|y)$ is the length of the shortest binary program which computes $x$ on input $y$. Kolmogorov complexity is absolute in the sense of being independent of the programming language, up to a fixed additional constant term which depends on the programming language but not on $x$. We now fix one canonical programming language once and for all as reference and thereby $C()$. For the theory and applications, see [@LiVi93]. A formal definition is as follows:
Let $U$ be an appropriate universal Turing machine such that $$U(\langle \langle i,p \rangle ,y \rangle ) =
T_i (\langle p,y\rangle)$$ for all $i$ and $\langle p,y\rangle$. The [*conditional Kolmogorov complexity*]{} of $x$ given $y$ is $$C(x|y) = \min_{p \in \{0,1\}^*} \{l(p): U (\langle p,y\rangle)=x \}.$$ The unconditional Kolmogorov complexity of $x$ is defined as $C(x) := C(x| \epsilon )$.
It is easy to see that there are strings that can be described by programs much shorter than themselves. For instance, the function defined by $f(1) = 2$ and $f(i) = 2^{f(i-1)}$ for $i>1$ grows very fast, $f(k)$ is a “stack” of $k$ twos. Yet for each $k$ it is clear that $f(k)$ has complexity at most $C(k) + O(1)$. What about incompressibility?
By a simple counting argument one can show that whereas some strings can be enormously compressed, the majority of strings can hardly be compressed at all.
For each $n$ there are $2^n$ binary strings of length $n$, but only $\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} 2^i = 2^n -1$ possible shorter descriptions. Therefore, there is at least one binary string $x$ of length $n$ such that $C(x) \geq n$. We call such strings $incompressible$. It also follows that for any length $n$ and any binary string $y$, there is a binary string $x$ of length $n$ such that $C(x| y) \geq n$. Generally, for every constant $c$ we can call a string $x$ is *c-incompressible if $C(x) \geq l(x) -c$. Strings that are incompressible (say, $c$-incompressible with small $c$) are patternless, since a pattern could be used to reduce the description length. Intuitively, we think of such patternless sequences as being random, and we use “random sequence” synonymously with “incompressible sequence.” [^8] By the same counting argument as before we find that the number of strings of length $n$ that are $c$-incompressible is at least $2^n - 2^{n-c} +1$. Hence there is at least one 0-incompressible string of length $n$, at least one-half of all strings of length $n$ are 1-incompressible, at least three-fourths of all strings of length $n$ are 2-incompressible, …, and at least the $(1- 1/2^c )$th part of all $2^n$ strings of length $n$ are $c$-incompressible. This means that for each constant $c \geq 1$ the majority of all strings of length $n$ (with $n > c$) is $c$-incompressible. We generalize this to the following simple but extremely useful:*
\[C2\] Let $c$ be a positive integer. For each fixed $y$, every set $A$ of cardinality $m$ has at least $m(1 - 2^{-c} ) + 1$ elements $x$ with $C(x| y) \geq \lfloor \log m \rfloor - c$.
By simple counting.
As an example, set $A = \{ x: l(x) = n \} $. Then the cardinality of $A$ is $m = 2^n$. Since it is easy to assert that $C(x) \leq n + c$ for some fixed $c$ and all $x$ in $A$, Lemma \[C2\] demonstrates that this trivial estimate is quite sharp. The deeper reason is that since there are few short programs, there can be only few objects of low complexity. We require another quantity: the prefix Kolmogorov complexity which is defined just as $C( \cdot | \cdot)$ but now with respect to a subset of Turing machines that have the property that the set of programs for which the machine halts is prefix-free, that is, no halting program is a prefix of any other halting program. For details see [@LiVi93]. Here we require only the quantitative relation below.
The [*prefix*]{} Kolmogorov complexity of $x$ conditional to $y$ is denoted by $K(x|y)$. It satisfies the inequality $$C(x|y) \leq K(x|y) \leq C(x|y) + 2 \log C(x|y) + O(1) .$$
Kolmogorov Random Graphs {#sect.KRgraphs}
========================
\[sect.topol\] Statistical properties of strings with high Kolmogorov complexity have been studied in [@LiVi94a]. The interpretation of strings as more complex combinatorial objects leads to a new set of properties and problems that have no direct counterpart in the “flatter” string world. Here we derive topological, combinatorial, and statistical properties of graphs with high Kolmogorov complexity. Every such graph possesses simultaneously all properties that hold with high probability for randomly generated graphs. They constitute “almost all graphs” and the derived properties a fortiori hold with probability that goes to 1 as the number of nodes grows unboundedly.
\[def.gc\] Each labeled graph $G=(V,E)$ on $n$ nodes $V=\{1,2,\ldots, n\}$ can be represented (up to automorphism) by a binary string $E(G)$ of length ${n \choose 2}$. We simply assume a fixed ordering of the ${n \choose 2}$ possible edges in an $n$-node graph, e.g. lexicographically, and let the $i$th bit in the string indicate presence (1) or absence (0) of the $i$’th edge. Conversely, each binary string of length ${n \choose 2}$ encodes an $n$-node graph. Hence we can identify each such graph with its binary string representation.
\[def.rg\] A labeled graph $G$ on $n$ nodes has [*randomness deficiency*]{} at most $\delta (n)$, and is called $\delta (n)$-[*random*]{}, if it satisfies $$\label{eq.KG}
C(E(G)|n ) \geq {n \choose 2} - \delta (n).$$
Some Basic Properties
---------------------
Using Lemma \[C2\], with $y=n$, $A$ the set of strings of length $n \choose 2$, and $c=\delta(n)$ gives us
\[lem.frac\] A fraction of at least \[eq.count\] $1 - 1/2^{\delta (n)}$ of all labeled graphs $G$ on $n$ nodes is $\delta (n)$-random.
As a consequence, for example the $c \log n$-random labeled graphs constitute a fraction of at least $(1 - 1/n^c)$ of all graphs on $n$ nodes, where $c>0$ is an arbitrary constant.
Labeled graphs with high-complexity have many specific topological properties, which seem to contradict their randomness. However, these are simply the likely properties, whose absence would be rather unlikely. Thus, randomness enforces strict statistical regularities. For example, to have diameter exactly two.
We will use the following lemma (Theorem 2.6.1 in [@LiVi93]):
\[blockszerotex\] Let $x=x_1 \ldots x_n$ be a binary string of length $n$, and $y$ a much smaller string of length $l$. Let $p = 2^{-l}$ and $\#y(x)$ be the number of (possibly overlapping) distinct occurrences of $y$ in $x$. For convenience, we assume that $x$ “wraps around” so that an occurrence of $y$ starting at the end of $x$ and continuing at the start also counts. Assume that $l \leq \log n$. There is a constant $c$ such that for all $n$ and $x \in \{0,1\}^n$, if $C(x) \geq n - \delta(n)$, then $$|\#y(x)-pn| \leq \sqrt{ \alpha pn},$$ with $\alpha = [K(y|n)+\log l + \delta(n)+c] 3l / \log e $.
\[lem.diam\] All $o(n)$-random labeled graphs have $n/4+o(n)$ disjoint paths of length 2 between each pair of nodes $i,j$. In particular, all $o(n)$-random labeled graphs have diameter 2.
The only graphs with diameter 1 are the complete graphs that can be described in $O(1)$ bits, given $n$, and hence are not random. It remains to consider an $o(n)$-random graph $G=(V,E)$ with diameter greater than or equal to 2. Let $i,j$ be a pair of nodes connected by $r$ disjoint paths of length 2. Then we can describe $G$ by modifying the old code for $G$ as follows:
- A program to reconstruct the object from the various parts of the encoding in $O(1)$ bits;
- The identities of $i < j$ in $2 \log n$ bits;
- The old code $E(G)$ of $G$ with the $2(n-2)$ bits representing presence or absence of edges $(j,k)$ and $(i,k)$ for each $k \neq i,j$ deleted.
- a shortest program for the string $e_{i,j}$ consisting of the (reordered) $n-2$ pairs of bits deleted above.
>From this description we can reconstruct $G$ in $$O(\log n) + {n \choose 2} - 2(n-2) + C(e_{i,j}|n)$$ bits, from which we may conclude that $C(e_{i,j}|n) \geq l(e_{i,j}) - o(n)$. As shown in [@LiVi94a] or [@LiVi93] (here Lemma \[blockszerotex\]) this implies that the frequency of occurrence in $e_{i,j}$ of the aligned 2-bit block ‘11’—which by construction equals the number of disjoint paths of length 2 between $i$ and $j$—is $n/4 + o(n)$.
A graph is [*$k$-connected*]{} if there are at least $k$ node-disjoint paths between every pair of nodes.
All $o(n)$-random labeled graphs are $( \frac{n}{4}+o(n))$-connected.
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a graph on $n$ nodes with randomness deficiency $O(\log n)$. Then the largest clique in $G$ has at most $\lfloor 2 \log n \rfloor + O(1)$ nodes.
Same proof as largest size transitive subtournament in high complexity tournament as in [@LiVi93].
With respect to the related property of random graphs, in [@ASE92] pp. 86,87 it is shown that a random graph with edge probability $1/2$ contains a clique on asymptotically $2 \log n$ nodes with probability at least $1-e^{-n^2}$.
Statistics of Subgraphs {#sect.statsubgr}
-----------------------
We start by defining the notion of labeled subgraph of a labeled graph.
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a labeled graph on $n$ nodes. Consider a labeled graph $H$ on $k$ nodes $\{1,2, \ldots,k\}$. Each subset of $k$ nodes of $G$ induces a subgraph $G_k$ of $G$. The subgraph $G_k$ is an ordered labeled [*occurrence*]{} of $H$ when we obtain $H$ by relabeling the nodes $i_1< i_2< \cdots < i_k$ of $G_k$ as $1,2, \ldots, k$.
It is easy to conclude from the statistics of high-complexity strings in Lemma \[blockszerotex\] that the frequency of each of the two labeled two-node subgraphs (there are only two different ones: the graph consisting of two isolated nodes and the graph consisting of two connected nodes) in a $\delta (n)$-random graph $G$ is $$\frac{ n(n-1)}{4} \pm \sqrt{ \frac{3}{4}(\delta (n)+ O(1)) n(n-1)/ \log e}.$$ This case is easy since the frequency of such subgraphs corresponds to the frequency of 1’s or $0$’s in the ${n \choose 2}$-length standard encoding $E(G)$ of $G$. However, to determine the frequencies of labeled subgraphs on $k$ nodes (up to isomorphism) for $k>2$ is a matter more complicated than the frequencies of substrings of length $k$. Clearly, there are $n \choose k$ subsets of $k$ nodes out of $n$ and hence that many occurrences of subgraphs. Such subgraphs may overlap in more complex ways than substrings of a string. Let $\#H(G)$ be [*the number of times $H$ occurs*]{} as an ordered labeled subgraph of $G$ (possibly overlapping). Let $p$ be the probability that we obtain $H$ by flipping a fair coin to decide for each pair of nodes whether it is connected by an edge or not, $$\label{eq.defp}
p=2^{-k(k-1)/2}.$$
\[theo.freqG\] Assume the terminology above with $G=(V,E)$ a labeled graph on $n$ nodes, $k$ is a positive integer dividing $n$, and $H$ is a labeled graph on $k \leq \sqrt{2 \log n}$ nodes. Let $C(E(G)|n ) \geq {n \choose 2} - \delta (n)$. Then $$\left|\#H(G)- {n \choose k}p \right| \leq
{n \choose k} \sqrt{\alpha (k/n) p} ,$$ with $\alpha := (K(H|n) + \delta(n) + \log {n \choose k}/(n/k) + O(1))
3 / \log e$.
A [*cover*]{} of $G$ is a set $C= \{S_1, \ldots , S_N\}$ with $N=n/k$, where the $S_i$’s are pairwise disjoint subsets of $V$ and $\bigcup_{i=1}^N S_i = V$. According to [@Ba74]:
\[claim.bara\] There is a partition of the ${n \choose k}$ different $k$-node subsets into $h={n \choose k}/N$ distinct covers of $G$, each cover consisting of $N = n/k$ disjoint subsets. That is, each subset of $k$ nodes of $V$ belongs to precisely one cover.
Enumerate the covers as $C_0, C_2 , \ldots , C_{h-1}$. For each $i \in \{ 0,1, \ldots, h-1 \}$ and $k$-node labeled graph $H$, let $\#H(G,i)$ be the number of (now non overlapping) occurrences of subgraph $H$ in $G$ occurring in cover $C_i$.
Now consider an experiment of $N$ trials, each trial with the same set of $2^{k(k-1)/2}$ outcomes. Intuitively, each trial corresponds to an element of a cover, and each outcome corresponds to a $k$-node subgraph. For every $i$ we can form a string $s_i$ consisting of the $N$ blocks of ${k \choose 2}$ bits that represent presence or absence of edges within the induced subgraphs of each of the $N$ subsets of $C_i$. Since $G$ can be reconstructed from $n,i,s_i$ and the remaining ${n \choose 2} - N {k \choose 2}$ bits of $E(G)$, we find that $C(s_i|n) \geq l(s_i) - \delta (n) - \log h$. Again, according to Lemma \[blockszerotex\] this implies that the frequency of occurrence of the aligned ${k \choose 2}$-block $E(H)$, which is $\#H(G,i)$, equals $$Np \pm \sqrt{Np \alpha},$$ with $\alpha$ as in the theorem statement. One can do this for each $i$ independently, notwithstanding the dependence between the frequencies of subgraphs in different covers. Namely, the argument depends on the incompressibility of $G$ alone. If the number of occurrences of a certain subgraph in [*any*]{} of the covers is too large or too small then we can compress $G$. Now, $$\begin{aligned}
\left| \#H(G) - p{n \choose k} \right| & = &
\sum_{i=0}^{h-1} |\#H(G,i)-Np| \\
& \leq & {n \choose k} \sqrt{\alpha (k/n)p}.\end{aligned}$$
In [@LiVi93; @LiVi94a] we investigated up to which length $l$ all blocks of length $l$ occurred at least once in each $\delta (n)$-random string of length $n$.
Let $\delta (n) < 2^{\sqrt{\frac{1}{2} \log n}}/4 \log n $ and $G$ be a $\delta (n)$-random graph on $n$ nodes. Then for sufficiently large $n$, the graph $G$ contains all subgraphs on $\sqrt{ 2 \log n}$ nodes.
We are sure that $H$ on $k$ nodes occurs at least once in $G$ if $ {n \choose k} \sqrt{ \alpha (k/n) p}$ in Theorem \[theo.freqG\] is less than ${n \choose k}p$. This is the case if $\alpha < (n/ k) p$. This inequality is satisfied for an overestimate of $K(H|n)$ by ${k \choose 2} + 2 \log {k \choose 2} +O(1)$ (since $K(H|n) \leq K(H)+O(1)$), and $p=2^{-k(k-1)/2}$, and $k$ set at $k = \sqrt{ 2 \log n}$. This proves the theorem.
Unlabeled Graph Counting {#sect.unlabeled}
------------------------
An unlabeled graph is a graph with no labels. For convenience we can define this as follows: Call two labeled graphs [*equivalent*]{} (up to relabeling) if there is a relabeling that makes them equal. An [*unlabeled graph*]{} is an equivalence class of labeled graphs. An [*automorphism*]{} of $G=(V,E)$ is a permutation $\pi$ of $V$ such that $(\pi(u),\pi(v)) \in E$ iff $(u,v)\in E$. Clearly, the set of automorphisms of a graph forms a group with group operation of function composition and the identity permutation as unity. It is easy to verify that $\pi$ is an automorphism of $G$ iff $\pi (G)$ and $G$ have the [*same binary string standard encoding*]{}, that is, $E(G)=E(\pi (G))$. This contrasts with the more general case of permutation relabeling, where the standard encodings may be different. A graph is [*rigid*]{} if its only automorphism is the identity automorphism. It turns out that Kolmogorov random graphs are rigid graphs. To obtain an expression for the number of unlabeled graphs we have to estimate the number of automorphisms of a graph in terms of its randomness deficiency.
In [@HP73] an asymptotic expression for the number of unlabeled graphs is derived using sophisticated methods. We give a new elementary proof by incompressibility. Denote by $g_n$ the number of unlabeled graphs on $n$ nodes—that is, the number of isomorphism classes in the set ${{\cal G}_n}$ of undirected graphs on nodes ${\{0,1,\ldots,n-1\}}$.
\[theo.unlabeled\] $g_n \sim \frac{2^{n \choose 2}}{n!}$.
Clearly, $$g_n = \sum_{G \in {{\cal G}_n}} \frac{1}{d( \bar{G})},$$ where $\bar{G}$ is the isomorphism class of graph $G$. By elementary group theory, $$d(\bar{G}) = \frac{d(S_n)}{d({{\it Aut}}(G))} = \frac{n!}{d({{\it Aut}}(G))},$$ where $S_n$ is the group of permutations on $n$ elements, and ${{\it Aut}}(G)$ is the automorphism group of $G$. Let us partition ${{\cal G}_n}$ into ${{\cal G}_n}= {{\cal G}_n}^0 \cup \ldots \cup {{\cal G}_n}^n$, where ${{\cal G}_n}^m$ is the set of graphs for which $m$ is the number of nodes moved (mapped to another node) by any of its automorphisms.
For $G \in {{\cal G}_n}^m$, $d( {{\it Aut}}(G)) \leq n^m = 2^{m\log n}$.
$d( {{\it Aut}}(G)) \leq {n \choose m}m! \leq n^m$.
Consider each graph $G \in {{\cal G}_n}$ having a probability ${{\it Prob}}(G) = 2^{-{n \choose 2}}$.
${{\it Prob}}(G \in {{\cal G}_n}^m) \leq 2^{-m(\frac{n}{2}-\frac{3m}{8} -\log n)}$.
By Lemma \[lem.frac\] it suffices to show that, if $G \in {{\cal G}_n}^m$ and $$C(E(G)|n,m) \geq {n \choose 2} - \delta (n,m)$$ then $\delta (n,m)$ satisfies $$\label{eq.dnm}
\delta (n,m) \geq m(\frac{n}{2}-\frac{3m}{8} -\log n).$$ Let $\pi \in {{\it Aut}}(G)$ move $m$ nodes. Suppose $\pi$ is the product of $k$ disjoint cycles of sizes $c_1,\ldots, c_k$. Spend at most $m \log n$ bits describing $\pi$: For example, if the nodes $i_1 < \cdots < i_m$ are moved then list the sequence $\pi(i_1),\ldots, \pi(i_m)$. Writing the nodes of the latter sequence in increasing order we obtain $i_1 , \dots , i_m$ again, that is, we execute permutation $\pi^{-1}$, and hence we obtain $\pi$.
Select one node from each cycle—say, the lowest numbered one. Then for every unselected node on a cycle, we can delete the $n-m$ bits corresponding to the presence or absence of edges to stable nodes, and $m-k$ half-bits corresponding to presence or absence of edges to the other, unselected cycle nodes. In total we delete $$\sum_{i=1}^{k} (c_i -1)(n-m + \frac{m-k}{2}) = (m-k)(n- \frac{m+k}{2})$$ bits. Observing that $k=m/2$ is the largest possible value for $k$, we arrive at the claimed $\delta (n,m)$ of $G$ (difference between savings and spendings is $\frac{m}{2}(n- \frac{3m}{4}) - m \log n$) of Equation \[eq.dnm\].
We continue the proof of the main theorem: $$g_n = \sum_{G \in {{\cal G}_n}} \frac{1}{d(\bar{G})}
= \sum_{G \in {{\cal G}_n}} \frac{d({{\it Aut}}(g))}{n!}
= \frac{2^{{n \choose 2}}}{n!} E_n,$$ where $E_n := \sum_{G \in {{\cal G}_n}} {{\it Prob}}(G) d({{\it Aut}}(G))$ is the expected size of the automorphism group of a graph on $n$ nodes. Clearly, $E_n \geq 1$, yielding the lower bound on $g_n$. For the upper bound on $g_n$, noting that ${{\cal G}_n}^1 = \emptyset$ and using the above claims, we find $$\begin{aligned}
E_n & = & \sum_{m=0}^n {{\it Prob}}(G \in {{\cal G}_n}^m) {{\it Avg}}_{G \in {{\cal G}_n}^m} d({{\it Aut}}(G)) \\
& \leq & 1 + \sum_{m=2}^n 2^{-m(\frac{n}{2}-\frac{3m}{8} -2 \log n)} \\
& \leq & 1 + 2^{-(n - 4 \log n - 2)}.\end{aligned}$$ which proves the theorem.
The proof of the theorem shows that the error in the asymptotic expression is very small:
$\frac{2^{{n \choose 2}}}{n!} \leq g_n \leq
\frac{2^{{n \choose 2}}}{n!} (1+ \frac{4n^4}{2^n})$.
It follows from Equation \[eq.dnm\] that (since $m=1$ is impossible):
If a graph $G$ has randomness deficiency slightly less than $n$ (more precisely, $C(E(G)|n) \geq {n \choose 2} - n - \log n -2$) then $G$ is rigid.
The expression for $g_n$ can be used to determine the maximal complexity of an unlabeled graph on $n$ nodes. Namely, we can effectively enumerate all unlabeled graphs as follows:
- Effectively enumerate all labeled graphs on $n$ nodes by enumerating all binary strings of length $n$ and for each labeled graph $G$ do: If $G$ cannot be obtained by relabeling from any previously enumerated labeled graph then $G$ is added to the set of unlabeled graphs.
This way we obtain each unlabeled graph by precisely one labeled graph representing it. Since we can describe each unlabeled graph by its index in this enumeration, we find by Theorem \[theo.unlabeled\] and Stirling’s formula that if $G$ is an unlabeled graph then $$C(E(G)|n) \leq {n \choose 2} - n \log n + O(n) .$$
\[theo.drop\] Let $G$ be a labeled graph on $n$ nodes and let $G_0$ be the unlabeled version of $G$. There exists a graph $G'$ and a label permutation $\pi$ such that $G' = \pi(G)$ and up to additional constant terms $C(E(G'))=C(E(G_0))$ and $C(E(G)|n) = C(E(G_0) , \pi |n )$.
By Theorem \[theo.drop\], for [*every*]{} graph $G$ on $n$ nodes with maximum-complexity there is a relabeling (permutation) that causes the complexity to drop by as much as $n \log n$. Our proofs of topological properties by the incompressibility method required the graph $G$ to be Kolmogorov random in the sense of $C(E(G)|n) \geq {n \choose 2} - O(\log n)$ or for some results $C(E(G)|n) \geq {n \choose 2} - o(n)$. Hence by relabeling such a graph we can always obtain a labeled graph that has a complexity too low to use our incompressibility proof. Nonetheless, topological properties do not change under relabeling.
[99]{}
, The Probabilistic Method, Wiley, 1992,
, Leçons sur la théorie des functions, 2nd Edition, 1914, 182–216.
, [*On the factorization of the complete uniform hypergraph,*]{} pp. 91-108 in: A. Hajnal, R. Rado, V.T. Sós, Eds, Infinite and Finite Sets, Proc. Coll. Keszthely, Colloq. Math. Soc. János Bolyai, Vol. 10 (1995) North-Holland, Amsterdam.
, Graph Theory, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1979.
, Random Graphs, Academic Press, London, 1985.
, [*Space-Efficient Routing Tables for Almost All Networks and the Incompressibility Method*]{}, [*SIAM J. Comput.*]{}, To appear.
, Probabilistic Methods in Combinatorics, Academic Press, New York, 1974. , [*Kolmogorov complexity and random graphs*]{}, Inform. Process. Lett., 41(1992), 125–130. , An Introduction to Kolmogorov Complexity and its Applications, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2nd Edition, 1997.
, [*Kolmogorov complexity arguments in Combinatorics*]{}, J. Comb. Th., Series A, 66:2(1994), 226-236. Errata, [*Ibid.*]{}, 69(1995), 183.
, [*Statistical properties of finite sequences with high Kolmogorov complexity*]{}, Math. System Theory, 27(1994), 365-376.
, Graphical Enumeration, Academic Press, 1973.
, [*Three approaches to the quantitative definition of information*]{}. Problems Inform. Transmission, 1(1):1–7, 1965.
, [*On the definition of random sequences*]{}, Information and Control, 9(1966), 602-619.
, [*Physics and the New Computation*]{}, Prague, August 1995, Proc. 20th Int. Symp. Math. Foundations of Computer Science, MFCS’95, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol 969, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 1995, 106–128.
[^1]: CWI, Kruislaan 413, 1098 SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Email: [email protected]
[^2]: Department of Computer Science, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ont. N2L 3G1, Canada. E-mail: [email protected]
[^3]: CWI, Kruislaan 413, 1098 SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Email: [email protected]
[^4]: CWI, Kruislaan 413, 1098 SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Email: [email protected]
[^5]: A partial preliminary version appeared in the [*Proc. Conference on Compression and Complexity of Sequences*]{}, IEEE Comp. Sci. Press, 1997. HB, JT and PV were partially supported by the European Union through NeuroCOLT ESPRIT Working Group Nr. 8556, and by NWO through NFI Project ALADDIN number NF 62-376 and SION Grant 612-34-002; ML was supported in part by the NSERC Operating Grant OGP0046506, CITO, a CGAT grant, and the Steacie Fellowship.
[^6]: Randomness deficiency measures how far the object falls short of the maximum possible Kolmogorov complexity. It is formally defined in Definition \[def.rg\].
[^7]: There are some results along these lines related to randomly generated graphs, but as far as the authors could ascertain (consulting Alan Frieze, Svante Janson, and Andrzej Rucinski around June 1996) such properties have not been investigated in the same detail as here. See for example [@ASE92], pp. 125–140. But note that also pseudo-randomness is different from Kolmogorov randomness.
[^8]: It is possible to give a rigorous formalization of the intuitive notion of a random sequence as a sequence that passes all effective tests for randomness, see for example [@LiVi93].
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
=1
[**Quantifying Cultural Histories via Person Networks in Wikipedia** ]{}\
Doron Goldfarb$^{1,2,3}$, Dieter Merkl$^{3}$, Maximilian Schich$^{1,2}$\
[1]{} [*School of Arts, Technology, and Emerging Communication\
The University of Texas at Dallas, TX, USA*]{}\
\
[2]{} [*Edith O’Donnell Institute of Art History\
The University of Texas at Dallas, TX, USA*]{}\
\
[3]{} [*Institute of Software Technology and Interactive Systems\
Vienna University of Technology, Austria*]{}\
[email protected]\
[email protected]\
[email protected]
Introduction
============
At least since Priestley’s 1765 Chart of Biography [@priestly:chart], large numbers of individual person records have been used to illustrate aggregate patterns of cultural history. Wikidata [@vrandecic:wikidata], the structured database sister of Wikipedia, currently contains about 2.7 million explicit person records, across all language versions of the encyclopedia. These individuals, notable according to Wikipedia editing criteria, are connected via millions of hyperlinks between their respective Wikipedia articles. This situation provides us with the chance to go beyond the illustration of an idiosyncratic subset of individuals, as in the case of Priestly.\
\
In this work we summarize the overlap of nationalities and occupations, based on their co-occurrence in Wikidata individuals. We construct networks of co-occurring nationalities and occupations, provide insights into their respective community structure, and apply the results to select and color chronologically structured subsets of a large network of individuals, connected by Wikipedia hyperlinks. While the imagined communities [@anderson:imaginedcomm] of nationality are much more discrete in terms of co-occurrence than occupations, our quantifications reveal the existing overlap of nationality as much less clear-cut than in case of occupational domains. Our work contributes to a growing body of research using biographies of notable persons to analyze cultural processes [@ronen:links]-[@goldfarb:arthistory]
Method
======
In our processing pipeline (cf. Figure \[fig:procpip\]), we use the Wikidata Toolkit [@kroetsch:wikidatatoolkit] to extract 2.7 million records about humans (instances of class Q5), in the form of person – property – value triples, from a downloaded Wikidata json dump (09/02/2015). We focus on the properties country of citizenship (P27) and occupation (P106) (numbers see Table \[tab:numbers\]A), restricting our analysis to nationalities with at least 10 and occupations with at least 100 occurrences. We construct and project the bipartite person-value affiliation matrices to uni-partite matrices of value-co-occurrence. To identify relevant co-occurrences, of nationalities or occupations respectively, the projected matrices are compared against a null model. Applying an established approach [@zweig:bipartite][@gu:fdsm], we derive expected co-occurrence weights from an ensemble of 10,000 degree-preserving random affiliation matrices. Co-occurrences with positive Pearson residuals are considered for further analysis (numbers see Table \[tab:numbers\]B).\
\
The resulting co-occurrence networks, with residuals as edge weights, are subsequently examined for community structure using the Louvain method [@blondel:louvain][@traag:louvain]. Detecting communities at different granularities, we perform modularity optimization at different resolutions [@Reichhardt:modularity], resulting in multiple partitions with varying numbers of communities. Using these partitions we can replace the plain co-occurrence weights in the original value-matrices with the probabilities of two values mutually co-occurring in the same community. The resulting mutual community matrix (Figures \[fig:citmat\] and \[fig:occmat\]) is then hierarchically clustered, with the resulting tree cut into a preset number of clusters (Figures \[fig:citfan\] and \[fig:occfan\]). The preset number – 28 for nationalities, and 24 for occupations – is based on visual inspection of repeated clusterings.\
\
Visualizations of the backbones of the co-occurrence networks (Figures \[fig:citnet\] and \[fig:occnet\]) show the resulting community structure in context. The network backbones are created by iteratively adding edges with the largest residuals until the maximal giant connected components (GCC) of the original networks are restored. For comparison, we plot the occurrence of nationalities and occupations over time, ordered by their first occurrence while disregarding outliers in terms of ordering (Figures \[fig:cittime\] and \[fig:occtime\]).\
\
Next, the clusters of nationalities and occupations are used to partition Wikipedia biographies into national community and domain specific sub-sets. Hyperlinks connecting Wikipedia articles about individuals are obtained from DBpedia \[16\] and filtered to approximate contemporary relationships by excluding links between individuals with birth dates more than 75 years apart. Using hyperlinks from the English Wikipedia, we visualize the giant connected component of the partition of individuals connected to occupations in the community of “arts, architecture, crafts, and design” (Figure \[fig:occfish\]). Colored by nationality cluster (cf. Figures \[fig:citmat\],\[fig:citfan\],\[fig:citnet\]), the visualization connects 22,825 nodes with 78,447 edges. We also visualize the giant connected component of the partition of individuals connected to nationalities in the community of “predominantly English speaking countries” (Figure \[fig:citfish\]). Colored by occupational domain (cf. Figures \[fig:occmat\],\[fig:occfan\],\[fig:occnet\]) the visualization connects 160,913 nodes with 1,004,415 edges. While the arts domain (Figure \[fig:occfish\]) seems to reflect the established narrative of art history where a sequence of nationalities dominates at different points of time, the predominantly English speaking partition (Figure \[fig:citfish\]) is clearly characterized by a more complex structure that excludes the construction of a simple narrative.
Conclusion
==========
In sum, we characterize networks of co-occurring nationalities and occupations related to Wikidata individuals. Our quantifications indicate that communities of nations derived from co-occurrence are much more complex than the rather clear-cut communities of occupational domain. This may be due to substantially more complex social processes leading to co-citizenship, as we observe in (post)colonial ties, due to the potentially vague concept of citizenship/nationality itself \[3\], as found in references to bygone and transient national constructs, or due to the considerable difference in the amount of available data (93,661 citizenship vs. 585,407 occupation co-references). Our approach can be used to group synonyms and attributions of differing granularity, occurring due to the free nature of Wikidata.\
\
Algorithmically mining occupational domains from a large set of individuals, we create an alternative to manually curated meta-domains of occupation, as used in multiple strains of recent research [@yu:pantheon][@schich:framework]. Deriving domain specific groups of individuals directly from a crowd-sourced ecosystem, such as Wikipedia, we also provide a useful alternative (Figure \[fig:occfish\]) to using expert curated datasets, such as the Getty Union List of Artist Names [@getty:vocab] as used to analyze the domain of art history in previous work [@goldfarb:arthistory]. Visualizing the Wikipedia hyperlink sub-networks of such domain specific groups of individuals reveals network patterns that would be obscured when using the network as a whole.
[17]{} J. A. Priestley: Chart of Biography. (London: J. Johnson, 1765) D. Vrandečić, M. Krötzsch: Wikidata: A Free Collaborative Knowledgebase. Communications of the ACM 57,10 (2014) 78-85 B. R. O. G. Anderson: Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. (London: Verso, 1991) S. Ronen, B. Gonçalves, K.Z. Hu, A. Vespignani, S. Pinker, C.A. Hidalgo: Links that speak: the global language network and its association with global fame. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 111,52 (2014) E5616-E5622 A. Z. Yu, S. Ronen, K. Hu, T. Lu, C. A. Hidalgo: Pantheon: A Dataset for the Study of Global Cultural Production. ArXiv preprint, arXiv:1502.07310v1 (2015) M. Klein, P. Konieczny: Gender Gap Through Time and Space: A Journey Through Wikipedia Biographies and the “WIGI” Index. ArXiv preprint, arXiv:1502.03086v1 (2015) Y.-H. Eom, P. Aragon, D. Laniado, A. Kaltenbrunner, S. Gigna and D. L. Shepelyansky: Interactions of culture and top people of wikipedia from ranking 24 language editions. Plos ONE, (2014) M. Schich, C. Song, Y.-Y. Ahn, A. Mirsky, M. Martino, A.-L. Barabási, D. Helbing: A network framework of cultural history. Science 345, 6196 (2014) 558-562 D. Goldfarb, M. Arends, J. Froschauer, D. Merkl: Art History on Wikipedia, a Macroscopic Observation, Proceedings of the 3rd Annual ACM Web Science Conference, (2012) 163-168 M. Krötzsch, F. Erxleben, M. Günther, J. Mendez: Wikidata Toolkit: A Java library for working with Wikidata. http://korrekt.org/talks/2014/wikimania-wikidata-toolkit.pdf, accessed May 20th, 2015 K. A. Zweig, M. Kaufmann: A systematic approach to the one-mode projection of bipartite graphs. Social Network Analysis and Mining 1,3 (2011) 187-218 Y. Gu: Ein neues Empfehlungssystem mit FDSM-basierter einseitiger Projektion und Link Community Clustering. (Thesis: Heidelberg University, 2013) V. D. Blondel, J.-L. Guillaume, R. Lambiotte, E. Lefebvre: Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2008,10 (2008) 10008 V.A. Traag: Implementation of the Louvain algorithm for various methods for use with igraph in python. https://github.com/vtraag/louvain-igraph, accessed May 20th, 2015 J. Reichardt, S. Bornholdt: Partitioning and modularity of graphs with arbitrary degree distribution. Physical Review E 76, 1 (2007) 015102 S. Auer, C. Bizer, G. Kobilarov, J. Lehmann, R. Cyganiak, Z. Ives: DBpedia: A nucleus for a web of open data. Proceedings of the 6th International Semantic Web Conference (2007) 722-735 Getty Vocabulary Program: Union List of Artist Names (The J. Paul Getty Trust, Los Angeles, 2010) http://www.getty.edu/research/tools/vocabularies/ulan/, accessed May 20th, 2015
[r|rrr|rrr]{} & &\
**A** & **\#persons** & **\#P27 links** & **\#nationalities** & **\#persons** & **\#P106 links** & **\#occupations**\
**Raw data** & 1,318,484 & 1,366,777 & 833 & 1,363,032 & 1,706,766 & 3,419\
**Reduced data** & 1,317,676 & 1,365,600 & 282 & 1,352,909 & 1,685,000 & 431\
**1:1 References** & 1,271,939 & 1,271,939 & 282 & 1,099,593 & 1,099,593 & 431\
**1:n References** & 45,737 & 93,661 & 282 & 253,316 & 585,407 & 430\
**B** & & **\#nodes** & & **\#nodes**\
**All** & & 2,100 & 282 & & 13,846 & 430\
**Positive** & & 1,565 & 282 & & 7,641 & 430\
**Backbone** & & 996 & 282 & & 2,964 & 430\
\[tab:numbers\]
![Data processing pipeline[]{data-label="fig:procpip"}](fig/Processing_Pipeline.pdf){width="16cm"}
![Louvain communities of co-occurring nationalities at different resolutions[]{data-label="fig:citmat"}](fig/Citizenships/citizenship_mutual_community.png){width="10cm"}
![Louvain communities of co-occurring occupations at different resolutions[]{data-label="fig:occmat"}](fig/Occupations/occupation_mutual_community.png){width="10cm"}
![Hierarchical clustering of communities of co-occurring nationalities[]{data-label="fig:citfan"}](fig/Citizenships/citizenship_hierarchical.pdf){width="16cm"}
![Hierarchical clustering of communities of co-occurring occupations[]{data-label="fig:occfan"}](fig/Occupations/occupation_hierarchical.pdf){width="14.5cm"}
![Network of national overlap through co-occurrence, colored by community[]{data-label="fig:citnet"}](fig/Citizenships/citizenship_network.pdf){width="16cm"}
![Network of co-occurring occupations, colored by community[]{data-label="fig:occnet"}](fig/Occupations/occupation_network.pdf){width="16cm"}
![Nationalities over time based on person life-spans[]{data-label="fig:cittime"}](fig/Citizenships/citizenship_timeline_jpg.jpg){height="12cm"}
![Occupations over time based on person life-spans[]{data-label="fig:occtime"}](fig/Occupations/occupation_timeline_jpg.jpg){height="18cm"}
![Hyperlink network of English Wikipedia biographies having occupations in “arts, architecture, crafts and design”, colored by nationality community corresponding to the colors in figures \[fig:citmat\],\[fig:citfan\],\[fig:citnet\] []{data-label="fig:occfish"}](fig/hyperlink_networks/arts_and_crafts.jpg){width="16cm"}
![Hyperlink network of English Wikipedia biographies with a nationality in the “predominantly english speaking” community, colored by occupation community corresponding to the colors in figures \[fig:occmat\],\[fig:occfan\],\[fig:occnet\][]{data-label="fig:citfish"}](fig/hyperlink_networks/englishspeaking.jpg){width="16cm"}
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The spread of a disease, a computer virus or information is discussed in a directed complex network. We are concerned with a steady state of the spread for the SIR and SIS dynamic models. In a scale-free directed network it is shown that the threshold of its outbreak in both models approaches zero under a high correlation between nodal indegrees and outdegrees.'
---
[**Epidemic thresholds in directed complex networks**]{}\
\
[`[email protected]`]{}\
Department of Mathematics, Kochi Joshi University, Kochi 780-8515, Japan.\
[2]{}
[**1. Introduction**]{}\
Recent studies on the spread of diseases, computer viruses or information in complex networks have been exclusively devoted to undirected ones such as social networks or the Internet. In those networks the direction of links (or edges) is not important and can be ignored. On the other hand, there are important directed networks in nature and man-made systems such as food webs and the WWW, [*etc*]{}. However, studies on the spread in directed networks have not been done extensively. In order to tackle the problem, \[5\] made good use of the generating function methodology. Our approach is different from it and is based on the dynamical mean-field theory of \[1, 2, 6\].\
The objective is to study the SIR and SIS models in directed networks and to derive the critical infection rate or the threshold, above which a disease spreads in the networks and below which it dies out. In a directed network a disease passes to other nodes through outgoing links and a node is infected by incoming links. The indegree of a node is the number of incoming links into the node and the outdegree is that of outgoing links emanating from it.\
Many directed networks such as the WWW, networks of metabolic reactions and phone calls have power law degree distributions (\[4\], \[8\], \[10\]): $$P(k) \propto k^{-\gamma}~~ {\rm and} ~~Q(\ell) \propto {\ell}^{-\gamma'}$$ for all large indegrees $k$ and outdegrees $\ell$, respectively, although real networks inevitably have finite sizes of $k, \ell$. The distinction between both degree distributions disappears for an undirected network. If the exponents satisfy $2 < \gamma, \gamma' \le 3$, these networks are called scale-free. Several authors use $\gamma_{\rm in}, \gamma_{\rm out}$ in place of $\gamma, \gamma' $, respectively.\
In \[9\] it was shown that the threshold of the SIS epidemic model in undirected scale-free networks is zero. In \[1, 2, 6\] a similar result was obtained also for the SIR epidemic model.\
In this paper, using the joint probability distribution of indegrees and outdegrees, we derive the thresholds for the SIR and SIS epidemic dynamics on directed networks. Actually they turn out the same for both. Furthermore, it is shown that the threshold approaches zero under a high correlation between indegrees and outdegrees. In the SIR model, the average fraction of nodes that are ever infected until the disease dies out is also given using the indegree distribution.\
[**2. The SIR model in a directed\
network**]{}\
First we investigate the SIR model on a directed network. Nodes of the network are divided into the following three groups as in \[7, Chap. 10\]: Susceptible (S), Infected (I) and Removed (R). Hereafter we will denote a susceptible node by an S-node [*etc.,*]{} for short. An S-node becomes infected at a rate of $\lambda$ ($0 \le \lambda \le 1$). The parameter $\lambda$ is the infection rate, for which we will derive the critical value for an outbreak of a disease, a computer virus, [*etc.*]{} The disease can be passed from I-nodes to S-nodes following only the direction of directed links. R-nodes have either recovered from the disease or died and so they cannot pass the disease to other nodes. An I-node becomes an R-node at a rate $\delta$ ($0 \le \delta \le 1$) and, without loss of generality, we will set $\delta = 1$.\
Let us denote the densities of S-, I-, R-nodes with indegree $k$ and outdegree $\ell$ at time $t$ by $S_{k,\ell}(t), \rho_{k,\ell}(t), R_{k,\ell}(t)$, respectively. So we have $$S_{k,\ell}(t) + \rho_{k,\ell}(t) + R_{k,\ell}(t) =1.$$ Let $p(k, \ell)$ be the joint probability distribution of nodes with indegree $k$ and outdegree $\ell$, and let us denote the marginal distributions by $$P(k) = \sum_{\ell} p(k, \ell), ~~ Q(\ell) = \sum_{k} p(k, \ell)$$ and the averages including the $n$th moments by $$\begin{aligned}
\langle k^n\rangle \! \! \! \!& = & \! \!\! \! \sum_{k, \ell} k^n p(k, \ell) = \sum_{k} k^n P(k), \\
\langle{\ell}^n\rangle \! \! \! \!& = & \! \!\! \! \sum_{k, \ell} {\ell}^n p(k, \ell) = \sum_{\ell} {\ell}^n Q(\ell), \\
\langle{k\ell}\rangle \! \! \! \!& = & \! \!\! \! \sum_{k, \ell} k\ell p(k, \ell).\end{aligned}$$ Following the dynamical mean-field theory (\[2, 6\]), we see that the spreading process on a directed network can be described by the system of differential equations: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{dS_{k,\ell}}{dt} \! \! \! \!& = & \! \!\! \! - \lambda k S_{k,\ell}(t)\theta(t), \\
\frac{d{\rho}_{k,\ell}}{dt} \! \!\! \! & = &\! \! \! \! \lambda k S_{k,\ell}(t)\theta(t) - {\rho}_{k,\ell}(t), \\
\frac{dR_{k,\ell}}{dt} \! \!\! \! & = &\! \!\! \! {\rho}_{k,\ell}(t).\end{aligned}$$ The term $\lambda k S_{k,\ell}(t)\theta(t)$ in (1) and (2) indicates the fraction of newly infected nodes through $k$ incoming links. The probability, $\theta(t)$, that a randomly selected outgoing link emanates from an I-node at time $t$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\theta(t) = \frac{\displaystyle \sum_{k, \ell}\ell
p(k, \ell){\rho}_{k,\ell}(t)}{\displaystyle \sum_{k, \ell}{\ell}p(k, {\ell})}=
\frac{ \sum_{k, \ell} \ell p(k, \ell) {\rho}_{k,\ell}(t)}{\langle{\ell}\rangle}.\end{aligned}$$ Note that each directed link is counted twice as one outdegree of some node and as one indegree of another. Hence the average outdegree is equal to the average indegree: ${\langle{\ell}\rangle} = {\langle{k}\rangle}$.\
Using the initial condition $S_{k,\ell}(0) = 1$, (1) is easily solved as $$\begin{aligned}
S_{k,\ell}(t) = e^{-\lambda k \phi(t)}, \end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\phi(t) = \int_0^t \theta(t')dt'.\end{aligned}$$ By (4) and $R_{k, \ell}(0) = 0$, $\phi(t)$ is expressed as $$\begin{aligned}
\phi(t) \! \! \! \!& =
&\! \! \! \! \frac{1}{{\langle{\ell}\rangle}}
\sum_{k, \ell} \ell p(k, \ell) \int_0^t {\rho}_{k,\ell}(t')dt' \nonumber \\
\! \! \! \!& =
&\! \! \! \! \frac{1}{{\langle{\ell}\rangle}} \sum_{k, \ell} \ell p(k, \ell) R_{k,\ell}(t).\end{aligned}$$ We derive the differential equation for $\phi(t)$. Using (3), (5) and (6), it follows that $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{d\phi(t)}{dt} \! \! \! \!& =
&\! \! \! \! \frac{1}{{\langle{\ell}\rangle}} \sum_{k, \ell} \ell p(k, \ell) \frac {dR_{k,\ell}(t)}{dt} \\
\! \! \! \!& =
&\! \! \! \! \frac{1}{{\langle{\ell}\rangle}} \sum_{k, \ell} \ell p(k, \ell) {\rho_{k,\ell}(t)}\\
\! \! \! \! & =
&\! \! \! \! \frac{1}{{\langle{\ell}\rangle}} \sum_{k, \ell} \ell p(k, \ell) (1- R_{k,\ell}(t) - S_{k,\ell}(t) ) \\
\! \! \! \! & =
&\! \! \! \! 1 -\phi(t) - \frac{1}{{\langle{\ell}\rangle}} \sum_{k, \ell} \ell p(k, \ell) S_{k,\ell}(t) \\
\! \! \! \!& =
&\! \! \! \! 1- \phi(t) - \frac{1}{{\langle{\ell}\rangle}} \sum_{k, \ell} \ell p(k, \ell) e^{-\lambda k \phi(t)}. \end{aligned}$$ In this paper we are concerned with a steady state of the epidemic spreading. At the steady state we will have a limit $$\begin{aligned}
\Phi = \lim_{t \rightarrow \infty}\phi(t),\end{aligned}$$ together with the condition $$\begin{aligned}
\lim_{t \rightarrow \infty} \frac{d\phi(t)}{dt} = 0.\end{aligned}$$ Substituting these into the above equations yields the equation for $\Phi$ as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
\Phi = 1- \frac{1}{{\langle{\ell}\rangle}} \sum_{k, \ell} \ell p(k, \ell) e^{-\lambda k \Phi}. \end{aligned}$$ An epidemic outbreak implies that this equation has a solution $\Phi >0$ other than $\Phi = 0$. Since the right hand side of (7) is a concave function of $\Phi$ and its value at $\Phi = 1$ is less than 1, the condition for it is $$\frac{d}{d \Phi}\bigg(1- \frac{1}{{\langle{\ell}\rangle}} \sum_{k, \ell} \ell p(k, \ell)
e^{-\lambda k \Phi}\bigg)_{\Phi = 0} > 1.$$ Hence the critical infection rate $\lambda_{\rm c}$ or the threshold for an epidemic outbreak is obtained by setting $$\frac{d}{d \Phi}\bigg(1- \frac{1}{{\langle{\ell}\rangle}} \sum_{k, \ell} \ell p(k, \ell)
e^{-\lambda k \Phi}\bigg)_{\Phi = 0} = 1.$$ Solving this for $\lambda$ we get $$\begin{aligned}
{\lambda}_{\rm c} = \frac{\langle{\ell}\rangle}{\sum_{k, \ell} k\ell p(k, \ell)}
= \frac{\langle{\ell}\rangle}{\langle{k \ell}\rangle}.\end{aligned}$$\
In \[7, Chap.10\] the total number of infected individuals is discussed for the classical SIR model, which represents the final outbreak size. In our setting it is the average fraction of nodes ever infected until the disease dies out. This is written as $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathcal{O}} \! \! \! \!& = &\! \! \! \! \sum_{k, \ell} p(k, \ell)(1- S_{k, \ell}(\infty)) \nonumber\\
\! \! \! \!& = &\! \! \! \! 1- \sum_{k, \ell} p(k, \ell)S_{k, \ell}(\infty) \\
\! \! \! \!& = &\! \! \! \! 1- \sum_{k, \ell} p(k, \ell)e^{-\lambda k \Phi} \nonumber
= 1- \sum_{k} P(k)e^{-\lambda k \Phi} \end{aligned}$$ by means of the indegree distribution $P(k)$.\
Suppose that the indegree distribution follows a power law $$P(k) \propto k^{-\gamma}, ~~k \ge m$$ with $2<\gamma \le 3$, then $P(k) =
(\gamma-1)m^{\gamma-1}k^{-\gamma}~(k \ge m)$, where $m$ is the minimum indegree. Let $\Gamma(a,x)$ be the incomplete gamma function defined by $$\Gamma(a,x)= \int_x^{\infty}t^{a-1}e^{-t}dt.$$ Then the fraction (9) of the outbreak size can be written as $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathcal{O}} \! \! \! \!& =
&\! \! \! \! 1 - \int_m^{\infty}P(k)e^{-\lambda k \Phi}dk \nonumber \\
\! \! \! \!& =
&\! \! \! \! 1- (\gamma -1)(\lambda m \Phi)^{\gamma - 1}
\Gamma(1-\gamma, \lambda m \Phi),\end{aligned}$$ by the continuous approximation.\
[**3. The SIS model in a directed\
network**]{}\
In the SIS model R-nodes are absent. Those nodes that recovered from a disease may be infected again and again. The densities of S-, I-nodes with indegree $k$ and outdegree $\ell$ at time $t$ are $S_{k,\ell}(t), \rho_{k,\ell}(t)$ as before, and the equality $S_{k,\ell}(t) = 1- \rho_{k,\ell}(t)$ holds. So equations (1)-(3) are replaced by the single differential equation $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{d{\rho}_{k,\ell}}{dt} = \lambda k (1- {\rho}_{k,\ell}(t))\theta(t) - {\rho}_{k,\ell}(t), \end{aligned}$$ where $\theta(t)$ is the same probability as (4).\
At the steady state, as in Section 2, we will have the condition $$\lim_{t \rightarrow \infty}\frac{d{\rho}_{k,\ell}}{dt} = 0$$ for all $k$ and $\ell$, and a limit $$\Theta = \lim_{t \rightarrow \infty}\theta(t).$$ So we get from (10) $$\lim_{t \rightarrow \infty} {\rho}_{k,\ell}(t)= \frac{\lambda k \Theta}{1+ \lambda k \Theta}.$$ Substituting these into (4) we have the equation for $\Theta$ as follows: $$\Theta =
\frac{1}{\langle{\ell}\rangle} \sum_{k, \ell} \ell p(k, \ell) \frac{\lambda k \Theta} {1+ \lambda k \Theta}.$$ If this has a solution $\Theta > 0$ other than $\Theta = 0$, then it corresponds to an endemic state. Since the right hand side of the equation is a concave function of $\Theta$ and its value at $\Theta = 1$ is less than 1, the condition for an outbreak is $$\frac{d}{d \Theta}\bigg(\frac{1}{\langle{\ell}\rangle} \sum_{k, \ell} \ell p(k, \ell)
\frac{\lambda k \Theta} {1+ \lambda k \Theta}\bigg)_{\Theta = 0} >1.$$ Again, this yields the same threshold (8) as in the SIR model: $${\lambda}_{\rm c} = \frac {\langle{\ell}\rangle}{\langle{k \ell}\rangle}.$$ In the next section we calculate the threshold ${\lambda}_{\rm c}$ in several cases and show that it approaches zero for scale-free directed networks under some additional assumptions.\
[**4. Correlations between outdegrees and indegrees**]{}\
Some of real complex networks contains a few hubs, that is, nodes with many outdegrees and indegrees, and a vast nodes with very few degrees as well. In order to discuss such a phenomenon, it is effective to introduce the conditional probability $p(\ell|k)$ for the correlation between outdegrees and indegrees. It indicates the probability that a given $k$-indegree node has $\ell$ outdegrees.\
First we deal with the following two extreme cases (I) and (II) by means of $p(\ell|k)$. (I) has the highest correlation, while (II) is the lowest one or independent case.\
\
Case (I) $p(\ell|k) = \delta_{\ell,k}$ for all $k$ and $\ell$.\
\
Here $\delta_{\ell,k}$ is the Kronecker delta. This condition implies that each node has the same in- and out-degrees. If we regard $k$ and $\ell$ as random variables, then $k = \ell$. In this case we have $\langle{k^2}\rangle = \langle{\ell^2}\rangle$ and the denominator in (8) is $$\langle k{\ell}\rangle = \sum_{k, \ell} k\ell p(k, \ell) = \sum_{k, \ell} k\ell \delta_{\ell,k}P(k) = \langle{k^2}\rangle.$$ Therefore, if the indegree distribution follows a power law $P(k) \propto k^{-\gamma}$ with $2 < \gamma \le 3$, then the threshold $\lambda_{\rm c}$ in (8) is equal to zero as in \[1, 2, 6, 9\], where this prominent result for the SIR and SIS models was first obtained for undirected scale-free networks.\
\
Case (II) $p(\ell|k) = Q(\ell)$ for all $k$ and $\ell$.\
\
In this case the random variables $k$ and $\ell$ are independent or uncorrelated and $\langle k\ell \rangle = \langle k \rangle \langle \ell \rangle$ holds, from which we see that the threshold (8) is $$\begin{aligned}
\lambda_{\rm c} = \frac {1}{{\langle{k}\rangle}} = \frac {1}{{\langle{\ell}\rangle}}.\end{aligned}$$ This expression of the threshold also appears for a homogeneous SIS model in undirected networks as in \[2\].\
Under the conditions $\langle k^2 \rangle < \infty$ and $\langle {\ell}^2 \rangle < \infty$ the average $\langle k\ell \rangle$ satisfies $$\begin{aligned}
\langle k\ell \rangle \le \sqrt{\langle k^2 \rangle \langle {\ell}^2 \rangle},\end{aligned}$$ by the Schwarz inequality \[3\]. Moreover, it also says that the equality $\langle k\ell \rangle =
\sqrt{\langle k^2 \rangle \langle {\ell}^2 \rangle}$ holds only if both random variables $k$ and $\ell$ satisfy $k = a \ell$ with some constant $a$. From $\langle k \rangle = \langle \ell \rangle$ we see that $a=1$, which coincides with (I). Thus, according as the correlation between indegrees $k$ and outdegrees $\ell$ becomes high, the threshold $\lambda_{\rm c}$ approaches zero: $${\lambda}_{\rm c} = \frac{\langle{\ell}\rangle}{\langle{k\ell}\rangle}
\to \frac{\langle{\ell}\rangle}{\sqrt{\langle k^2 \rangle \langle {\ell}^2 \rangle}} \to 0,$$ provided the power laws $$\begin{aligned}
P(k) \propto k^{-\gamma}~~{\rm and }~~ Q(\ell) \propto {\ell}^{-\gamma'}~~{\rm for } ~~ k, \ell \le M,\end{aligned}$$ hold with exponents $2 < \gamma, \gamma' \le 3$ and the maximum degree $M$ is very large.\
In order to discuss more quantitatively, we might use the correlation coefficient (\[3\]): $$\begin{aligned}
r = \frac{\langle (k-\langle k \rangle)(\ell -\langle \ell \rangle) \rangle}{\sigma_k \sigma_{\ell}}
= \frac{\langle k \ell \rangle - \langle k \rangle \langle \ell \rangle}
{\sqrt{\langle k^2 \rangle- {\langle k \rangle}^2}
\sqrt{\langle {\ell}^2 \rangle- {\langle {\ell} \rangle}^2}}.\end{aligned}$$ Here $\sigma_k$ and $\sigma_{\ell}$ are the respective standard deviations. It satisfies $-1 \le r \le 1$, which is a variation of the Schwarz inequality. By a simple calculation it follows that the threshold of (8) can be written as $$\begin{aligned}
\lambda_{\rm c} =
\Big(\langle k \rangle + r\langle k \rangle \sqrt{\big(\langle {k^2} \rangle /{\langle k \rangle}^2-1\big)
\big(\langle {\ell}^2 \rangle/{\langle {\ell} \rangle}^2-1\big)}\Big)^{-1}.\end{aligned}$$ So, if it is possible to find $r > 0$ by sampling, then we have $\lambda_{\rm c} \approx 0$ under the above condition (11), because $\langle {k^2} \rangle \gg {\langle k \rangle}^2$ and $\langle {{\ell}^2} \rangle \gg {\langle {\ell} \rangle}^2$ in case of $2 < \gamma, \gamma' \le 3$.\
[**References**]{}
- M. Barthélemy, A. Barrat, R. Pastor-Satorras and A. Vespignani, Dynamical patterns of epidemic outbreaks in complex heterogeneous networks, [*Journal of Theoretical Biology*]{} [**235**]{}, 275–288, 2005.
- M. Boguñá, R. Pastor-Satorras and A. Vespignani, Epidemic spreading in complex networks with degree correlations, LN in Physics [**625**]{}, Springer, 127–147, 2003.
- Y. S. Chow and H. Teicher, Probability Theory, Springer Verlag, 1988.
- S. N. Dorogovtsev and J. F. F. Mendes, Evolution of Networks: From Biological Nets to the Internet and WWW, Oxford University Press, 2003.
- L. A. Meyers, M. E. J. Newman and B. Pourbohloul, Predicting epidemics on directed contact networks, [*Journal of Theoretical Biology*]{} [**240**]{}, 400-418, 2006.
- Y. Moreno, R. Pastor-Satorras and A. Vespignani, Epidemic outbreaks in complex heterogeneous networks, [*European Physical Journal B*]{} [**26**]{}, 521-529, 2002.
- J. D. Murray, Mathematical Biology (Vol. 1), Springer Verlag, 2002.
- M. E. J. Newman, The structure and function of complex networks, [*SIAM Review*]{} [**45**]{} 167–256, 2003.
- R. Pastor-Satorras and A. Vespignani, Epidemic spreading in scale-free networks, [*Physical Review Letters*]{} [**86**]{}, 3200–3203, 2001.
- S. Tanimoto, Power laws of the in-degree and out-degree distributions of complex networks, arXiv:0912.2793, 2009.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
harvmac epsf \#1[Nucl. Phys. [**B[\#1]{}**]{}]{} \#1[Phys. Lett. [**B[\#1]{}**]{}]{} \#1[Phys. Rep. [**[\#1]{}**]{}]{}
Sergei V. Zenkin [^1][Permanent address: Institute for Nuclear Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow 117312, Russia. E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected]]{}
Department of Physics, Kyushu University 33
Fukuoka 812, Japan
1.5cm
We discuss the phase structure of a lattice Higgs-Yukawa system in the variational mean field approximation with contributions of fermionic determinant being calculated in a ladder approximation. In particular, we demonstrate that in this approximation the ferrimagnetic phase in the $Z_2$ model with naive fermions can appear as an artifact of a finite lattice and that the phase diagram for this model on infinite lattice changes qualitatively at space-time dimension $D = 4$ compared with those at $D > 4$.
Although mean field method for lattice systems including fermions loses considerably its simplicity and requires further approximations it is still useful to get some idea of the phase structure of the systems and to orientate Monte Carlo simulations towards investigating the most interesting points. In this paper we make an improvement in the approximations within the variational mean field approximation for $Z_2$ Higgs-Yukawa systems by summing up a ladder type contributions to fermionic determinant, including those of the next order in inverse space-time dimension $1/D$. This enables us to observe two new points. As the first one we demonstrate that within our approximation the ferrimagnetic phase in the simplest Higgs-Yukawa model with naive fermions can arise as a finite lattice artifact. The second point is that the value $D =
4$ turns out in a sense to be critical, as the domain of paramagnetic phase just at $D = 4$ becomes disconnected, being connected at $D > 4$.
The paper is organized as follows. The system under consideration is defined in Sect. 2. In Sect. 3 we describe the method and approximations. Results are discussed in Sect.4.
The system is defined on a hyper cubic $D$-dimensional ($D$ is even) lattice $\Lambda$ with sites numbered by $n = (n_1, ..., n_D)$, $-N/2+1 \leq n_{\mu}
\leq N/2$ ($N$ is even) and with lattice spacing $a = 1$; $\hat{\mu}$ is the unit vector along the lattice link in the positive $\mu$-direction. Dynamical variables of the model are the fermion $2^{D/2}$-component fields $\psi_n$, $\psibar_n$, and scalar field $\phi_n \in Z_2$ (i.e. $\phi_n = \pm 1$). We imply antiperiodic boundary conditions for the fermion and periodic for the scalar fields.
The model is defined by functional integral with the action where $\kappa \in (-\infty, \infty)$ is the hoping parameter, $y \geq 0$ is the Yukawa coupling; we use the Hermitean $\gamma$-matrices: $[\gamma_{\mu},
\gamma_{\nu}]_{+} = 2 \delta_{\mu \nu}$; $L_{\mu}(p) = \sin p_{\mu}$, $p_{\mu} = (2 \pi / N) (k_{\mu} - 1/2)$, $-N/2+1 \leq k_{\mu}\leq N/2$, so that $p_{\mu} \in (-\pi/2, \pi/2)$. Operator $\dsl$ satisfies In the limit of $N
\rightarrow \infty$ the sum $N^{-D} \sum_p$ defines the integral $\int^{\pi/2}_{-\pi/2} d^D p / (2 \pi)^D$.
The action is invariant under $Z_2$ global chiral transformations where $P_{L,R} = (1 \pm \gamma_{D+1})/2$ are chiral projecting operators.
To analyze the phase structure of the model we use the variational mean field approximation \[\] (see also \[\]) which becomes applicable to after integrating out the fermions Then for free energy of the system $F = W[0]$ the method yields the inequality where $h_n$ is a mean field, and u So, we can get some idea of the system, studying $F_{MF}$, that is much simpler than that for $F$. From it immediately follows that and therefore the main problem is a calculation of the expectation value of the fermionic determinant where $\tr$ stands for the trace over spinorial indices; in the first term of the second equation the relation $\phi_i^{2^{D/2}} = 1$ has been taken into account.
Following the usual way we consider $F_{MF}$ for two translation invariant ansatzes for $h_n$ which in fact are the order parameters distinguishing the ferromagnetic (FM: $h_n^{FM} \neq 0$, $h_n^{AF} = 0$), antiferromagnetic (AF: $h_n^{FM} = 0$, $h_n^{AF} \neq 0$), paramagnetic (PM: both are zero), and ferrimagnetic (FI: both are nonzero) phases in the system. Then the mean field equations are reduced to where $F_{MF}^{FM,\,AF}$ is the functional of the right-hand side of Eq.(3.2) on ansatzes (3.6). Further simplification comes from the observation (see, for example ), that as the value $h = 0$ is always a solution of Eq. (3.7), and, therefore, second order phase transition lines are determined by equations to find them it is sufficient to know $\vev{\ln \det \,[\dsl + y \phi]}_h$ to terms of order of $h^2$.
If the problem could be solved exactly both of two representations (3.5) of the fermionic determinant would yield the same answer. But correlations of $\phi{^,}$s at coinciding arguments (Eq.(3.4)) make the problem unsolvable exactly, as the contributions of order of $h^2$ to (3.5) come from terms of any orders of $u''$, as well as from those of order of $u'^2$. These contributions shown schematically in Fig. 1. Therefore, we are forced to use some approximations, and, particularly, to use two representations of (3.5) separately for “weak" and “strong" coupling regimes of $y$, though the exact meaning of this can only be clear a posteriori.
Our approximation involves summing up all diagrams of Fig.1 ($a$) (proper ladder diagrams) and ($b$) (crossed ladder diagrams), so we may call it as a ladder approximation. Using property (2.4) of the Dirac operator we find that the contributions to $F_{MF}^{FM, AF}$ from the fermionic determinant, $\Delta F_{MF}^{FM, AF}$, have the same functional form for both representations (3.5) and in our approximation read as follows where $q_{\mu} = (2 \pi /N) l_{\mu}$, $-N/2+1 \leq l_{\mu}\leq N/2$ (so that $q_{\mu} \in (-\pi, \pi])$, while coupling $c$ and form of function $G$ depend on the representation. So, for weak coupling regime we have $c = y$ and and for the strong coupling they are $c = y^{-1}$ and The first terms in (3.9) come from the diagrams of Fig.1($a$), while the second from those of Fig.1($b$).
Then, from Eq. (3.8) and the above formulae it follows that critical lines in the system in our approximation are determined by the expressions
We now should make some comments.
\(i) The contributions to (3.12) which are proportional to $G(0)$ and $G(\pi)$ are generalization of “double chain” contributions of Ref. , as the diagrams of Fig.1($a$) are the generalization of the double chains to any configurations of the same topology. They coincide only for $G^S$ because of strict locality of the Dirac operator, but not for $G^W$. More important difference comes from the second terms corresponding to the diagrams of Fig.1($b$) (the latter correspond to the generalization of the double chains with coinciding ends), which have not been taken into account in previous calculations (see also \[\]). From the well known symmetry of the model under the transformations: $(\psi, \psibar)_n \rightarrow \exp (i \epsilon_n \pi /4) (\psi, \psibar)_n$, $\phi_n \rightarrow \epsilon_n \phi_n$, $\kappa \rightarrow -\kappa$, $y
\rightarrow -i y$, it follows that $G(\pi) = -G(0)$, and also, that the contributions of the new terms are of even power in $y^{\pm 2}$ beginning from $y^{\pm 4}$.
\(ii) These terms can become dominating when $y^2$ is close to the values $1/G^W(0)$ or $G^S(0)$ which are singular points of the expressions under the sum, even though in weak coupling regime they are of $O(D^{-1})$ compared with the first ones. Thereby these terms determine domains of the “weak" and “strong" coupling regimes also for $\kappa^F_{cr}$. They are domains of analyticity of functions $\kappa^W_{cr}(y)$ and $\kappa^S_{cr}(y)$, that is $y^2 < 1/G^W (0)$ and $y^2 > G^S (0)$, respectively, coinciding for $\kappa^F_{cr}$ and $\kappa^{AF}_{cr}$.
\(iii) We have no strict arguments why other diagrams which we did not take into account could be neglected compared with the ladder ones. In particular, in strong coupling regime they can give contributions to $\kappa_{cr}$ of the same order in $1/D$ as the latter. But because those diagrams come into play in higher orders in $y^{\pm 1}$, at least from the order of $y^{\pm 6}$, the assumption that their contributions are suppressed and less singular looks plausible.
Finally, it worth noting that the formulae (3.12) are applicable to any lattice fermion actions, including non-local ones, whose Dirac operators satisfy property (2.4) \[\].
Let us now compare the phase diagrams determined by the expressions (3.12) for $D=4$ for finite $N$ and for the limiting case of $N \rightarrow \infty$ . The new terms are always negative and therefore increase the contributions of the first terms for $\kappa^F_{cr}$ and decrease them for $\kappa^{AF}_{cr}$. The question is of how much.
For $N = 4$ we have $G^W(0) = 0.5$, $G^S(0) = 2$, so that the domain of inapplicability of our formulae shrinks to the point $y = 2^{1/2}$, and the phase diagram is shown in Fig. 2. The curves $\kappa^F_{cr}(y)$ and $\kappa^{AF}_{cr}(y)$ intersect each other forming narrow domain with the ferrimagnetic phase around $y = 2^{1/2}$, which is spreaded from $-\infty$ to $\infty$ in $\kappa$. It is natural to assume, that contributions of other diagrams (Fig.1($c$)) smooth the negative contribution of those of Fig. 1($b$), so that the PM-AF phase transition line in Fig. 2($b$) becomes continuous. Then, as a result we would have a familiar picture, typical for SU(2) models (see, for example, \[\]), with FI phase lying below this line.
In the limit of $N \rightarrow \infty$ we have $G^W(0) \simeq 0.62$, $G^S(0)
=
2$, but the picture is changed qualitatively. The phase diagram is shown in Fig. 3. The curves do not touch each other even at $\kappa \rightarrow
-\infty$ and FI phase does not appear.
To clear up why this happens let us consider behaviour of functions of $y^2$ determined by the sums in (3.12) near the points $1/G^W(0)$ and $G^S(0)$. Let us define positive $\delta = y^2 - G^S(0)$ or $1/G^W(0) - y^2$. Then a simple analysis shows that at a finite $N$ and a small $\delta^,$s these functions is of order of $O(D^k N^{-D} \delta^{-2})$, so the intersections of the curves $\kappa^F_{cr}(y)$ and $\kappa^{AF}_{cr}(y)$ always occur at the points $\delta = O(D^l N^{-D})$, $-\kappa = O(D^m 2^{D/2} N^D)$, where $k$, $l$, $m$ are some (negative or non-negative) powers. But at $N \rightarrow
\infty$, when the sums go over to integrals, this functions become of order of $\ln \delta$ for $D = 4$, and even of $O(\delta^0)$ at $D > 4$. This means that at $D > 4$ we can continue lines $\kappa^{F(W)}_{cr}(y)$ and $\kappa^{F(S)}_{cr}(y)$ until they intersect each other, so that the phase diagram in this case looks like in Fig. 4, that reproduces the result of ref..
Thus, this example demonstrates importance of summing up contributions to fermionic determinant including those of the next order in $1/D$ for $D = 4$ systems. Another point is that even though we cannot definitely conclude whether the FI phase in this example is an artifact only of a finite lattice or also of the mean field approximation, this gives one one more caution in what concerns finite lattice effects.
[**Acknowledgments**]{}
This work is supported by JSPS. I am grateful to H. Yoneyama for enlightening discussions and careful reading the manuscript and to S. Sakoda for drawing the picture of Fig. 1. It is also a pleasure to thank all members of the Elementary Particle Theory Group of the Department of Physics of Kyushu University for their warm hospitality.
50ex
=by 8 by 10 Fig. 1. Diagrams contributed to $\Delta F$ to order $h^2$. Solid lines denote $\dsl$ or $\dsl^{-1}$, each solid circle stands for $u'$, dashed line for $u''$.
10ex
=by 8 by 10 =by 8 by 10 Fig. 2. $(a)$ Phase diagram of the model at $D = 4$, $N = 4$. Intersections of FM-PM phase transition line (solid) with PM-AF phase transition line (gray) form FI phase in the narrow region around the point $y = 2^{1/2}$ shown in $(b)$ in more detail.
10ex
=by 8 by 10 Fig. 3. Phase diagram of the model at $D = 4$, $N
\rightarrow \infty$. =by 8 by 10 Fig. 4. Qualitative picture of the phase diagram of the model at $D > 4$, $N \rightarrow \infty$. \#!/bin/csh -f \# Note: this uuencoded compressed tar file created by csh script uufiles \# if you are on a unix machine this file will unpack itself: \# just strip off any mail header and call resulting file, e.g., figs.uu \# (uudecode will ignore these header lines and search for the begin line below) \# then say csh figs.uu \# if you are not on a unix machine, you should explicitly execute the commands: \# uudecode figs.uu; uncompress figs.tar.Z; tar -xvf figs.tar \# uudecode $0
chmod 644 figs.tar.Z
zcat figs.tar.Z | tar -xvf -
rm $0 figs.tar.Z exit
[^1]: $^*$
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We give a protocol for producing certifiable randomness from a single untrusted quantum device that is polynomial-time bounded. The randomness is certified to be statistically close to uniform from the point of view of any computationally unbounded quantum adversary, that may share entanglement with the quantum device. The protocol relies on the existence of post-quantum secure trapdoor claw-free functions, and introduces a new primitive for constraining the power of an untrusted quantum device. We show how to construct this primitive based on the hardness of the learning with errors (LWE) problem, and prove that it has a crucial adaptive hardcore bit property. The randomness protocol can be used as the basis for an efficiently verifiable “test of quantumness”, thus answering an outstanding challenge in the field.'
author:
- 'Zvika Brakerski[^1]'
- 'Paul Christiano[^2]'
- 'Urmila Mahadev[^3]'
- 'Umesh Vazirani[^4]'
- 'Thomas Vidick[^5]'
bibliography:
- 'randomness.bib'
- 'qpip.bib'
title: A Cryptographic Test of Quantumness and Certifiable Randomness from a Single Quantum Device
---
Introduction
============
[^1]: Weizmann Institute of Science, Israel. Email: `[email protected]`.
[^2]: OpenAI, USA. Work performed while at UC Berkeley
[^3]: UC Berkeley, USA. Email: `[email protected]`
[^4]: UC Berkeley, USA. Email: `[email protected]`
[^5]: California Institute of Technology, USA. Email: `[email protected]`
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
To explore the extent of embeddability of Leibnizian infinitesimal calculus in first-order logic (FOL) and modern frameworks, we propose to set aside ontological issues and focus on procedural questions. This would enable an account of Leibnizian procedures in a framework limited to FOL with a small number of additional ingredients such as the relation of infinite proximity. If, as we argue here, first order logic is indeed suitable for developing modern proxies for the inferential moves found in Leibnizian infinitesimal calculus, then modern infinitesimal frameworks are more appropriate to interpreting Leibnizian infinitesimal calculus than modern Weierstrassian ones.
Keywords: First order logic; infinitesimal calculus; ontology; procedures; Leibniz; Weierstrass; Abraham Robinson
address:
- 'P. Błaszczyk, Institute of Mathematics, Pedagogical University of Cracow, Poland'
- 'V. Kanovei, IPPI, Moscow, and MIIT, Moscow, Russia'
- 'K. Katz, Department of Mathematics, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan 52900 Israel'
- 'M. Katz, Department of Mathematics, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan 52900 Israel'
- 'T. Kudryk, Department of Mathematics, Lviv National University, Lviv, Ukraine'
- 'T. Mormann, Department of Logic and Philosophy of Science, University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU, 20080 Donostia San Sebastian, Spain'
- 'D. Sherry, Department of Philosophy, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011, US'
author:
- Piotr Błaszczyk
- Vladimir Kanovei
- 'Karin U. Katz'
- 'Mikhail G. Katz'
- Taras Kudryk
- Thomas Mormann
- David Sherry
title: 'Is Leibnizian calculus embeddable in first order logic?'
---
Introduction
============
Leibniz famously denied that infinite aggregates can be viewed as *wholes*, on the grounds that they would lead to a violation of the principle that the whole is greater than the part. Yet the infinitary idea is latent in Leibniz in the form of a distinction between *assignable* and *inassignable* quantities [@Ch p. 153], and explicit in his comments as to the violation of Definition V.4 of Euclid’s *Elements* [@Le95b p. 322]. This definition is closely related to what is known since [@Sto83] as the *Archimedean property*, and was translated by Barrow in 1660 as follows:
> *Those numbers are said to have a ratio betwixt them, which being multiplied may exceed one the other* [@Eu60].
Furthermore, Leibniz produced a number of results in infinitesimal calculus which, nowadays, are expressed most naturally by means of quantifiers that range over infinite aggregates. This tension leads us to examine a possible relationship between Leibnizian infinitesimal calculus and a modern logical system known as first order logic (FOL). The precise meaning of the term is clarified in Section \[FOL\]. We first analyze several Leibnizian examples in Section \[one\].
This text continues a program of re-evaluation of the history of infinitesimal mathematics initiated in [@KK12], [@B11] and elsewhere.
Examples from Leibniz {#one}
=====================
Let us examine some typical examples from Leibniz’s infinitesimal calculus so as to gauge their relationship to FOL.
Series presentation of $\pi/4$ {#s11}
------------------------------
In his *De vera proportione* (1682), Leibniz represented $\frac{\pi}{4}$ in terms of the infinite series $$1-\frac{1}{3}+\frac{1}{5}-\frac{1}{7}+\ldots$$ This is a remarkable result, but we wish to view it as a result concerning a specific real number, i.e., a *single case*, and in this sense involving no quantification, once we add a new function symbol for a black box procedure $\square$ called “evaluation of convergent series” (as well as a definition of $\pi$) (we will say a few words about the various implementations of $\square$ in modern frameworks in Section \[two\]).
Leibniz convergence criterion for alternating series {#s22}
----------------------------------------------------
This refers to an arbitrary alternating series defined by an alternating sequence with terms of decreasing absolute value tending to zero, such as the series of Subsection \[s11\], or the series $\sum_n \frac{(-1)^n}{n}$ determined by the alternating sequence $\frac{(-1)^n}{n}$. We will refer to such a sequence as a ‘Leibniz sequence’ for the purposes of this subsection. This criterion seems to be quantifying over sequences (and therefore sets), thus transcending the FOL framework, but in fact this can be handled easily by introducing a free variable that can be interpreted later according to the chosen domain of discourse.
Thus, the criterion fits squarely within the parameters of $\text{FOL}+\square$ at level (3) (see Section \[FOL\]). In more detail, we are not interested here in arbitrary ‘Leibniz sequences’ with possibly inassignable terms. Leibniz only dealt with sequences with ordinary (assignable) terms, as in the two examples given above. Each real sequence is handled in the framework $\mathbb{R}\subset{}^\ast\mathbb{R}$ by the transfer principle, which asserts the validity of each true relation when interpreted over ${}^\ast\mathbb{R}$.
Product rule {#s23}
------------
We have $\frac{d(uv)}{dx}=\frac{du}{dx}v+\frac{dv}{dx}u$ and it looks like we need quantification over pairs of functions $(u,v)$. Here again we are only interested in natural extensions of real functions $u,v$, which are handled at level (3) as in the previous section.
In [@Le84], the product rule is expressed in terms of differentials as $d(uv)=udv+vdu$. In *Cum Prodiisset* [@Le01c p. 46-47], Leibniz presents an alternative justification of the product rule (see [@Bos p. 58]). Here he divides by $dx$ and argues with differential quotients rather than differentials. Adjusting Leibniz’s notation, we obtain an equivalent calculation $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{d(uv)}{dx} &= \frac{(u+du)(v+dv)-uv}{dx} \\&=
\frac{udv+vdu+du\,dv}{dx} \\&= \frac{udv+vdu}{dx} + \frac{du\,dv}{dx}
\\&= \frac{udv+vdu}{dx}.
\end{aligned}$$ Under suitable conditions the term $\frac{du\,dv}{dx}$ is infinitesimal, and therefore the last step $$\label{72}
\frac{udv+vdu}{dx} + \frac{du\,dv}{dx} =
u\,\frac{dv}{dx}+v\,\frac{du}{dx},$$ relying on a generalized notion of equality, is legitimized as an instance of Leibniz’s *transcendental law of homogeneity*, which authorizes one to discard the higher-order terms in an expression containing infinitesimals of different orders.
Law of continuity
-----------------
Leibniz proposed a heuristic principle known as the *law of continuity* to the effect that
> … et il se trouve que les règles du fini réussissent dans l’infini … ; et que vice versa les règles de l’infini réussissent dans le fini, … [@Le02a p. 93-94],
cited by [@Kn02 p. 67], [@Ro66 p. 262], [@Lau92 p. 145], and other scholars.
On the face of it, one can find numerous counterexamples to such a principle. Thus, finite ordinal number addition is commutative, whereas for infinite ordinal numbers, the addition is no longer commutative: $1 + \omega = \omega \not= \omega+1$. Thus, the infinite realm of Cantor’s ordinals differs significantly from the finite: in the finite realm, commutativity rules, whereas in the infinite, it does not not. Thus the transfer of properties between these two realms fails.
Similarly, there are many infinitary frameworks where the law of continuity fails to hold. For example, consider the Conway–Alling surreal framework; see e.g., [@Al85]. Here one can’t extend even such an elementary function as $\sin(x)$ from ${{\mathbb R}}$ to the surreals. Even more strikingly, $\sqrt{2}$ turns out to be (sur)rational; see [@Co01 chapter 4]. The surnaturals don’t satisfy the Peano Arithmetic. Therefore transfer from the finite to the infinite domain fails also for the domain of the surreals.
On the other hand, the combined insight of [@He48], [@Lo55], and [@Ro61] was that there does exist an infinitary framework where the law of continuity can be interpreted in a meaningful fashion. This is the ${{\mathbb R}}\subset{}^\ast{{\mathbb R}}$ framework. While it is not much of a novelty that many infinitary systems don’t obey a law of continuity/transfer, the novelty is that there is one that does, as shown by Hewitt, [Ł]{}o[ś]{}, and Robinson, in the context of first-order logic.
Throughout the 18th century, Euler and other mathematicians relied on a broad interpretation of the law of continuity or, as Cauchy will call it, the *generality of algebra*. This involved manipulation of infinite series as if they were finite sums, and in some cases it also involved ignoring the fact that the series diverges. The first serious challenge to this principle emerged from the study of Fourier series when new types of functions arose through the summation thereof. Specifically, Cauchy rejected the principle of the *generality of algebra*, and held that a series is only meaningful in its radius of convergence. Cauchy’s approach was revolutionary at the time and immediately attracted followers like Abel. Cauchy in 1821 was perhaps the first to challenge such a broad interpretation of the law of continuity, with a possible exception of Bolzano, whose work dates from only a few years earlier and did not become widely known until nearly half a century later. For additional details on Cauchy see [@KK11], [@KK12], [@BK], [@Ba14]. For Euler see [@KKKS] and [@Ba16b].
Non-examples: EVT and IVT
-------------------------
It may be useful to illustrate the scope of the relevant results by including a negative example. Concerning results such as the extreme value theorem (EVT) and the intermediate value theorem (IVT), one notices that the proofs involve procedures that are not easily encoded in first order logic. These 19th century results (due to suitable combinations of Bolzano, Cauchy, and Weierstrass) arguably fall outside the scope of Leibnizian calculus, as do infinitesimal foundations for differential geometry as developed in [@NK], [@KKN].
There are axioms in FOL for a real closed field $F$ (e.g., real algebraic numbers, real numbers, hyperreal numbers, Conway numbers). One of these axioms formalizes the fact that IVT holds for odd degree polynomials $F[x]$. In fact, one needs infinitely many axioms like $(\forall a,b,c) (\exists x) [x^3+ax^2+bx+c=0]$. Meanwhile, IVT in its full form is equivalent to the continuity axiom for the real numbers [@Bl15].
What does “first-order” mean exactly? {#FOL}
=====================================
The adjective ‘first-order’ as we use it entails limitations on quantification over sets (as opposed to elements). Now Leibniz really did not have much to say about properties of sets in general in the context of his infinitesimal calculus, and even declared on occasion that infinite totalities don’t exist, as mentioned above. Note that Leibniz arguably did exploit second-order logic in areas outside infinitesimal calculus (see [@Len87], [@Len04]) but this will not be our concern here. Leibniz famously takes for granted second order logic in formulating his principle governing the *identity of indiscernibles*. While second order logic is possibly part of Leibniz’s metaphysics it is not in any obvious way part of his infinitesimal calculus.
Once we reach topics like Baire category, measure theory, Lebesgue integration, and modern functional analysis, quantification over sets becomes important, but these were not Leibnizian concerns in the kind of analysis he explored.
In fact, the term “first order logic" has several meanings. We can distinguish three levels at which a number system could have first-order properties compatible with those of the real numbers. Note that the real numbers satisfy the axioms of an ordered field as well as a completeness axiom.
1. An *ordered field* obeys those among the usual axioms of the real number system that can be stated in first-order logic (completeness is excluded). For example, the following commutativity axiom holds: $(\forall x, y)\;[x+y=y+x]$.
2. A real closed ordered field has all the first-order properties of the real number system, regardless of whether such properties are usually taken as axiomatic, for statements which involve the basic ordered-field relations $+, \times$, and $\leq$. This is a stronger condition than obeying the ordered-field axioms. More specifically, one includes additional first-order properties, such as extraction of roots (e.g., existence of a root for every odd-degree polynomial). For example, every number must have a cube root: $(\forall x)(\exists
y)\;[y^3=x]$, or every positive number have a square root: $(\forall
x>0)(\exists y)\; [y^2=x]$.
3. The system could have all the first-order properties of the real number system for statements involving arbitrary relations (regardless of whether those relations can be expressed using $ +, \times$, and $\leq$). For example, there would have to be a sine function that is well defined for infinitesimal and infinite inputs; the same is true for every real function. To do series, one needs a symbol for ${{\mathbb N}}$, so as to define transcendental entities such as $\pi$ or sine. We also introduce function symbols for whatever functions we are interested in working with; say all elementary functions occurring in Leibniz as well as their combinations via composition, differentiation, and integration.
It follows from these examples that the *first order* qualification is connected with the intended domain of discourse, so that any quantifier related to objects outside the domain of discourse is qualified as not a first order one. It could be added however that all mathematical objects are, generally speaking, (represented by suitable) sets from the set theoretic standpoint, and hence all mathematical quantifiers are first-order with respect to the background set universe (superstructure).
The point with level (3) is that instead of quantifying over sequences or functions, we relate to each individual sequence or function, and make sure that it has an analogue in the extended domain. Such an analogue of $f$ is sometimes referred to as the *natural extension* of $f$. Then we can say something about the extension of every standard object in our system, e.g., function, without ever being able to assert anything about *all* functions. Thus, the product rule for differentiation is proved for the assortment of functions chosen in item (3) above.
An alternative to the multitude of functional symbols would be to add a countable list of variables $u,v,w,\ldots$ meant to denote unspecified functions. The idea is to avoid quantifying over such variables, and use them as merely free variables. Then, for example, the product rule is the following statement: “if $u,v$ are differentiable functions then the Leibniz rule holds for $u$ and $v$”, with $u,v$ being free variables.
Note that we use FOL in a different sense from that used in formalizing Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory (ZFC).
When we seek hyperreal proxies, following the pioneering work of [@He48] and [@Ro66], for Leibniz’s procedural moves, the theory of *real closed fields* at level (2) is insufficient and we must rely upon level (3).
Thus, Leibniz’s series of Subsection \[s11\] is expressible in $\text{FOL}+\square$ at level (3) but FOL level (2) does not suffice since $\pi$ is not algebraic. Similarly, examples in Subsection \[s22\] and Subsection \[s23\] need symbols for unspecified functions which are not available at level (2).
Modern frameworks {#two}
=================
Based on the examples of Section \[one\], we would like to consider the following question:
> *Which modern mathematical framework is the most appropriate for interpreting Leibnizian infinitesimal calculus?*
The frameworks we would like to consider are
1. a Weierstrassian (or “epsilontic”) framework in the context of what has been called since [@Sto83] an *Archimedean* continuum, satisfying Euclid V.4 (see Section \[one\]), namely the real numbers exclusively; and
2. a modern framework exploiting infinitesimals such as the hyperreals, which could be termed a *Bernoullian* continuum since Johann Bernoulli was the first to exploit infinitesimals (rather than “exhaustion” methods) systematically in developing the calculus.[^1]
The series summation blackbox $\square$ (see Subsection \[s11\]) is handled differently in A and B. Framework A exploits a first-order “epsilontic” formulation that works in a complete Archimedean field. Thus, the convergence of a series $\sum_i u_i$ to $L$ would be expressed as follows: $$(\forall\epsilon>0)(\exists n\in{{\mathbb N}})(\forall m\in{{\mathbb N}})\;\left[m\geq
n\rightarrow \left|\sum_{i=1}^m u_i-L\right|<\epsilon\right].$$ [@Is90 Chapter 5] sought to interpret Leibnizian infinitesimal calculus by means of such quantified paraphrases, having apparently overlooked Leibniz’s remarks to the effect that his infinitesimals violate Euclid V.4 [@Le95b p. 322].
Meanwhile, framework B allows for an alternative interpretation in terms of the shadow (i.e., the standard part, closely related to Leibniz’s generalized notion of equality) and hyperfinite partial sums as follows: for each infinite hypernatural $H$ the partial sum $\sum_{i=1}^H u_i$ is infinitely close to $L$, i.e., $$(\forall H) \left[H \text{ infinite } \rightarrow \sum_{i=1}^H
u_i\approx L\right].$$ This is closer to the historical occurrences of the package $\square$ as found in Gregory, Leibniz, and Euler, as we argue below.
In pursuing modern interpretations of Leibniz’s work, a helpful distinction is that between ontological and procedural issues. More specifically, we seek to sidestep traditional questions concerning the ontology of mathematical entities such as numbers, and concentrate instead on the procedures, in line with Quine’s comment to the effect that
> Arithmetic is, in this sense, all there is to number: there is no saying absolutely what the numbers are; there is only arithmetic. [@Qu p. 198]
Related comments can be found in [@Be65]. If one could separate the “ontological questions" from the rest, then framework A would be more appropriate than framework B for interpreting the classical texts *if and only if* framework A provides better proxies for the procedural moves found in Leibnizian infinitesimal calculus than framework B does, and vice versa.
The tempting evidence in favor of the appropriateness of a modern framework B for interpreting Leibnizian infinitesimal calculus is the presence of infinitesimals and infinite numbers in both, as well as the availability of hyperreal proxies for guiding principles in Leibniz’s work such as the law of continuity as expressed in [@Le01c] and [@Le02a] as well as the transcendental law of homogeneity [@Le10b]; see [@KS2], [@KS1], [@SK], [@Gu]. To what extent Leibnizian infinitesimals can be implemented in differential geometry can be gauged from [@NK].
The question we seek to explore is whether the limitation of working with first order logic as discussed in Section \[FOL\] could potentially undermine a full implementation of a hyperreal scheme for Leibnizian infinitesimal calculus.
With this in mind, let us consider Skolem’s construction of nonstandard natural numbers [@Sk33], [@Sk34], [@Sk55]; see [@KKM section 3.2] for additional references. It turns out that one needs many, many nonstandard numbers in order to move from $\mathbb{N}$ to ${}^\ast\mathbb{N}$, e.g., in Henkin’s countable model one has $$\label{21}
{}^\ast\mathbb{N}=\mathbb{N} + (\mathbb{Z}\times\mathbb{Q}).$$ Here we use ${{\mathbb Q}}$ to indicate that the galaxies are dense, so that between any pair of galaxies there is another galaxy (a galaxy is the set of numbers at finite distance from each other). Meanwhile ${{\mathbb Z}}$ indicates that each galaxy other than the original ${{\mathbb N}}$ itself is order-isomorphic to ${{\mathbb Z}}$ rather than to ${{\mathbb N}}$, because for each infinite $H$ the number $H-1$ is in the same galaxy.
Leibniz arguably did not have such a perspective. In other words, one needs to build up a considerable conceptual machinery to emulate Leibniz’s probably rather modest arsenal of procedural moves. That is to say, we may be able to emulate all of Leibniz moves in a modern B-framework, such as Leibniz’s infinite quantities, his distinction between assignable and inassignable quantities, and his transcendental law of homogeneity. However, the B-framework also enables us to carry out many additional moves unknown to Leibniz, for instance those related to the detailed structure of ${}^\ast{{\mathbb N}}$ as in . Thus, the *difference* between the Leibnizian framework and a modern infinitesimal B-framework is *large*.
On the other hand, a Weierstrassian A-framework may not cover all the moves Leibniz may make in his framework LEI, but one might argue that the *difference* between (A) and LEI is small. Thus, one may not necessarily have $\text{LEI}\subseteq\text{(A)}$, but one might argue that the difference $\text{(A)}-\text{LEI}$ is *small*. This may be taken as evidence that (A) and LEI are more similar to each other than (B) and LEI are. This could affect the assessment of appropriateness. Finally, could it be that neither the Weierstrassian nor the modern infinitesimal account is appropriate to cope with Leibnizian infinitesimal calculus?
Separating entities from procedures {#three}
===================================
What would it mean exactly to separate ontological problems from procedural problems? A possible approach is to attempt to account for Leibniz’s procedures in a framework limited to first order logic, with a small number of additional ingredients such as the relation of *infinite proximity* and the closely related *shadow principle* for passing from a finite inassignable quantity to an assignable one (or from a finite nonstandard number to a standard one), as in $2x+dx\operatorname{\,{}_{\ulcorner\!\urcorner}\,}2x$.[^2] As far as Skolem’s nonstandard extension ${{\mathbb N}}\subset{}^\ast{{\mathbb N}}$ is concerned, anything involving the actual construction of the number system and the entities called *numbers* would go under the heading of the *ontology* of mathematical entities. Note that *the first order theories* of $\mathbb{N}$ and ${}^\ast\mathbb{N}$ are identical, as shown by Skolem (for more details see Section \[FOL\]). In this sense, not only is one not adding *a lot*, but in fact *one is not adding anything at all* at the level of the *theory*.
What about the claim that *Leibniz did not have this perspective*? It is true that he did not have our perspective on the *ontological* issues involved in a modern construction of a suitable number system incorporating infinite numbers, but this needn’t affect the *procedural* match.
What about the claim that *one has to build up a considerable conceptual machinery to emulate Leibniz’s probably rather modest arsenal of procedural moves; that is to say, we may be able to emulate all of Leibniz’s moves in the modern framework, but it also enables us to carry out many moves that Leibniz would have never dreamt of*? As mentioned above, this is not the case at the level of first order logic.
What about the claim that *the difference between Leibniz framework and the infinitesimal framework is large*? At the procedural level this is arguably not the case.
What about the claim that *the Weierstrass framework may not cover all of Leibniz’s, but the *difference*, $\text{(A)}-\text{LEI}$, is *small*, indicating that (A) and LEI are more similar to each other than (B) and LEI are, affecting the assessment of appropriateness*? What needs to be pointed out here is that actually the considerable distance in ontology between (A) and LEI is about the same is the distance between (B) and LEI. The Weierstrassian punctiform continuum where almost all real numbers are undefinable (so that no individual number of this sort can ever be specified, unlike $\pi$, $e$, etc.) is a far cry from anything one might have imagined in the 17th century.
As far as the question *Could it be that neither Weierstrass nor the infinitesimal account is appropriate to cope with Leibniz?* this is of course possible in principle. However, we are interested here in the practical issue of modern commentators missing some compelling aspects of interpretation of Leibniz’s work because of a self-imposed limitation to a Weierstrassian interpretive framework.
A lid on ontology
=================
It could be objected that one cannot escape so easily with the general argument along the lines of “Let’s Ignore (ontological) Differences,” or LID for short (putting a *lid* on ontology, so to speak).
The LID proceeds as follows. We start with the ‘real’ L, i.e., the mathematician who lived, wrote, and argued in the 17th century. It seems plausible to assume that L based his reasoning on a mixture of first and second order arguments, without clearly differentiating between the two.
In a reconstruction of L’s arguments, one replaces the cognitive agent L by a substitute L1 who argues only in a first order framework. This entails, in particular, that L1 cannot distinguish between $\mathbb{N}$ and ${}^\ast\mathbb{N}$.
However, it seems likely that L could distinguish the two structures, simply because he did not distinguish between the first and second order levels. In other words, the LID recommendation does not help because the distinction between first and second order does not only affect the ontology but also the epistemology of the historical agents involved.
In sum, a modern infinitesimal reconstruction of L deals with a first-order version of L, namely L1, and not with L. In line with his position on geometric algebra, [@Un76] could point out that L1 is a modern artefact, different from the “real” L. Therefore additional arguments are needed in favor of the hypothesis that L and L1 are epistemologically sufficiently similar, but this seems difficult. In any case, a purely ontological assumption does not suffice.
To respond to the L *vs* L1 distinction, note that the tools one needs are *almost* limited to first order logic, but not quite, since one needs the shadow principle and the relation of infinite proximity. Rather than arguing that $L=L1$, we are arguing that $L=L1+\epsilon$.
Now the difference between calculus and analysis is that in calculus one deals mostly with first order phenomena (with the proviso as in Section \[three\]), whereas in analysis one starts tackling phenomena that are essentially second order, such as the completeness property i.e., existence of the least upper bound for an arbitrary bounded set, etc. It seems reasonable to assume that what they were doing in the 17th century was calculus rather than analysis.
As far as Unguru is concerned, he is unlikely to be impressed by interpretations of Leibnizian infinitesimals as quantified propositions or for that matter by reading Leibniz as if he had already read not only Weierstrass but also Russell à la Ishiguro, contrary to much textual evidence in Leibniz himself. We provide a rebuttal of the Ishiguro–Arthur *logical fiction* reading in [@Ba16] and [@Ba16b].
Robinson, Cassirer, Nelson
==========================
Robinson on second-order logic
------------------------------
The following quote is from Robinson’s *Non-standard Analysis*:
> The axiomatic systems for many algebraic concepts such as groups or fields are formulated in a natural way within a first order language…, However, interesting parts of the *theory* of such a concept may well extend beyond the resources of a first order language. Thus, in the theory of groups statements regarding subgroups, or regarding the existence of subgroups of certain types will, in general, involve quantification with respect to sets of individuals… [@Ro66 section 2.6, p. 19]
This appears to amount to a claim that the local ontology may indeed be often formulated in first-order terms, while the global ontology is deeply infected by second-order concepts. The latter may typically involve objects and arguments qualified as second or higher order with respect to the former, which nevertheless are of the first-order type when considered as related to the background set universe.
Ernst Cassirer
--------------
Does the equation $L = L1 +\epsilon$ not amount to an underestimation of the historical Leibniz? Is it reasonable to assume that he only invented the calculus, and not analysis? According to Cassirer, the basic concepts of analysis were deeply soaked with philosophy, i.e., for Leibniz mathematical and philosophical concepts were intimately related:[^3]
> Leibniz himself asserted that the new analysis has sprung from the innermost source of philosophy, and he assigned to both regions \[i.e., analysis and philosophy\] the task to confirm and to elucidate each other.[^4] [@Ca02 p. xi]
If L = L1 + epsilon, i.e., if the historical Leibniz was mainly dealing with *calculus*, this may appear hardly compatible with Cassirer’s perspective; see [@MK]. This impression would be, however, a misunderstanding. In order to forestall it, it merits being pointed out that developing the calculus was a great mathematical achievement of philosophical relevance. It is only today that the term *calculus* possesses a connotation of routine undergraduate mathematics, but not in the 19th century.
As far as Cassirer is concerned, Leibniz was indeed doing *analysis* as l’Hôpital called it. It is not even sure Cassirer was aware of the more advanced analysis. Leibnizian calculus only seems “trivial" from the standpoint of properly 20th century mathematics. It is an advance in understanding when we make a distinction between Leibnizian calculus and analysis. We don’t mean to diminish Leibniz’s greatness by this distinction, nor do we suggest that Cassirer was *wrong*. He was merely using the term *analysis* in its 17–19th century sense rather than the sense in which we use it today.
Edward Nelson
-------------
As far as the passage from [@Ro66] is concerned, we find the following comment at the end of the paragraph:
> The following framework for higher order structures and higher order languages copes with these and similar cases. It is rather straightforward and suitable for our purposes. [@Ro66 section 2.6, p. 19]
Robinson then proceeds to develop a solution, which roughly corresponds to level (3) as outlined in Section \[FOL\]. The claim that we are dealing with first order logic plus *standard part* is in a sense a mathematical theorem, undermining the contention that “this seems hardly compatible, etc.”
Edward Nelson demonstrated that infinitesimals can be found within the ordinary real line itself in the following sense. Nelson finds infinitesimals in the real line by means of enriching the language through the introduction of a unary predicate *standard* and an axiom schemata (of Idealization), one of most immediate instances of which implies the existence of infinitely large integers and hence nonzero infinitesimals; see [@Ne77]. This is closely parallel to the dichotomy of *assignable* vs *inassignable* in Leibniz, whereas Carnot spoke of *quantités désignées* [@Ca97], [@Ba89 p. 46]. Thus, we obtain infinitesimals as soon as we assume that (1) there are assignable (or standard) reals, that obey the same rules as all the reals, and (2) there are reals that not assignable.
In more detail, one considers the ordinary ZFC formulated in first order logic (here the term is used in a different sense from the rest of this article), adds to it the unary predicate and the axiom schemata, and obtains a framework where calculus and analysis can be done with infinitesimals. For further discussion see [@KK15].
The passage from Robinson cited above does indicate that second order theory may often be interesting. However, in the case of the calculus/analysis as it was practiced in the 17th century, we are not aware of a single significant result that cannot be formulated in a system of type $\text{FOL}+\square$ (see Section \[one\] for examples of results that can). Arguably it was calculus (rather than analysis) that Leibniz invented, in the sense that there don’t appear to be any essentially second order statements there.
It may seem surprising that there could be a kind of pre-established harmony between a modern logical category, namely, first-order results, and a historical category, namely, results of 17th century calculus. This idea suggests further questions: does this only hold for the calculus, or is it always or often the case that a historically earlier realization of a theory covers only the first-order part of its successor. How do arithmetic and geometry behave in this respect? Would it really make sense to systematically distinguish between Leibniz and Leibniz1, Euclid and Euclid1, etc.?
Not standalone
--------------
Let us return to the comment *In the context of Skolem’s construction of nonstandard natural numbers and some related stuff, one is impressed by how many nonstandard numbers one needs to move from $\mathbb N$ to ${}^\ast\mathbb{N}$, e.g., in Henkin’s model ${}^\ast\mathbb N = \mathbb N + ({{\mathbb Z}}\times {{\mathbb Q}})$ and it goes without saying that Leibniz did not have this perspective*, that was addressed briefly above. One could elaborate on the “impression” concerning “how many nonstandard numbers” one needs to define ${}^\ast\mathbb{N}$ consistently and conveniently.
An infinitely large number say $H$ is not a standalone object, but rather lives in a community of numbers obeying certain laws which mathematicians anticipate as a goal of the construction of a nonstandard number system ${}^\ast\mathbb N$. Such a commitment to anticipated laws forces Skolem and others to add to $\mathbb N$ a suitable entourage of $H$ along with $H$ itself. What are the laws involved?
Modern specialists in Nonstandard Analysis (NSA) stipulate that ${}^\ast \mathbb N$ should satisfy the axioms of Peano Arithmetic and moreover, satisfy the same sentences of the language (not necessarily consequences of the axioms) that are true in $\mathbb N$ itself. This is called (the principle of) Transfer today. Mathematicians of the 17th (or even 19th) century had neither this perspective nor the tools consistently to define ${}^\ast\mathbb N$ or ${}^\ast\mathbb R$.
On the other hand, one can argue that there is no need for actually rigorously defining ${}^\ast\mathbb N$ in order to make use of its benefits. One can argue that it is sufficient to have some idea of Transfer on top of an acceptance of infinitely large numbers per se (possibly as *useful fictions*, to borrow Leibniz’s expression). We have argued that the Leibnizian *Law of continuity* is closely related to the Transfer principle; see [@KS1].
Therefore the claim that *Leibniz had not the slightest idea of this stuff* (the “stuff” being the modern technique of building nonstandard models) is perhaps technically true, but it does not reflect all the aspects of the interrelations within the Leibniz/Weierstrass/NSA triangle.
Conclusion
==========
The vast oeuvre of Leibniz is still in the process of publication. In principle a lucky scholar might one day unearth a manuscript where Leibniz tackles a property equivalent to the completeness of the reals (after all the existence of the shadow is so equivalent), involving quantification over *all* sets of the number system and therefore second-order.
However, this is unlikely in view of Leibniz’s reluctance to deal with infinite collections, as mentioned above. If level (3) of first order logic is indeed suitable for developing modern proxies for the inferential moves found in Leibnizian infinitesimal calculus, as we have argued, then modern infinitesimal frameworks are more appropriate to interpreting Leibnizian infinitesimal calculus than modern Weierstrassian ones.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
M. Katz was partially funded by the Israel Science Foundation grant number 1517/12.
[ABI]{}
Alling, N. “Conway’s field of surreal numbers.” *Transactions of the American Mathematical Society* **287** (1985), no. 1, 365–386.
Bair, J.; Błaszczyk, P.; Ely, R.; Henry, V.; Kanovei, V.; Katz, K.; Katz, M.; Kutateladze, S.; McGaffey, T.; Schaps, D.; Sherry, D.; Shnider, S. “Is mathematical history written by the victors?” *Notices of the American Mathematical Society* **60**, no. 7, 886-904.
See <http://www.ams.org/notices/201307/rnoti-p886.pdf>
and <http://arxiv.org/abs/1306.5973>
Bair, J.; Błaszczyk, P.; Ely, R.; Henry, V.; Kanovei, V.; Katz, K.; Katz, M.; Kutateladze, S.; McGaffey, T.; Reeder, P.; Schaps, D.; Sherry, D.; Shnider, S. “Interpreting the infinitesimal mathematics of Leibniz and Euler.” *Journal for general philosophy of science*, online first.
See <http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10838-016-9334-z>
and <http://arxiv.org/abs/1605.00455>
Barreau, H. “Lazare Carnot et la conception leibnizienne de l’infini mathématique.” In *La mathématique non standard*, 43–82, Fondem. Sci., CNRS, Paris.
Bascelli, T.; Bottazzi, E.; Herzberg, F.; Kanovei, V.; Katz, K.; Katz, M.; Nowik, T.; Sherry, D.; Shnider, S. “Fermat, Leibniz, Euler, and the gang: The true history of the concepts of limit and shadow.” *Notices of the American Mathematical Society* **61**, no. 8, 848-864.
Bascelli, T.; Błaszczyk, P.; Kanovei, V.; Katz, K.; Katz, M.; Schaps, D.; Sherry, D. “Leibniz vs Ishiguro: Closing a quarter-century of syncategoremania.” *HOPOS (Journal of the Internatonal Society for the History of Philosophy of Science)* **6**, no. 1, 117–147. See
<http://arxiv.org/abs/1603.07209>, <http://arxiv.org/abs/1603.07209>
Benacerraf, P. “What numbers could not be.” *Philosophical Review* **74**, 47–73.
Błaszczyk, P. “A Purely Algebraic Proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Algebra.” See <http://arxiv.org/abs/1504.05609>
Borovik, A., Katz, M. “Who gave you the Cauchy–Weierstrass tale? The dual history of rigorous calculus.” *Foundations of Science* **17**, no. 3, 245-276. See <http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10699-011-9235-x>
Bos, H. “Differentials, higher-order differentials and the derivative in the Leibnizian calculus.” *Archive for History of Exact Sciences* **14**, 1–90.
Carnot, L. *Réflexions sur la métaphysique du calcul infinitésimal*. Paris.
Cassirer, E. *Leibniz’ System in seinen wissenschaftlichen Grundlagen*. Gesammelte Werke, Hamburger Ausgabe, ECW 1, Hamburg, Felix Meiner Verlag, 1998.
Child, J. (ed.) *The early mathematical manuscripts of Leibniz*. Translated from the Latin texts published by Carl Immanuel Gerhardt with critical and historical notes by J. M. Child. The Open Court Publishing, Chicago-London. Reprinted by Dover in 2005.
Conway, J. *On numbers and games*. Second edition. A K Peters, Natick, MA.
Euclid. *Euclide’s Elements; The whole Fifteen Books, compendiously Demonstrated*. By Mr. Isaac Barrow Fellow of *Trinity College* in Cambridge. And Translated out of the Latin. London, 1660.
Gerhardt, C. (ed.) *Historia et Origo calculi differentialis a G. G. Leibnitio conscripta*. Hannover, Hahn.
Gerhardt, C. (ed.) *Leibnizens mathematische Schriften*. Berlin and Halle: Eidmann. Guillaume, M. Review of “Katz, M.; Sherry, D. Leibniz’s infinitesimals: their fictionality, their modern implementations, and their foes from Berkeley to Russell and beyond. *Erkenntnis* **78** (2013), no. 3, 571–625.” Mathematical Reviews (2014).
See <http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=3053644>
Hahn, H. “Über die nichtarchimedischen Grössensysteme.” Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien, Mathematisch - Naturwissenschaftliche Klasse 116 (Abteilung IIa), pp. 601–655.
Hewitt, E. “Rings of real-valued continuous functions. I.” *Transactions of the American Mathematical Society* **64** (1948), 45–99.
Ishiguro, H. *Leibniz’s philosophy of logic and language*. Second edition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Kanovei, V.; Katz, K.; Katz, M.; Sherry, D. “Euler’s lute and Edwards’ oud." *The Mathematical Intelligencer* **37**, no. 4, 48–51. See <http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00283-015-9565-6>
and <http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.02586>
Kanovei, V.; Katz, M.; Mormann, T. “Tools, Objects, and Chimeras: Connes on the Role of Hyperreals in Mathematics.” *Foundations of Science* **18**, no. 2, 259–296.
See <http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10699-012-9316-5>
and <http://arxiv.org/abs/1211.0244>
Kanovei, V.; Katz, K.; Katz, M.; Nowik, T. “Small oscillations of the pendulum, Euler’s method, and adequality.” *Quantum Studies: Mathematics and Foundations*, online first.
See <http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40509-016-0074-x>
and <http://arxiv.org/abs/1604.06663>
Katz, K.; Katz, M. “Cauchy’s continuum.” *Perspectives on Science* **19**, no. 4, 426–452.
See <http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/POSC_a_00047>
and <http://arxiv.org/abs/1108.4201>
Katz, K.; Katz, M. “A Burgessian critique of nominalistic tendencies in contemporary mathematics and its historiography.” *Foundations of Science* **17**, no. 1, 51–89.
See <http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10699-011-9223-1>
and <http://arxiv.org/abs/1104.0375>
Katz, M.; Kutateladze, S. “Edward Nelson (1932-2014).” *The Review of Symbolic Logic* **8** (2015), no. 3, 607-610.
See <http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1755020315000015>
and <http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.01570>
Katz, M.; Sherry, D. “Leibniz’s laws of continuity and homogeneity.” *Notices of the American Mathematical Society* **59**, no. 11, 1550–1558. See <http://www.ams.org/notices/201211/rtx121101550p.pdf>
and <http://arxiv.org/abs/1211.7188>
Katz, M.; Sherry, D. “Leibniz’s infinitesimals: Their fictionality, their modern implementations, and their foes from Berkeley to Russell and beyond.” *Erkenntnis* **78**, no. 3, 571–625.
See <http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10670-012-9370-y>
and <http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.0174>
Knobloch, E. “Leibniz’s rigorous foundation of infinitesimal geometry by means of Riemannian sums.” Foundations of the formal sciences, 1 (Berlin, 1999). *Synthese* **133**, no. 1-2, 59–73. Laugwitz, D. “Leibniz’ principle and omega calculus.” \[A\] Le labyrinthe du continu, Colloq., Cerisy-la-Salle/Fr. 1990, 144-154 (1992).
Leibniz, G. “Nova methodus pro maximis et minimis …” *Acta Eruditorum*, Oct. 1684. See [@Ge50], V, pp. 220-226. English translation at <http://17centurymaths.com/contents/Leibniz/nova1.pdf>
Leibniz, G. “Responsio ad nonnullas difficultates a Dn. Bernardo Niewentiit circa methodum differentialem seu infinitesimalem motas.” *Acta Eruditorum Lipsiae* (1695). In [@Ge50], vol. V, p. 320-328. A French translation is in [@Le1989 p. 316–334].
Leibniz, G. “Cum Prodiisset…” mss “Cum prodiisset atque increbuisset Analysis mea infinitesimalis …" in [@Ge46 pp. 39–50]. Online at
<http://books.google.co.il/books?id=UOM3AAAAMAAJ&source=gbs_navlinks_s>
Leibniz, G. To Varignon, 2 feb. 1702, in [@Ge50], vol. IV, pp. 91–95.
Leibniz, G. “Symbolismus memorabilis calculi algebraici et infinitesimalis in comparatione potentiarum et differentiarum, et de lege homogeneorum transcendentali.” In [@Ge50], vol. V, pp. 377-382.
Leibniz, G. *La naissance du calcul différentiel. 26 articles des Acta Eruditorum*. Translated from the Latin and with an introduction and notes by Marc Parmentier. With a preface by Michel Serres. Mathesis. Librairie Philosophique J. Vrin, Paris.
Lenzen, W. “Leibniz on How to Derive Set-Theory from Elementary Arithmetics.” In: Proceedings of the 8th International Congress of Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science, Moscow **3**, 176-179.
Lenzen, W. “Leibniz’s logic.” In The rise of modern logic: from Leibniz to Frege, 1-83, Handb. Hist. Log. **3**, Elsevier/North-Holland, Amsterdam.
o[ś]{}, J. “Quelques remarques, théorèmes et problèmes sur les classes définissables d’algèbres.” In Mathematical interpretation of formal systems, [98–113]{}, North-Holland, Amsterdam.
Mormann, T., Katz, M. “Infinitesimals as an issue of neo-Kantian philosophy of science.” *HOPOS: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science* **3** (2013), no. 2, 236–280. See <http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/671348>
and <http://arxiv.org/abs/1304.1027>
Nelson, E. “Internal set theory: a new approach to nonstandard analysis.” *Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society* **83**, no. 6, 1165–1198.
Nowik, T., Katz, M. “Differential geometry via infinitesimal displacements.” *Journal of Logic and Analysis* **7**:5 (2015), 1–44. See
<http://www.logicandanalysis.org/index.php/jla/article/view/237/106>
Quine, W. “Ontological Relativity.” *The Journal of Philosophy* **65**, no. 7, 185-212.
Robinson, A. “Non-standard analysis.” *Nederl. Akad. Wetensch. Proc. Ser. A* **64** = [*Indag. Math.*]{} **23** (1961), 432–440. Reprinted in Selected Works, see item [@Ro79], pp. 3-11.
Robinson, A. *Non-standard analysis*. North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam.
Robinson, A. *Selected papers of Abraham Robinson*. Vol. II. Nonstandard analysis and philosophy. Edited and with introductions by W. A. J. Luxemburg and S. Körner. Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn.
Sherry, D., Katz, M. “Infinitesimals, imaginaries, ideals, and fictions.” *Studia Leibnitiana* **44** (2012), no. 2, 166-192. (The article was published in 2014 even though the journal issue lists the year 2012.)
See <http://arxiv.org/abs/1304.2137>
Skolem, T. “Über die Unmöglichkeit einer vollständigen Charakterisierung der Zahlenreihe mittels eines endlichen Axiomensystems.” *Norsk Mat. Forenings Skr., II. Ser.* No. 1/12, 73-82.
Skolem, T. “Über die Nicht-charakterisierbarkeit der Zahlenreihe mittels endlich oder abzählbar unendlich vieler Aussagen mit ausschliesslich Zahlenvariablen.” *Fundamenta Mathematicae* **23**, 150-161.
Skolem, T. “Peano’s axioms and models of arithmetic.” In Mathematical interpretation of formal systems, pp. 1–14. North-Holland Publishing, Amsterdam.
Stolz, O. “Zur [G]{}eometrie der [A]{}lten, insbesondere [ü]{}ber ein [A]{}xiom des Archimedes.” *Mathematische Annalen* **22** (4), 504–519.
Unguru, S. “Fermat revivified, explained, and regained.” *Francia* **4**, 774–789.
**Piotr Błaszczyk** is Professor at the Institute of Mathematics, Pedagogical University (Cracow, Poland). He obtained degrees in mathematics (1986) and philosophy (1994) from Jagiellonian University (Cracow, Poland), and a Ph.D. in ontology (2002) from Jagiellonian University. He authored *Philosophical Analysis of Richard Dedekind’s memoir Stetigkeit und irrationale Zahlen* (Cracow, 2008, Habilitationsschrift). He co-authored *Euclid, Elements, Books V–VI. Translation and commentary* (Cracow, 2013), and *Descartes, Geometry. Translation and commentary* (Cracow, 2015). His research interest is in the idea of continuum and continuity from Euclid to modern times.
**Vladimir Kanovei** graduated in 1973 from Moscow State University, and obtained a Ph.D. in physics and mathematics from Moscow State University in 1976. In 1986, he became Doctor of Science in physics and mathematics at Moscow Steklov Mathematical Institute (MIAN). He is currently Principal Researcher at the Institute for Information Transmission Problems (IPPI), Moscow, Russia, and Professor at the Moscow State University of Railway Engineering (MIIT), Moscow, Russia. Among his publications is the book *Borel equivalence relations. Structure and classification*, University Lecture Series 44, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2008.
**Karin Katz** (B.A. Bryn Mawr College, ’82); Ph.D. Indiana University, ’91) teaches mathematics at Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel. Among her publications is the joint article “Proofs and retributions, or: why Sarah can’t *take* limits” published in *Foundations of Science*.
**Mikhail G. Katz** (B.A. Harvard University, ’80; Ph.D. Columbia University, ’84) is Professor of Mathematics at Bar Ilan University. Among his publications is the book *Systolic geometry and topology*, with an appendix by Jake P. Solomon, published by the American Mathematical Society; and the article (with T. Nowik) “Differential geometry via infinitesimal displacements” published in *Journal of Logic and Analysis*.
**Taras S. Kudryk** (born 1961, Lviv, Ukraine) is a Ukrainian mathematician and associate professor of mathematics at Lviv National University. He graduated in 1983 from Lviv University and obtained a Ph.D. in physics and mathematics in 1989. His main interests are nonstandard analysis and its applications to functional analysis. He is the author of books about nonstandard analysis (in Ukrainian and English) and textbooks about functional analysis (in Ukrainian) co-authored with V. Lyantse. Kudryk has performed research in nonstandard analysis in collaboration with V. Lyantse and Vitor Neves. His publications appeared in *Matematychni Studii*, *Siberian Journal of Mathematics*, and *Logica Universalis*.
**Thomas Mormann** is Professor at the Departamento de Lógica y Filosofía de la Ciencia de la Universidad del País Vasco UPV/EHU (Donostia-San Sebastián, Spain). He obtained a PhD in Mathematics from the University of Dortmund, and habilitated in Philosophy, Logic, and Philosophy of Science at the University of Munich. He published numerous papers in philosophy of science, history of philosophy of science, epistemology, and related areas. He is the editor of Carnap’s “Anti-Metaphysical Writings" (in German). Presently, his main research interest is in the philosophy of Ernst Cassirer and, more generally, in the Marburg Neo-Kantianism.
**David Sherry** is Professor of Philosophy at Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ. E-mail: [email protected]. He has research interests in philosophy of mathematics, especially applied mathematics and nonstandard analysis.
[^1]: The adjective *non-Archimedean* is used in modern mathematics to refer to certain modern theories of ordered number systems properly extending the real numbers, namely various successors of [@Ha07]. In modern mathematics, this adjective tends to evoke associations unrelated to 17th century mathematics. Furthermore, defining infinitesimal mathematics by a negation, i.e., as *non-Archimedean*, is a surrender to the Cantor–Dedekind–Weierstrass (CDW) view. Meanwhile, true infinitesimal calculus as practiced by Leibniz, Bernoulli, and others is the base of reference as far as 17th century mathematics is concerned. The CDW system could be referred to as non-Bernoullian, though the latter term has not yet gained currency.
[^2]: On occasion Leibniz used the notation “$\operatorname{\,{}_{\ulcorner\!\urcorner}\,}$” for the relation of equality. Note that Leibniz also used our “$=$” and other signs for equality, and did not distinguish between “$=$” and “$\operatorname{\,{}_{\ulcorner\!\urcorner}\,}$” in this regard. To emphasize the special meaning *equality* had for Leibniz, it may be helpful to use the symbol $\operatorname{\,{}_{\ulcorner\!\urcorner}\,}$ so as to distinguish Leibniz’s equality in a generalized sense of “up to” from the modern notion of equality “on the nose.”
[^3]: In support of this claim, Cassirer refers here in particular to Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Die philosophischen Schriften, hrg. von Carl Immanuel Gerhardt, 7 Bde., Berlin 1875–1890, Bd. VII, S. 542. (Cassirer 1902, p. xi)
[^4]: In the original: “Leibniz selbst hat es ausgesprochen, daß die neue Analysis aus dem innersten Quell der Philosophie geflossen ist, und beiden Gebieten die Aufgabe zugewiesen, sich wechselseitig zu bestätigen und zu erhellen.”
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Assessing the quality of 3D printed models before they are printed remains a challenging problem, particularly when considering point cloud-based models. This paper introduces an approach to quality assessment, which uses techniques from the field of Topological Data Analysis (TDA) to compute a topological abstraction of the eventual printed model. Two main tools of TDA, Mapper and persistent homology, are used to analyze both the printed space and empty space created by the model. This abstraction enables investigating certain qualities of the model, with respect to print quality, and identifies potential anomalies that may appear in the final product.'
address:
- University of South Florida
- University of South Florida
- University of South Florida
- University of South Florida
- University of South Florida
author:
- Paul Rosen
- Mustafa Hajij
- Junyi Tu
- Tanvirul Arafin
- Les Piegl
bibliography:
- 'refs.bib'
title: ' Inferring Quality in Point Cloud-based 3D Printed Objects using Topological Data Analysis'
---
Introduction
============
3D printing is gaining incredible popularity in low-yield manufacturing for customized or specialized parts. However, assessing the quality of models before they are printed remains a challenging problem [@telea2011voxel], particularly when you consider point cloud-based models [@oropallo2018point], such as those that come from 3D scanners. This paper introduces an approach to quality assessment, which uses techniques from the field of Topological Data Analysis (TDA) to compute a topological abstraction of the eventual printed model and the empty space around and contained within it. This abstraction enables investigating certain properties of the model, with respect to print quality, and identifies potential anomalies that may appear in the final product.
Mapper and Persistent Homology
==============================
This approach uses 2 of the fundamental tools of TDA, namely Mapper [@singh2007topological] and persistent homology [@edelsbrunner2000topological], to provide users with feedback about their models (see Figure \[fig.topo\_example\]). Mapper is used in 2 ways. First, it is used to extract information about the layer-by-layer connectivity of the model to be printed, providing an abstraction of the overall shape of the object. Second, it is used to determine the topology of the empty space contained within and surrounding the printed model. Persistent homology on the other hand is a tool that normally is used to provide a multiscale view of connected components, holes/tunnels, and voids in data of any dimension. Our approach uses persistent homology for the detection of connected components and holes within a printer layer.
The inner workings and associated details of both Mapper and persistent homology are quite complicated, and so we refer the reader to prior work for a better understanding [@edelsbrunner2000topological; @singh2007topological]. We will instead provide an intuition about the types of structures captured by each of these tools.
![Our approach uses Mapper to look at the filled space topology of multiple layers (left) and empty space topology of multiple layers (middle). It uses persistent homology to understand the topology of a single layer (right).[]{data-label="fig.topo_example"}](Figures/topo_ex.pdf "fig:"){width="0.975\linewidth"}\
Mapper
------
Mapper is a TDA tool that provides a graph-based abstraction of the topology of a mesh or point-based data. Mapper construction starts by first parameterizing and slicing the data. In our case the parameterization is vertical.
The graph vertices are created from connected components identified within each layer. In other words, the connected components of the layer are “collapsed” into graph vertices. There are many variations on identifying connected components from points. We use the persistent homology approach, introduced in the next subsection.
Finally, graph edges are added between components that touch on neighboring layers. This connection is made by adding a small amount of overlap to each layer. If one or more points in the overlap region are contained within connected components from 2 different layers, those component vertices receive a graph edge. The resulting graph can describe the overall topology of the connected components of a printed object.
![Example of Mapper on a mesh. The (a) model is (b) sliced. (c) Connected components are collapsed to vertices and edges added for components that touch. (d) Finally, an illustration of the printed object is shown.[]{data-label="fig.mapper_example"}](Figures/example.pdf "fig:"){width="0.95\linewidth"}\
Figure \[fig.mapper\_example\] shows an example of Mapper on a simple domain. First, (a) the input model is (b) sliced with layer thickness being set to equal the 3D printer’s layer resolution. Next, (c) the connected components are found and edges added when they touch. (d) Finally, the illustration of the printed object is shown for comparison. The nodes of the Mapper graphs do not provide any insight into the size or shape of a given connected component. Instead they provide insight into which components touch and how those components may or may not form holes in the output model.
Calculating the Mapper graph on the empty space is a similar process. However, to calculate the graph, the empty space first needs to be filled. This is done by populating the empty space with points. Then, Mapper construction proceeds identically on the empty space points. The approach is illustrated in Figure \[fig.mapper\_empty\].
![Example of Mapper on the empty space of a mesh. The (a) model has its empty space filled with points and is (b) sliced. (c) The connected components are collapsed to vertices and edges added for components that overlap. For illustration purposes, the vertices here are colored green for outside and purple for inside the model.[]{data-label="fig.mapper_empty"}](Figures/emptyspace_example){width="0.90\linewidth"}
The calculation of Mapper is relatively inexpensive. The slicing operation is linear in the number of points. The connected component detection is naively quadratic in the number of points per layer, but this can be improved with spatial partitioning. The overall performance can be improved by using a parallelized algorithm [@hajij2017distributed].
Persistent Homology
-------------------
Given a topological space ${{\mathbb X}}$, the homology groups ${{\sf H}}_0({{\mathbb X}})$, ${{\sf H}}_1({{\mathbb X}})$, and ${{\sf H}}_2({{\mathbb X}})$, describe the connected components, holes/tunnels, and voids of the space, respectively. For example, consider the annulus in Figure \[fig.annulus\]. It has a single connected component. It also has a single hole/tunnel through the middle. Finally, it contains no void.
![(a) An annulus. (b-e) Example of persistent homology as it relates to a point-based annulus. As points are thickened, from (b) to (e), a hole/tunnel forms in (c) and closes in (e).[]{data-label="fig.ph"}](Figures/ph_ex.pdf "fig:"){width="0.74\linewidth"}\
The multiscale notion of homology, called persistent homology, extracts the homology groups of a set of points considering different resolutions. A topological feature therefore has a minimum resolution where it first appears, known as the birth time, and a maximum resolution it is still visible, known as its death time. This can be intuitively thought of as the thickening of points. Figure \[fig.ph\](b-e) shows an example. Starting with (b) 12 points, the points are thickened, until (c) they form a single connected component with a hole. As the points continue to thicken (d) the hole remains visible, until (e) the thickness of the points closes it.
The performance calculating ${{\sf H}}_0$ connected components is the same process per layer as with Mapper, naively quadratic. Finding the ${{\sf H}}_1$ homology groups (i.e. holes/tunnels) in persistent homology is quite expensive. This calculation builds a simplicial complex on the data in the form of a boundary matrix and performs a reduction, similar to Gaussian elimination, which leads to a worst case performance that is cubic in the number of points. The average run time is linear with a large time constant. We mitigate this by pre-extracting per-layer connected components and running this calculation only on those components.
Link Between Mapper and Persistent Homology
-------------------------------------------
The most direct link between Mapper and persistent homology is to use the persistent homology approach in the calculation of ${{\sf H}}_0({{\mathbb X}})$ homology groups (i.e. connected components) for the individual slices of the Mapper algorithm. However, we augment the conventional Mapper implementation by further attaching the ${{\sf H}}_1({{\mathbb X}})$ homology groups (i.e. holes/tunnels) to the individual nodes of the Mapper graph. By doing this, the number of holes in each connected component is retained for further analysis.
The Topology of 3D Printing
===========================
It turns out that both Mapper and persistent homology have direct applications to 3D printing anomaly detection. For Mapper, the slicing operation has a direct corollary in the layers of a 3D printer. Therefore, the slice thickness, known as the cover, can be set to the same value as the thickness of a single layer on the 3D printer (i.e. the z resolution). For persistent homology, the calculation of connected components is the same as a physically connected components within a single layer. The holes within each layer represent the holes within the model. These can be determined by targeting the xy resolution of 3D printer of interest. Furthermore, using the empty space, Mapper can provide information about the watertightness of the model.
Visualization
-------------
Once the topology of the point cloud has been calculated, we provide a visualization for inspecting the data. The visualization contains 4 components. The first, and most important, is the Mapper graph of the printed model, as seen in Figure \[fig.software\](a). The Mapper graph nodes shows the individual connected components of the model. In addition, each tunnel going through the connected component is represented by a red point in the node visualization. The next visualization, as seen in Figure \[fig.software\](d) is the Mapper graph calculated on the empty space of the model, instead of the filled space. The last 2 visualizations are: the 3D point cloud (Figure \[fig.software\](b)), with regions highlighted based upon the selection of Mapper graph nodes, and a 2D slice visualization (Figure \[fig.software\](c)), again based upon nodes selected in the Mapper graph.
![Our software with the Stanford Dragon dataset. (a) The filled space topology is shown as a Mapper graph with holes denoted as red dots. (b) A 3D view and (c) a single slice view are shown for detail. (d) The empty space topology is shown only as the Mapper graph.[]{data-label="fig.software"}](Figures/software.pdf){width="0.975\linewidth"}
![Results of Dragon dataset. The Mapper graph of the filled space (left) has 5 different portions (a-e) highlighted (right).[]{data-label="fig.results"}](Figures/results.pdf){width="0.975\linewidth"}
Results
=======
We implemented our approached using a number of tools. First, data is converted into a point by any method of choice, such as [@oropallo2018point]. In our case, PLY or STL files had their vertices extract directly. Our Mapper implementation is in Java. The software loads a point cloud, slices it, detects connected components, and exports the Mapper graph and connected component points for both the filled space and empty space. Each filled space connected component is then fed into Ripser[^1] for persistent homology detection of holes/tunnels. For the visualization of the Mapper graph, the layout was calculated using Graphviz[^2]. The data was then fed into our visualization tool built using Processing[^3].
We tested our approach on the Dragon dataset from the Stanford 3D Scanning Repository. We used the points from the reconstructed dataset, which contained approximately 437,000 points. The question we were after was, if someone was to try to rasterize these points directly for 3D printing (ignoring any mesh connectivity), what sort of anomalies would occur. We first scaled the model to a height of 10 cm. We then chose the z resolution to be 3.3 mm and xy resolution to be 1.0 mm.
Original Model
--------------
After running our pipeline, the results are displayed in Figure \[fig.software\] and Figure \[fig.results\]. In Figure \[fig.results\], the tree on the left overviews the entire structure of the graph. We will concentrate on the few circled regions.
First, starting with Figure \[fig.results\](c) in yellow, notice that this region represents a portion of the body of the dragon. In this region, each ring forms a single connected component, each with a single hole through the middle. That is until the topmost ring, where a single connected component has 2 holes, beginning the bifurcation of the upper front and middle portions of the body, as seen in Figure \[fig.results\](a) in dark blue. This feature can be observed in the graph by looking at the top most node in the yellow circle. Notice 2 red dots, indicating 2 holes in that component.
Next, notice the region Figure \[fig.results\](b) in orange. In this region, the model itself splits and comes back together leaving a hole between the torso and tail. This can be observed in the graph as well. Starting after the bottom node of orange region, the graph bifurcates, indicating a split in the connected components, and merges again at the top. This splitting and merging pattern is indicative of an exterior hole in the model. This same type of splitting and merging behavior can also be noticed in the graph region circled in green and associated with Figure \[fig.results\](d). This hole is caused by the leg and body coming together. However, it is difficult to observe by looking at the 3D imagery of the point cloud. In fact, we could not find a good viewing angle that showed this hole directly.
We now look at the bottom slice of the model in Figure \[fig.results\](e) in light blue. Looking at the graph, one may observe 2 nodes on the bottom layer that have many red points in the visualization. Each point representing a hole in the layer. This may represent a problem for watertightness, particularly given that this is the bottom layer. Observing the connected components represented by those 2 node in Figure \[fig.results\](e), many holes are visible in the layer due to inadequate resolution of the points. The initial concern about watertightness remains, given that these holes are not covered by a subsequent layer. Finally, the lack of watertightness can be confirmed by looking at the empty space graph in Figure \[fig.software\](d). In this graph, there is a single component representing all empty space. If the model were watertight, at least 2 empty space components would form, one outside the model and one or more inside.
Error Corrected Model
---------------------
As a comparison, we have computed an error free version of the dragon model. To do this, the triangle mesh provided with the model was subdivided to calculate additional vertices until the point model became watertight. The result of the Mapper and persistent homology calculations can be seen in Figure \[fig.corrected\_results\]. This new model contained 441,713 points (less than 1% increase from the original), making it visually indistinguishable from the original.
In Figure \[fig.corrected\_results.printed\], the Mapper graph of the filled space looks identical to the Mapper graph of the original in Figure \[fig.results\](a). The persistent homology calculation however is quite different. The number of red dots (i.e. holes in the model) have reduced significantly. In fact, the only holes that remain are those representing the major empty cavities of the model’s interior.
In Figure \[fig.corrected\_results.empty\], the Mapper graph of the empty space is shown. The most important aspect of these new graphs is that there are now 2 connected components. Figure \[fig.corrected\_results.empty\](left) represents the connected component of the air surrounding the model. Figure \[fig.corrected\_results.empty\](right) represents the air inside the model. The lack of connection between these 2 components indicates that the model is now watertight.
Runtime Performance
-------------------
We tested the runtime performance of our analysis on the Dragon data set by varying the 3 main parameters, the number of slices, slice overlap, and the xy grid resolution. The results can be seen in Figure \[fig.performance\]. These results show that persistent homology is almost always the largest cost. This high cost can be attributed to regions that have large connected components.
Conclusions
===========
In conclusion, we have presented an approach for using Topological Data Analysis in the evaluation of the quality of 3D printed objects using point cloud-based models. We made some simplifying assumptions in this paper. For example, we assume that 3D printing resolution is uniform across the entire xy domain, which is not necessarily true. We also chose a naive rasterization procedure, though any other pre-rasterized model would be adequate for analysis in this pipeline.
It is also important to note that this approach, as presented, does not report specific problems, aside from watertightness. It instead enables a number of qualitative analyses that depend upon a user’s expectation for the output of their model, including certain global or regional problems, such as issues with number of tunnels expected per component; whether the tunnels are connected; the number of connected components per slice; and which connected components make contact slice-to-slice. This essentially enables answering the question, ‘does the printed model topology match my expectations?’
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
The dragon model was provided by the Stanford 3D Scanning Repository. This work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation (IIS-1513616).
[^1]: Ripser: <https://github.com/Ripser/ripser>
[^2]: Graphvis: <https://www.graphviz.org/>
[^3]: Processing: <https://processing.org/>
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
By means of the unitary transformation, a new way for discussing the ordering prescription of Schrödinger equation with a position-dependent mass (PDM) for isospectral Hamiltonian operators is presented. We show that the ambiguity parameter choices in the kinetic part of the Hamiltonian can be explained through an exact SUSY symmetry as well as a consequence of an accidental symmetry under the $\mathbb{Z}
_{2}$ action. By making use of the unitary transformation, we construct coherent states for a family of PDM isospectral Hamiltonians from a suitable choice of ladder operators. We show that these states preserve the usual structure of Klauder-Perelomov’s states and thus saturate and minimize the generalized position-momentum uncertainty relation (GUR) under some special restrictions. We show that GUR’s properties can be used to determine the sign of the superpotential.
author:
- 'Sid-Ahmed Yahiaoui and Mustapha Bentaiba'
date: date
title: 'Isospectral Hamiltonian for position-dependent mass for an arbitrary quantum system and coherent states'
---
Introduction
============
Nowadays, it is well-known that a family of Hamiltonians with the same eigenvalues set of the original Hamiltonian is called isospectral Hamiltonians [@1; @2]. These families have been known for a long time and were obtained by means of factorization method [@3], the Gel’fand-Levitan’s approach [@4], supersymmetric quantum mechanics (SUSY) and the related shape-invariant [@5] and Lie algebraic procedure [@6]. These techniques are known as a most fruitful approaches for solving Schrödinger equation in the context of constant mass.
When working with quantum system subjected to interact with a given interaction, however, usually considerations impose to identify the mass-term with the concept of effective mass. By a way, such quantum system becomes position-dependent mass (PDM) and considerable interest has been recently devoted in studying the Schrödinger equation under this new perspective [@7; @8; @9; @10; @11; @12; @13; @14; @15; @16; @17]. We find the most extensive use of such an equation in effective interactions in nuclear physics [@18], in the framework of curved spaces [@19], in the point of view of $\mathcal{PT}$-symmetry [@20; @21], quantum wells, wires and dots [@22] and semiconductor heterostructures [@23]. May be the important concept in the framework of PDM concerns the problem of choosing some fixed ordering prescription in the kinetic part of the Hamiltonian, coming from noncommutativity between the mass-term $m(x)$ and momentum $\widehat{P}$ operator.
This problem is a long standing one in quantum mechanics and up to now some uncertainties are concerned about the form of the kinetic energy term $\widehat{T}$ in the Hamiltonian. To cope with this difficulty, it was stressed by von Roos [@24] that the correct kinetic part of the Hamiltonian can be written as$$h_{\text{vR}}=\frac{1}{4}\left( M^{a^{\prime}}(x)\widehat{P}M^{b^{\prime}}(x)\widehat{P}M^{c^{\prime}}(x)+M^{c^{\prime}}(x)\widehat{P}M^{b^{\prime}}(x)\widehat{P}M^{a^{\prime}}(x)\right) +V(x),\tag{1.1}\label{1.1}$$ which has an advantage to keep $h_{\text{vR}}$ hermitian. Here $V(x)$ is a potential and $\widehat{P}\left( \equiv-i\hbar\frac{d}{dx}\right) $ is the conventional momentum operator. $M(x)=m_{0}m(x)$ is the position-dependent mass function ($m(x)$ being dimensionless and $m_{0}$ is a constant mass), and $a^{\prime}$, $b^{\prime}$ and $c^{\prime}$ are arbitrary parameters satisfying the condition: $a^{\prime}+b^{\prime}+c^{\prime}=-1$.
In the other context, a set of coherent states (CS) may be the most important set of basis vectors knows in mathematical physics and which are not necessarily orthonormals. Originally, they were first introduced for the harmonic oscillator by Schrödinger in 1926 [@25], and latter by Glauber [@26] who showed that these states describe the electromagnetic correlation functions in the quantum optics. These states are also constructed for a family of isospectral oscillator Hamiltonians in [@27]. The construction of CS is approached by three different ways and lead to the equivalent state vector for harmonic oscillator (see, e.g., [@28] and references therein). For instance, we can recall their definition: (i) as eigenstates of an annihilation operator (Barut-Girardello’s approach), (ii) as a displaced version of the ground-state wave-function (Klauder-Perelomov’s approach) and (iii) as minimum uncertainty states (Schrödinger’s approach). Very recently, CS have also been constructed for a wide family of Hamiltonians endowed with PDM [@29; @30; @31; @32].
In this paper, our primary concern is to extend the procedure worked out in [@33] to PDM endowed with an effective potential and construct their PDM CS. We want to tackle the problem of ordering ambiguity in a new way and differently than [@31], and prove that there is a special ordering in PDM framework due essentially to the existence of the unitary transformation. Once the suitable factorization operators, $\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}$ and $\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag}$, have been chosen to work as ladders, we prove that selecting the appropriate SUSY-parameter values $\alpha$ can be interpreted as a consequence of both *exact SUSY and accidental symmetries*. We show that the last symmetry is implemented under the $\mathbb{Z}
_{2}$-transformation, through an operator $\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}$, if and only if $\alpha=1/2$ is considered as *the unique fixed point of the* $\mathbb{Z}
_{2}$ *action*. The related PDM CS are then constructed as a displaced version of the ground-state wave-function and minimize the generalized position-momentum uncertainty relation (GUR). The properties of GUR lead us to remark two important observations: (i) if $\alpha=1/2$ then the deduced PDM CS saturate completely GUR and (ii) PDM CS are minimized when $\alpha\neq1/2.$ We observe that the minimization allow us to fix the sign of the superpotential $\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}(x)$ appearing in both ladder operators.
The paper is organized as follows. We start by introducing in section 2 the family of PDM isospectral Hamiltonians, their eigenstates and a pair of associated ladder operators through the use of unitary transformation. In section 3 we show that there is a special ordering, that may be checked by a one SUSY parameter, to select the kinetic part of the Hamiltonian. The related PDM CS are constructed in section 4. They are shown to preserve the structure of Klauder-Perelomov’s states, and saturate and minimize GUR under some special restrictions. Our concluding remarks are summarized in the last section.
Effective mass ladder operators and unitary transformation
==========================================================
Here we follow Morrow and Brownstein [@34] who have shown from (\[1.1\]) the constraint $a^{\prime}=c^{\prime}$, by comparing exact solutions of some models with experimental results. The restricted Hamiltonian (\[1.1\]), with a new change in parameters $a^{\prime}=a$ and $b^{\prime}=2b$, can be now written as (see, [@31])$$h_{a}=\frac{1}{2}\left( m^{a}(x)\widehat{P}m^{2b}(x)\widehat{P}m^{a}(x)\right) +V(x), \tag{2.1}\label{2.1}$$ where we used the atomic units $\hbar=m_{0}=1$ and $2a+2b=-1.$ Let us factorize (\[2.1\]) in terms of the operators$$\begin{aligned}
q_{a} & =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( m^{a}(x)\frac{d}{dx}m^{b}(x)+w(x)\right)
,\tag{2.2a}\label{2.2a}\\
q_{a}^{\dag} & =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( -m^{b}(x)\frac{d}{dx}m^{a}(x)+w(x)\right) , \tag{2.2b}\label{2.2b}$$ where $w(x)$ is an arbitrary real-function. The Hamiltonians $q_{a}^{\dag
}q_{a}$ and $q_{a}q_{a}^{\dag}$ are SUSY partners. It is well known that $q_{a}$ and $q_{a}^{\dag}$ are not unique when the only requirement for $h_{a}$ is its hermiticity, then one can construct a family of strictly isospectral Hamiltonians through a new operators [@33]$$\begin{aligned}
Q_{a} & =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( m^{a}(x)\frac{d}{dx}m^{b}(x)+W(x)\right)
,\tag{2.3a}\label{2.3a}\\
Q_{a}^{\dag} & =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( -m^{b}(x)\frac{d}{dx}m^{a}(x)+W(x)\right) , \tag{2.3b}\label{2.3b}$$ such that$$Q_{a}Q_{a}^{\dag}=q_{a}q_{a}^{\dag}. \tag{2.4}\label{2.4}$$
On setting $m(x)=U^{-2}(x)$, where $U(x)$ is some positive-definite function and substituting (2.2) and (2.3) into (\[2.4\]), one gets Riccati equation which can be solved to give:$$W(x)=w(x)+\phi_{\lambda}(x),\qquad\text{with\qquad}\phi_{\lambda}(x)=\frac{U(x)}{\lambda+{\displaystyle\int\nolimits_{{}}^{x}}
\xi_{0}^{2}(\eta)d\eta}\xi_{0}^{2}(x), \tag{2.5}\label{2.5}$$ where $\lambda$ is a constant of integration and $\xi_{0}(x)$ is the normalized ground-state eigenfunction of the Hamiltonian $q_{a}^{\dag}q_{a}$, given by$$\xi_{0}(x)\sim U^{-1-2a}(x)\exp\left\{ -{\displaystyle\int\nolimits^{\mu(x)}}
w(\eta)d\mu(\eta)\right\} ,$$ up to normalization constant and for convenience we introduce the auxiliary mass function $\mu(x)={\textstyle\int\nolimits^{x}}
d\eta/U(\eta)$.
One can construct the eigenfunctions $\left\vert \Xi_{n}\right\rangle $ of the strictly isospectral family of $H_{a}=Q_{a}^{\dag}Q_{a}+\epsilon$, ($\epsilon$ corresponds to the ground-state energy, i.e., $\epsilon=E_{0}$), which is intertwined with $h_{a}=q_{a}^{\dag}q_{a}+\epsilon$ by means of the intertwining operator $\mathcal{B}_{a}=Q_{a}^{\dag}q_{a}$ [@13; @33] $$H_{a}\mathcal{B}_{a}=\mathcal{B}_{a}h_{a}\quad\Longrightarrow\quad\left(
Q_{a}^{\dag}Q_{a}\right) Q_{a}^{\dag}q_{a}=Q_{a}^{\dag}q_{a}\left(
q_{a}^{\dag}q_{a}\right) . \tag{2.6}\label{2.6}$$
It turns out that the normalized eigenfunctions $\left\vert \Xi_{n}\right\rangle $ of $H_{a}$ can be written in terms of the eigenfunctions $\left\vert \xi_{n}\right\rangle $ as$$\left\vert \Xi_{n}\right\rangle =\frac{1}{E_{n}-\epsilon}Q_{a}^{\dag}q_{a}\left\vert \xi_{n}\right\rangle ,\qquad(n=1,2,3,\cdots) \tag{2.7}\label{2.7}$$
It is worth noting from (\[2.7\]) that $\epsilon=E_{0}\notin$ Spect$\left(
H_{a}\right) $. From (\[2.7\]), it is easy to determine the normalized eigenfunctions $\Xi_{n}(x)\left( \equiv\left\langle x|\Xi_{n}\right\rangle
\right) $ in the coordinate representation and are given by$$\begin{aligned}
\Xi_{0}(x) & \sim\frac{\xi_{0}(x)}{\lambda+{\displaystyle\int\nolimits_{{}}^{x}}
\xi_{0}^{2}(\eta)d\eta},\tag{2.8}\label{2.8}\\
\Xi_{n}(x) & =\left( 1+\frac{1}{2(E_{n}-\epsilon)}\phi_{\lambda}(x)\ q_{a}\right) \xi_{n}(x). \tag{2.9}\label{2.9}$$
Thus the operators $Q_{a}$ and $q_{a}$ connect the states $\left\vert \xi
_{n}\right\rangle $ and $\left\vert \Xi_{n}\right\rangle $ and can not be considered as creation and annihilation operators. To cope with this difficulty, we are interested now in identifying these set of ladder operators by introducing the unitary transformation, $\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}$, following Kumar and Khare [@33]$$Q_{a}=q_{a}\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}^{\dag},\qquad\text{and\qquad}Q_{a}^{\dag
}=\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}q_{a}^{\dag}, \tag{2.10}\label{2.10}$$ where (\[2.4\]) implies that $\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}^{\dag}\widehat
{\mathfrak{U}}\equiv\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}^{\dag
}=\openone$. Once more, let us consider the factorization$$\mathcal{H}_{a}=\mathcal{Q}_{a}^{\dag}\mathcal{Q}_{a}+\epsilon, \tag{2.11}\label{2.11}$$ by defining the new ladder operators $\mathcal{Q}_{a}$ and $\mathcal{Q}_{a}^{\dag}$ in terms of $\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}$ and $\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}^{\dag}$ as$$\mathcal{Q}_{a}=\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}q_{a}\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}^{\dag}\equiv\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}Q_{a},\qquad\text{and\qquad}\mathcal{Q}_{a}^{\dag
}=\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}q_{a}^{\dag}\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}^{\dag}\equiv
Q_{a}^{\dag}\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}^{\dag}, \tag{2.12}\label{2.12}$$ so that $Q_{a}^{\dag}Q_{a}=\mathcal{Q}_{a}^{\dag}\mathcal{Q}_{a}\colon=\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}\left( q_{a}^{\dag}q_{a}\right) \widehat
{\mathfrak{U}}^{\dag}$ and leads to the relation $\mathcal{H}_{a}=\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}h_{a}\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}^{\dag}$. A consequence of isospectrality between $h_{a}$ and $H_{a}$ implies that $E_{n}\equiv
\left\langle \Xi_{n}\left\vert H_{a}\right\vert \Xi_{n}\right\rangle
=\left\langle \xi_{n}\left\vert h_{a}\right\vert \xi_{n}\right\rangle $.
Using (\[2.12\]) we get a relation connecting the basis $\left\{ \left\vert
\xi_{n}\right\rangle \right\} _{n\in\mathbb{N}
}$ and $\left\{ \left\vert \Xi_{n}\right\rangle \right\} _{n\in\mathbb{N}
}$ as follows$$\left\vert \xi_{n}\right\rangle =\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}^{\dag}\left\vert
\Xi_{n}\right\rangle ,\qquad\text{and\qquad}\left\vert \Xi_{n}\right\rangle
=\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}\left\vert \xi_{n}\right\rangle . \tag{2.13}\label{2.13}$$
Moreover, the relevance of relationships (\[2.10\]), (\[2.12\]) and (\[2.13\]) is clear by noting that $$\begin{aligned}
\left\langle \xi_{n}\left\vert q_{a}^{\dag}q_{a}\right\vert \xi_{n}\right\rangle & =\left\langle \xi_{n}\left\vert \widehat{\mathfrak{U}}^{\dag}\left( \widehat{\mathfrak{U}}q_{a}^{\dag}\right) \left(
q_{a}\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}^{\dag}\right) \widehat{\mathfrak{U}}\right\vert
\xi_{n}\right\rangle \nonumber\\
& =\left\langle \widehat{\mathfrak{U}}\xi_{n}\left\vert Q_{a}^{\dag}Q_{a}\right\vert \widehat{\mathfrak{U}}\xi_{n}\right\rangle \nonumber\\
& =\left\langle Q_{a}\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}\xi_{n}|Q_{a}\widehat
{\mathfrak{U}}\xi_{n}\right\rangle \equiv E_{n}-\epsilon,\tag{2.14}\label{2.14}$$ which leads to define a new state $\left\vert \Upsilon_{n}\right\rangle
\propto Q_{a}\left( \widehat{\mathfrak{U}}\left\vert \xi_{n}\right\rangle
\right) =Q_{a}\left\vert \Xi_{n}\right\rangle $, such that $\left\langle
\Upsilon_{n}|\Upsilon_{n}\right\rangle =\left\Vert \left\vert \Upsilon
_{n}\right\rangle \right\Vert ^{2}=E_{n}-\epsilon<\infty$. Then, the new set of states$$S_{n}=\left\{ \left\vert \Upsilon_{n}\right\rangle =\frac{1}{\sqrt
{E_{n}-\epsilon}}Q_{a}\left( \widehat{\mathfrak{U}}\left\vert \xi
_{n}\right\rangle \right) =\frac{1}{\sqrt{E_{n}-\epsilon}}Q_{a}\left\vert
\Xi_{n}\right\rangle
\bigg{|}E_{n}\neq\epsilon\right\} ,\tag{2.15}\label{2.15}$$ consists of normalized eigenfunctions of $H_{a}\equiv\mathcal{H}_{a}=\mathcal{Q}_{a}^{\dag}\mathcal{Q}_{a}+\epsilon$ belonging to the eigenvalues $E_{n}=$ Spect$(H_{a})$. Now, following [@31], let $\left\vert
\Upsilon_{n,\epsilon}\right\rangle $ be a function which is orthogonal to the set $\left\{ \left\vert \Upsilon_{n}\right\rangle \right\} _{n\in\mathbb{N}
}$; i.e., $\left\langle \Upsilon_{n}|\Upsilon_{n,\epsilon}\right\rangle
\equiv\left\langle Q_{a}\Xi_{n}|\Upsilon_{n,\epsilon}\right\rangle
=\left\langle \Xi_{n}|Q_{a}^{\dag}\Upsilon_{n,\epsilon}\right\rangle =0$. Then using (\[2.10\]), it is easy to convince ourselves that $Q_{a}^{\dag
}\left\vert \Upsilon_{n,\epsilon}\right\rangle \equiv\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}\left( q_{a}^{\dag}\left\vert \Upsilon_{n,\epsilon}\right\rangle \right)
=0$, since the state $\left\vert \Xi_{n}\right\rangle \neq0$ and the related solution reads, in the coordinate representation, as$$\Upsilon_{n,\epsilon}(x)\sim\frac{1}{m^{a}(x)}\exp\left\{
{\displaystyle\int\nolimits^{\mu(x)}}
w(\eta)d\mu\left( \eta\right) \right\} .\tag{2.16}\label{2.16}$$
If $\left\langle \Upsilon_{n,\epsilon}|\Upsilon_{n,\epsilon}\right\rangle
<\infty$, then Spect$(H_{a})=$ Spect$(h_{a})\cup\left\{ \epsilon\right\} $ which leads to impose that $m(x)$ *has no zeros* and $a<0$ (i.e., $b>-1/2$). This problem is closely related to the ordering problem and we will face to this question in the next section.
In summary, $h_{a}$ and $H_{a}$ are isospectral operators and are related by the unitary transformation $\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}$. We would like also to emphasize that $\mathcal{Q}_{a}$ and $\mathcal{Q}_{a}^{\dag}$, as they are defined in (\[2.12\]), are nothing but the correct set of creation and annihilation operators for our isospectral Hamiltonians.
SUSY parameter $\alpha$ and accidental symmetry $\mathbb{Z}
_{2}$
===========================================================
In this section we take full advantage of ladder operators derived under unitary transformation in the previous section. To this end, inserting (\[2.2a\]) into (\[2.12\]), the operator $\mathcal{Q}_{a}$ can be expressed as$$\mathcal{Q}_{a}=\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}q_{a}\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}^{\dag}\equiv\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( \widehat{\mathfrak{U}}m^{a}(x)\frac{d}{dx}m^{b}(x)\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}^{\dag}+\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}w(x)\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}^{\dag}\right) .\tag{3.1}\label{3.1}$$
By substituting$\ \widehat{\mathfrak{U}}^{\dag}\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}=\openone$ twice into the first term of the right-hand side of (\[3.1\]), taking into account that $b=-(1/2+a)$, the operators $\mathcal{Q}_{a}$ and $\mathcal{Q}_{a}^{\dag}$ can be rewritten explicitly in the form:$$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{Q}_{a} & \longrightarrow\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( f^{\alpha}(x)\frac{d}{dx}g(x)f^{-\alpha}(x)+\mathcal{W}(x)\right)
,\tag{3.2}\label{3.2}\\
\mathcal{Q}_{a}^{\dag} & \longrightarrow\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag}=\frac
{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( -g(x)f^{-\alpha}(x)\frac{d}{dx}f^{\alpha}(x)+\mathcal{W}(x)\right) ,\tag{3.3}\label{3.3}$$ where $f(x)$, $g(x)$ and the superpotential $\mathcal{W}(x)$ are real functions defined following$$f^{\alpha}(x)=\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}f^{a}(x)\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}^{\dag
},\qquad g(x)=\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}m^{-1/2}(x)\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}^{\dag
},\qquad\text{and\qquad}\mathcal{W}(x)=\widehat{\mathfrak{U}}w(x)\widehat
{\mathfrak{U}}^{\dag},\tag{3.4}\label{3.4}$$ where we assume that the new parameter $\alpha$ only labels a particular ordering in the kinetic part of the Hamiltonian. Then from (\[2.11\]), $\mathcal{H}_{a}\rightarrow\mathcal{H}_{\alpha}=\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag
}\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}+\epsilon$, we have$$\mathcal{H}_{\alpha}=-\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dx}g^{2}(x)\frac{d}{dx}+\mathcal{V}_{\text{eff}}^{(\alpha)}(x)+\epsilon,\tag{3.5}\label{3.5}$$ where $\mathcal{V}_{\text{eff}}^{(\alpha)}(x)$ is known as the effective potential. In order to relate (\[3.5\]) to PDM problem, we look for the functions $f(x)$ and $g(x)$ that satisfy the condition $f(x)=g(x)=U(x)$. Then (\[3.2\]) and (\[3.3\]) become
$$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha} & \equiv\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( U^{\alpha}(x)\frac
{d}{dx}U^{1-\alpha}(x)+\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}(x)\right) ,\tag{3.6a}\label{3.6a}\\
\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag} & \equiv\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( -U^{1-\alpha
}(x)\frac{d}{dx}U^{\alpha}(x)+\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}(x)\right) ,\tag{3.6b}\label{3.6b}$$
where the effective potential, $\mathcal{V}_{\text{eff}}^{(\alpha
)}(x)=\mathcal{V}_{\alpha}(x)+\mathcal{V}_{\text{U}}^{(\alpha)}(x)$, is defined in terms of the superpotential $\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}(x)$ as
$$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{V}_{\alpha}(x)-\epsilon & =\frac{1}{2}\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}^{2}(x)-\frac{1}{2}U(x)\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}^{\prime}(x)+\frac{1-2\alpha}{2}U^{\prime}(x)\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}(x),\tag{3.7a}\label{3.7a}\\
\mathcal{V}_{\text{U}}^{(\alpha)}(x) & =\frac{\alpha(\alpha-1)}{2}U^{\prime
2}(x)+\frac{\alpha-1}{2}U^{\prime\prime}(x)U(x).\tag{3.7b}\label{3.7b}$$
However, we have observed that the appropriate mapping: $\alpha\mapsto
\alpha_{n}=n\alpha$, for $n\in\mathbb{N}
-\left\{ 0\right\} $, has a remarkable property; it keeps the kinetic operator in (\[3.5\]) *unchanged* and we will see hereafter why these maps were chosen. We shall take full advantage of this last mapping, since the problem we have to deal with concerns the choice of the appropriate profile for mass functions $U(x),$ (i.e., $m(x)$), appearing in (3.6) and represented by the terms $\zeta^{(+)}=U^{\alpha_{n}}(x)$ and $\zeta^{(-)}=U^{1-\alpha_{n}}(x)$. Taking into account that $U(x)=m^{-1/2}(x)$, we are faced the situation in which two distinguishable profiles for $U(x)$ must be considered:
(P1)
: $\zeta^{(\pm)}(x)$ *admit singularities (i.e.,* $m(x)$ *has zeros)*. This implies that both exponents $(1-n\alpha
,n\alpha)<0$, with $\alpha$ is confined to the domain: dom$(\alpha)=\left(
-\infty,0\right] \cup\left[ \frac{1}{n},+\infty\right) $. Then it is easy to realize that this case must be omitted in order to avoid a possible divergence of $\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}$ (i.e., $\mathcal{H}_{\alpha}$), when $\alpha=\pm\infty$.
(P2)
: $\zeta^{(\pm)}(x)$ *admit zeros (i.e.,* $m(x)$ *has singularities)*. This implies that $(1-n\alpha,n\alpha)>0$ and a similar reasoning shows that $0\leq\alpha\leq\frac{1}{n}\leq1$, for $n=1,2,3,\cdots$.
The case (**P2**) is which we are looking for. Then it is evident that the functions $U(x)$ (resp. $m(x)$) are chosen in such a way that they accept *zeros* (resp. *singularities*). This fact suggest that the ordering in the kinetic operator depends closely on the choice of SUSY parameter $\alpha$ which belongs to the discrete and bounded set:$$\mathfrak{S}_{\alpha_{n}}=\left\{ \forall n\in\mathbb{N}
-\left\{ 0\right\}
\bigg{|}\text{ }\alpha_{\infty}=0,\quad\text{and\quad}\alpha_{n}=\frac{1}{n}\in\mathbb{Q}
^{+}\right\} \equiv\left\{ 1,\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{3},\ldots,\frac{1}{n},\ldots,0\right\} , \tag{3.8}\label{3.8}$$ which is well-known that it is closed in $\mathbb{R}
$, and hence compact. For instances, among the SUSY parameter $\alpha_{n}$ of the set (\[3.8\]), some of frequently used form of the kinetic operators are reported below in the table. In the ongoing analysis, we will suppress the $n$-index of all the parameters $\alpha$.
\[c\][llllll]{} & & &\
$(\alpha,n)$ & $(a,b)$ & $\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}$ & $\widehat{T}_{\alpha}$ & (Type) & Refs.\
$(0,\infty)$ & $\left( -\frac{1}{2},0\right) $ & $\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(
\frac{d}{dx}U(x)+\mathcal{W}_{0}(x)\right) $ & $\frac{1}{2}U(x)\widehat
{P}^{2}U(x)$ & (ZK) & [@35]\
$(1,1)$ & $\left( 0,-\frac{1}{2}\right) $ & $\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(
U(x)\frac{d}{dx}+\mathcal{W}_{1}(x)\right) $ & $\frac{1}{2}\widehat{P}U^{2}(x)\widehat{P}$ & (BDD) & [@36]\
$\left( \frac{1}{2},2\right) $ & $\left( -\frac{1}{4},-\frac{1}{4}\right)
$ & $\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( \sqrt{U(x)}\frac{d}{dx}\sqrt{U(x)}+\mathcal{W}_{1/2}(x)\right) $ & $\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{U(x)}\widehat
{P}U(x)\widehat{P}\sqrt{U(x)}$ & (BBQT) & [@11]\
\[table1\]
Using the identity (\[2.11\]) and the representations (\[3.2\]) and (\[3.3\]), one can easily find that$$\begin{aligned}
\left[ \mathcal{Q}_{\alpha},\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag}\right] &
=U(x)\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}^{\prime}(x)+\frac{1-2\alpha}{2}U(x)U^{\prime\prime
}(x),\tag{3.9a}\label{3.9a}\\
\left[ \mathcal{H}_{\alpha},\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}\right] & =-\left[
\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha},\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag}\right] \mathcal{Q}_{\alpha
},\tag{3.9b}\label{3.9b}\\
\left[ \mathcal{H}_{\alpha},\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag}\right] &
=\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag}\left[ \mathcal{Q}_{\alpha},\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha
}^{\dag}\right] , \tag{3.9c}\label{3.9c}$$ which require that the algebra of three operators $\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha
},\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag}$ and $\mathcal{H}_{\alpha}$ is nothing but the generally deformed oscillator algebra (GDOA) [@29].
Although our approach holds for any $\alpha$ of (\[3.8\]), we shall focus our attention on the effect changing the SUSY parameter $\alpha$ to $1-\alpha$ via the identification: $\alpha\mapsto\overline{\alpha}=1-\alpha$, with $0\leq\overline{\alpha}\leq1$. Then (3.6) become
$$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha} & \rightarrow\overline{\mathcal{Q}}_{\alpha}\equiv\mathcal{Q}_{1-\alpha}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( U^{1-\alpha}(x)\frac
{d}{dx}U^{\alpha}(x)+\mathcal{W}_{1-\alpha}(x)\right) , \tag{3.10a}\label{3.10a}\\
\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag} & \rightarrow\overline{\mathcal{Q}}_{\alpha
}^{\dag}\equiv\mathcal{Q}_{1-\alpha}^{\dag}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(
-U^{\alpha}(x)\frac{d}{dx}U^{1-\alpha}(x)+\mathcal{W}_{1-\alpha}(x)\right) ,
\tag{3.10b}\label{3.10b}$$
where the corresponding effective potential
$$\begin{aligned}
\overline{\mathcal{V}}_{\alpha}(x)-\epsilon & =\frac{1}{2}\mathcal{W}_{1-\alpha}^{2}(x)-\frac{1}{2}U(x)\mathcal{W}_{1-\alpha}^{\prime}(x)-\frac{1-2\alpha}{2}U^{\prime}(x)\mathcal{W}_{1-\alpha}(x), \tag{3.11a}\label{3.11a}\\
\overline{\mathcal{V}}_{\text{U}}^{(\alpha)}(x) & =\frac{\alpha(\alpha
-1)}{2}U^{\prime2}(x)-\frac{\alpha}{2}U^{\prime\prime}(x)U(x), \tag{3.11b}\label{3.11b}$$
and the associated GDOA is the same as (3.9) except that they differ in the sign of the term $1-2\alpha$.
There is another side to this identification. Indeed a simple inspection leads us to make a crucial observation that a such changing in the SUSY parameter $\alpha$ is nothing but an accidental symmetry under the $\mathbb{Z}
_{2}$ action, *if and only if* $\alpha=1/2$ *is the unique fixed point of this transformation*. For example, the emergence of this kind of striking symmetry has already been discussed by Fiset and Hussin [@37]. They find that this symmetry has an interesting and particular effects on the coherent states built out of SUSY potential functions. Here by an accidental symmetry, we mean that this symmetry in not predicted neither by factorization method, nor the SUSY approach. As we can see, selecting an appropriate SUSY parameter $\alpha$ can also be interpreted as a consequence of the striking and accidental symmetry under the $\mathbb{Z}
_{2}$ action, where only $\overline{\alpha}=0,1/2$, and $1$ belong to the set (\[3.8\]). It is obvious that the most suitable ordering parameter $\alpha$ is given by the simplest case $\alpha=1/2$, (i.e., $a=b=-1/4$, see Table 1), and corresponding to the well-known kinetic operator, $\widehat{T}_{1/2}=\frac{1}{2}\left( \sqrt{U(x)}\frac{d}{dx}\sqrt{U(x)}\right) ^{2}$, which has deserved special attention in research papers over the years (see, for example [@11] and references therein.)
To be more precise about this transformation, let us introduce an operator $\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}$ that implements the $\mathbb{Z}
_{2}$-transformation on the annihilation operator $\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}$. Thus, acting on $\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}$, we must require that the implement operator $\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}$ satisfies$$\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}^{-1}=\mathcal{Q}_{1-\alpha}\quad\Longrightarrow\quad\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}=\mathcal{Q}_{1-\alpha}\widehat{\mathcal{Z}},
\tag{3.13}\label{3.13}$$ with $\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}^{-1}\neq\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}^{\dag}$, since we assume that they are no other operators, apart from $\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}$, which are affected by the $\mathbb{Z}
_{2}$ action. Note that we have also demand the invariance for the fixed point $\alpha=1/2$, i.e., the commutator $\left[ \widehat{\mathcal{Z}},\mathcal{Q}_{1/2}\right] =0$, which means that the operators $\widehat
{\mathcal{Z}}$ and $\mathcal{Q}_{1/2}$ share the same eigenfunctions. Then, along with (\[3.13\]), it is obvious that the implement operator $\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}$ is identified to $\mathcal{Q}_{1/2}$ for $\alpha=1/2$. However it acts as an intertwiner transformation for the ladder operators $\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}$ and $\mathcal{Q}_{1-\alpha}$ for $\alpha\neq1/2$. Moreover, acting (\[3.13\]) on the right-hand side by a function $\phi
_{n}(x)$, we get$$\Psi_{n}(x)\equiv\mathcal{Q}_{1-\alpha}\psi_{n}(x)=\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}\left( \mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}\varphi_{n}(x)\right) \equiv\widehat
{\mathcal{Z}}\Phi_{n}(x), \tag{3.14}\label{3.14}$$ where $\psi_{n}(x)\equiv\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}\varphi_{n}(x)$. Clearly, we look for $\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}$ as an *intertwiner operator*. For the sake of completeness, we now seek the intertwining operator in the form of a first-order linear-differential operator$$\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( F(x)\frac{d}{dx}F\left(
x\right) +G(x)\right) , \tag{3.15}\label{3.15}$$ where $F(x)$ and $G(x)$ are two real functions to be determined, such that $\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}$ fulfills (\[3.13\]). For lack of space, the implement operator is evaluated and the result is$$\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}\equiv\mathcal{T}_{\alpha}(x)\widehat{\nabla}_{x}^{(\alpha)}\mathcal{T}_{\alpha}(x), \tag{3.16}\label{3.16}$$ with$$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{T}_{\alpha}(x) & =U^{1-\alpha}(x)\exp\left\{ \int_{{}}^{\mu
(x)}\frac{\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}(\eta)-\mathcal{W}_{1-\alpha}(\eta)}{2}d\mu
(\eta)\right\} ,\qquad\text{and}\tag{3.17a}\label{3.17a}\\
\widehat{\nabla}_{x}^{(\alpha)} & =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( \frac{d}{dx}+\frac{1}{2}\frac{\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}(x)+\mathcal{W}_{1-\alpha}(x)}{U(x)}\right) . \tag{3.17b}\label{3.17b}$$
It is worth noting that if $\alpha=1/2$ , then (\[3.17a\]) is reduced to $\mathcal{T}_{1/2}(x)=U^{1/2}(x)\equiv m^{-1/4}(x)$ and the implement operator $\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}$ becomes the standard annihilation operator $\mathcal{Q}_{1/2}$, (see Table 1), i.e.,$$\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}=\mathcal{Q}_{1/2}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( \sqrt
{U(x)}\frac{d}{dx}\sqrt{U(x)}+\mathcal{W}_{1/2}(x)\right) . \tag{3.18}\label{3.18}$$
PDM CS and generalized position-momentum uncertainty relation
=============================================================
Now the main question is: what kind of position-dependent mass coherent states (PDM CS) are expected in both symmetries? This section is devoted to construct a set of PDM CS for isospectral Hamiltonians $\mathcal{H}_{\alpha}$. As mentioned in the introduction, there are three equivalent definitions of CS and one of the candidates (Klauder-Perelomov’s approach) looks on CS as an orbit of the ground-state $\left\vert 0\right\rangle $, under the Weyl-Heisenberg displacement operator $\mathcal{D}(z)$ expressed in terms of ladder operators.
We have seen that $\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}$ and $\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag}$ are such operators and can be used to derive their associated PDM CS. Then the related PDM CS, $\left\vert z;\alpha\right\rangle $, for which we are looking for must verify the eigenvalue equation $\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}\left\vert
z;\alpha\right\rangle =z\left\vert z;\alpha\right\rangle $ and annihilates the ground-state $\left\vert \Xi_{0};\alpha\right\rangle $, i.e., $\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}\left\vert \Xi_{0};\alpha\right\rangle =0$.
Using (3.6) the ground-state $\left\vert \Xi_{0};\alpha\right\rangle $ can be calculated straightforwardly by integration, and we get$$\left\vert \Xi_{0};\alpha\right\rangle \sim U^{\alpha-1}(x)\exp\left\{ -{\displaystyle\int\nolimits_{{}}^{\mu(x)}}
\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}(\eta)d\mu(\eta)\right\} , \tag{4.1}\label{4.1}$$ up to normalization constant. In Klauder-Perelomov’s approach, our PDM CS are expressed through$$\left\vert z;\alpha\right\rangle =\mathcal{D}_{\alpha}(z)\left\vert \Xi
_{0};\alpha\right\rangle , \tag{4.2}\label{4.2}$$ and one assumes that the displacement operator, $\mathcal{D}_{\alpha}(z)$, takes the form [@29]$$\mathcal{D}_{\alpha}(z)=\exp\left\{ i\mathcal{S}_{\alpha}(z)\right\}
,\qquad\text{with\qquad}\mathcal{S}_{\alpha}(z)=-iz\mathcal{K}_{\alpha},
\tag{4.3}\label{4.3}$$ where $\mathcal{K}_{\alpha}$ is unknown operator which can be determined using the unitarity condition of $\mathcal{D}_{\alpha}(z)$, i.e., $\mathcal{D}_{\alpha}^{-1}(z)=\mathcal{D}_{\alpha}^{\dag}(z)$. Indeed this restriction leads us to identity both $\mathcal{S}_{\alpha}(z)$ and $\mathcal{K}_{\alpha}$ as hermitian operators if and only if $z=-z^{\ast}$, i.e., $\Re(z)=0$. Having introduced the form of $\mathcal{D}_{\alpha}(z)$, we are now able to state the following proposition [@29] in order to determine $\mathcal{K}_{\alpha}$.
Let $z\in i\mathbb{R}
$. Then, for every displacement operator $\mathcal{D}_{\alpha}(z)$ as defined in (\[4.3\]) and acting on the ladder operators under the general scheme:$$\mathcal{D}_{\alpha}^{\dag}(z)\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}\mathcal{D}_{\alpha
}(z)=\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}+z\left[ \mathcal{Q}_{\alpha},\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha
}^{\dag}\right] ,\qquad\text{and\qquad}\mathcal{D}_{\alpha}^{\dag
}(z)\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag}\mathcal{D}_{\alpha}(z)=\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha
}^{\dag}+z^{\ast}\left[ \mathcal{Q}_{\alpha},\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag
}\right] , \tag{4.4}\label{4.4}$$ must verify$$\left[ \mathcal{S}_{\alpha}(z),\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}\right] =iz\left[
\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha},\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag}\right] ,\qquad
\text{and}\qquad\left[ \mathcal{S}_{\alpha}(z),\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag
}\right] =iz^{\ast}\left[ \mathcal{Q}_{\alpha},\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag
}\right] , \tag{4.5}\label{4.5}$$ where $z=-z^{\ast}$.
Let us define the operator $\mathcal{P}_{\alpha}=\left[ \mathcal{Q}_{\alpha
},\mathcal{D}_{\alpha}(z)\right] $. Expanding $\exp\left\{ i\mathcal{S}_{\alpha}(z)\right\} $ in the development of Taylor series, we find$$\mathcal{P}_{\alpha}=-\sum_{k=0}^{+\infty}\frac{i^{k}}{k!}\left[
\mathcal{S}_{\alpha}^{k}(z),\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}\right] , \tag{4.6}\label{4.6}$$ and using (\[4.5\]), a straightforward calculation yields to the recursion relation satisfying$$\left[ \mathcal{S}_{\alpha}^{k}(z),\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}\right]
=ik\mathcal{S}_{\alpha}^{k-1}(z)\left[ \mathcal{Q}_{\alpha},\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag}\right] , \tag{4.7}\label{4.7}$$ and by inserting (\[4.7\]) into (\[4.6\]), we have$$\mathcal{P}_{\alpha}=z\mathcal{D}_{\alpha}(z)\left[ \mathcal{Q}_{\alpha
},\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag}\right] . \tag{4.8}\label{4.8}$$
On the other hand, starting from $\mathcal{P}_{\alpha}=\left[ \mathcal{Q}_{\alpha},\mathcal{D}_{\alpha}(z)\right] $ and multiplying both sides on the left by $\mathcal{D}_{\alpha}^{\dag}(z)$ and comparing with (\[4.4\]), we get (\[4.8\]). This completes the proof.
The substitution of $\mathcal{S}_{\alpha}(z)=-iz\mathcal{K}_{\alpha}$ into (\[4.5\]) yields four possible and distinguishable solutions for $\mathcal{K}_{\alpha}$: $\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha},\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag}$ and $\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}\pm\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag}$. The two-first cases will be omitted to avoid ill-defined hermiticity condition imposed to $\mathcal{K}_{\alpha}$, while the last case with a positive sign is that in which we are interested in. Under these conditions, the displacement operator (\[4.3\]) can be expressed as:$$\mathcal{D}_{\alpha}(z)=\exp\left\{ z\left( \mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}+\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag}\right) \right\} _{z=-z^{\ast}}=\exp\left\{
z\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}-z^{\ast}\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag}\right\} ,
\tag{4.9}\label{4.9}$$ and by inserting (\[4.1\]) and (\[4.9\]) into PDM CS (\[4.2\]), we get$$\left\vert z;\alpha\right\rangle \sim U^{\alpha-1}(x)\exp\left\{ \sqrt
{2}z\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}(x)+\frac{1-2\alpha}{\sqrt{2}}zU^{\prime}(x)-{\displaystyle\int\nolimits_{{}}^{\mu(x)}}
\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}(\eta)d\mu(\eta)\right\} . \tag{4.10}\label{4.10}$$
This expression is the general form of isospectral Hamiltonians CS endowed with PDM for an arbitrary quantum system and already deduced in the case $\alpha=1/2$ in [@29]. Let us now turn to the construction of PDM CS for an accidental symmetry, $\overline{\left\vert z;\alpha\right\rangle }$, under the $\mathbb{Z}
_{2}$ action and satisfying the eigenvalue equation $\mathcal{Q}_{1-\alpha
}\overline{\left\vert z;\alpha\right\rangle }=z\overline{\left\vert
z;\alpha\right\rangle }$. This procedure can easily be achieved in the same manner it was performed in the exact SUSY symmetry or merely by performing the substitution $\alpha\mapsto\overline{\alpha}=1-\alpha$ in (\[4.10\]). Finally, we get the relationship between both coherent states$$\begin{aligned}
\overline{\left\vert z;\alpha\right\rangle } & \sim U^{-\alpha}(x)\exp\left\{ \sqrt{2}z\mathcal{W}_{1-\alpha}(x)-\frac{1-2\alpha}{\sqrt{2}}zU^{\prime}(x)-{\displaystyle\int\nolimits_{{}}^{\mu(x)}}
\mathcal{W}_{1-\alpha}(\eta)d\mu(\eta)\right\} \nonumber\\
& =U^{1-2\alpha}(x)\exp\left\{ -\sqrt{2}z\widetilde{\mathcal{W}}_{\alpha
}(x)-\sqrt{2}(1-2\alpha)zU^{\prime}(x)+{\displaystyle\int\nolimits_{{}}^{\mu(x)}}
\widetilde{\mathcal{W}}_{\alpha}(\eta)d\mu(\eta)\right\} \left\vert
z;\alpha\right\rangle , \tag{4.11}\label{4.11}$$ where $\widetilde{\mathcal{W}}_{\alpha}(x)=\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}(x)-\mathcal{W}_{1-\alpha}(x).$
On the other hand, the relevance of (\[3.13\]) is clear in the sense that if $\left\vert z;\alpha\right\rangle $ is PDM CS of $\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}$, then $\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}\left\vert z;\alpha\right\rangle $ is a new PDM CS of $\mathcal{Q}_{1-\alpha}$ under the $\mathbb{Z}
_{2}$-transformation. Indeed by acting (\[3.13\]) on $\left\vert
z;\alpha\right\rangle $, taking into account that $\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha
}\left\vert z;\alpha\right\rangle =z\left\vert z;\alpha\right\rangle $, it seems that $\overline{\left\vert z;\alpha\right\rangle }=\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}\left\vert z;\alpha\right\rangle $ solves the new eigenvalue PDM CS equation, where the action of $\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}$ on $\left\vert z;\alpha
\right\rangle $ is well established in (\[4.11\]). However by comparing (\[4.10\]) to (\[4.11\]), it is easy to verify that $\overline{\left\vert
z;1-\alpha\right\rangle }=\left\vert z;\alpha\right\rangle $, so that $\overline{\left\vert z;\alpha\right\rangle }=\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}\overline{\left\vert z;1-\alpha\right\rangle }$. The same identity can be deduced for the state $\left\vert z;\alpha\right\rangle $, i.e., $\left\vert
z;\alpha\right\rangle =\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}^{-1}\left\vert z;1-\alpha
\right\rangle $.
As we can see, the $\mathbb{Z}
_{2}$ action acts on PDM CS (\[4.10\]) as a functional factor representing the implementation of the transformation and affects (\[4.10\]) as long as $\alpha\neq1/2$ and $U(x)$ remains a function. Otherwise, (i.e., $\alpha
=1/2$), the $\mathbb{Z}
_{2}$ action is broken and both PDM CS in (\[4.11\]) are reduced to be the same state.
In the following one may prove that PDM CS $\left\vert z;\alpha\right\rangle $ of (\[4.10\]) minimize the generalized position-momentum uncertainty relation (GUR). To prove this, let us calculate the variances, $\left(
\Delta\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}\right) ^{2}$ and $\left( \Delta\Pi_{\alpha
}\right) ^{2}$, of the superpotential and generalized momentum operators given by$$\widehat{\mathcal{W}}_{\alpha}(x)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( \mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}+\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag}\right) -\frac{1-2\alpha}{\sqrt{2}}U^{\prime}(x),\quad\text{and\quad}\widehat{\Pi}_{\alpha}(x)=-\frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}\left( \mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}-\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag}\right) ,
\tag{4.12}\label{4.12}$$ and deduced from (3.6). By definition, the variance of an operator, say $\widehat{\Theta}$, is defined as: $\left( \Delta\Theta\right)
^{2}=\left\langle z;\alpha\left\vert \widehat{\Theta}^{2}\right\vert
z;\alpha\right\rangle -\left\langle z;\alpha\left\vert \widehat{\Theta
}\right\vert z;\alpha\right\rangle ^{2}$. Then with the help of the first equation of (3.9), we find after some straightforward but lengthy calculation$$\begin{aligned}
\left\langle \mathcal{W}_{\alpha}\right\rangle & \equiv\left\langle
z;\alpha\left\vert \widehat{\mathcal{W}}_{\alpha}\right\vert z;\alpha
\right\rangle =-\frac{1-2\alpha}{2}U^{\prime}(x),\tag{4.13a}\label{4.13a}\\
\left\langle \Pi_{\alpha}\right\rangle & \equiv\left\langle z;\alpha
\left\vert \widehat{\Pi}_{\alpha}\right\vert z;\alpha\right\rangle =-i\sqrt
{2}z,\tag{4.13b}\label{4.13b}\\
\left\langle \mathcal{W}_{\alpha}^{2}\right\rangle & \equiv\left\langle
z;\alpha\left\vert \widehat{\mathcal{W}}_{\alpha}^{2}\right\vert
z;\alpha\right\rangle =-\frac{1}{2}U(x)\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}^{\prime
}(x)-(1-2\alpha)U^{\prime}(x)\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}(x)\nonumber\\
& +\frac{1-2\alpha}{2}U(x)U^{\prime\prime}(x)-\frac{(1-2\alpha)^{2}}{4}U^{\prime2}(x),\tag{4.13c}\label{4.13c}\\
\left\langle \Pi_{\alpha}^{2}\right\rangle & \equiv\left\langle
z;\alpha\left\vert \widehat{\Pi}_{\alpha}^{2}\right\vert z;\alpha\right\rangle
=-2z^{2}+\frac{1}{2}U(x)\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}^{\prime}(x)+\frac{1-2\alpha}{4}U(x)U^{\prime\prime}(x), \tag{4.13d}\label{4.13d}$$ keeping in mind that $z=-z^{\ast}$. Thus the use of definition of the variance given above provides the product$$\left( \Delta\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}\right) ^{2}\cdot\left( \Delta\Pi_{\alpha
}\right) ^{2}=\frac{1}{4}\left( \left\langle z;\alpha\left\vert \left[
\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha},\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag}\right] \right\vert
z;\alpha\right\rangle \right) ^{2}-\frac{1}{2}\mathcal{R}_{\alpha
}(x)\left\langle z;\alpha\left\vert \left[ \mathcal{Q}_{\alpha},\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag}\right] \right\vert z;\alpha\right\rangle ,
\tag{4.14}\label{4.14}$$ where the function $\mathcal{R}_{\alpha}(x)$ is defined as$$\mathcal{R}_{\alpha}(x)=(1-2\alpha)U^{\prime}(x)\left( \mathcal{W}_{\alpha
}(x)+\frac{1-2\alpha}{2}U^{\prime}(x)\right) . \tag{4.15}\label{4.15}$$
As we can see a deeper insights are necessary on the function $\mathcal{R}_{\alpha}(x)$, if we are interested to saturate and minimize (\[4.14\]).
##### Saturation of (\[4.14\]).
Using (\[4.15\]), it is worth noting that PDM CS $\left\vert z;\alpha
\right\rangle $ saturate GUR if and only if $\mathcal{R}_{\alpha}(x)=0$. This latter leads us to consider three requirements: (**R1**) $\alpha=1/2$, (**R2**) $U^{\prime}(x)=0$, and/or (**R3**) $\mathcal{W}_{\alpha
}(x)=-(1-2\alpha)U^{\prime}(x)/2.$ It is easy to convince ourselves that (**R2**) must be avoided since in this case the quantum system loses its PDM features. However if the restriction (**R1**) is satisfied, then (**R3**) yields $\mathcal{W}_{1/2}(x)=0$ which corresponds to a free particle in (\[3.7a\]). This is in contrast with our study since the case $\alpha=1/2$ has its own PDM potential and can not be zero. Thus in order to avoid this ambiguity, we suggest that $\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}(x)\neq
-(1-2\alpha)U^{\prime}(x)/2$ simultaneously with $\alpha=1/2$. On the other hand, taking into account only the restriction (**R3**) we get from (3.7)$$\mathcal{V}_{\text{eff}}(x)=-\frac{1}{4}U(x)U^{\prime\prime}(x)-\frac{1}{8}U^{\prime2}(x)+\epsilon,\tag{4.16}\label{4.16}$$ which is independent of $\alpha.$ We conclude that *the saturation of PDM CS (\[4.10\]) is possible if and only if:*
- $\alpha=1/2$ and $\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}(x)\neq-(1-2\alpha)U^{\prime
}(x)/2$,
- $\alpha\neq1/2$ and $\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}(x)=-(1-2\alpha)U^{\prime
}(x)/2$, leading to the effective potential (\[4.16\]).
##### Minimization of (\[4.14\]).
On the other context, it is also simple to verify that PDM CS, $\left\vert
z;\alpha\right\rangle $, minimize GUR as follows$$\left( \Delta\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}\right) ^{2}\cdot\left( \Delta\Pi_{\alpha
}\right) ^{2}\geq\frac{1}{4}\left( \left\langle z;\alpha\left\vert \left[
\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha},\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}^{\dag}\right] \right\vert
z;\alpha\right\rangle \right) ^{2},\tag{4.17}\label{4.17}$$ if and only if $\mathcal{R}_{\alpha}(x)<0$. This restriction leads us to distinguish between two possible cases from (\[4.15\]) as follows (with $0\leq\alpha\leq1$):
(C1)
: If $(1-2\alpha)U^{\prime}(x)<0$, then $\mathcal{W}_{\alpha
}(x)+(1-2\alpha)U^{\prime}(x)/2>0,$
(C2)
: If $(1-2\alpha)U^{\prime}(x)>0$, then $\mathcal{W}_{\alpha
}(x)+(1-2\alpha)U^{\prime}(x)/2<0.$
The first condition of (**C1**) gives either $-1\leq1-2\alpha<0$ with $U^{\prime}(x)>0$, or $0<1-2\alpha\leq1$ for $U^{\prime}(x)<0$. Then, in both situations, the second condition yields $\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}(x)>0$. The same analysis is made for (**C2**), which gives either $-1\leq1-2\alpha<0$ with $U^{\prime}(x)<0$, or $0<1-2\alpha\leq1$ for $U^{\prime}(x)>0$, while the second condition of this case yields $\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}(x)<0$. We conclude here that *the sign of the superpotential* $\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}(x)$ *is entirely controlled by the minimization of GUR obtained fr*om (\[4.10\])**.
Concluding remarks
==================
We have extended the ideas given in [@33] for an arbitrary quantum system of isospectral family of Hamiltonians endowed with PDM and constructed their PDM CS through the unitary transformation.
In this paper, our main aim is to emphasize the greatest importance of introducing the unitary transformation and its consequence for solving the ordering problem. For instances, we have shown that the profile of the mass function $m(x)$ (resp. $U(x)$) is subjected to *singularities* (resp. *zeros*). In this way, we have been able to define a special set of the SUSY parameter $\alpha$ which distinguishes different choices of the kinetic operator $\widehat{T}_{\alpha}$ and some of the mostly used forms are reported in table 1. We have also observed the occurrence of an accidental symmetry under the $\mathbb{Z}
_{2}$-transformation if the special value $\alpha=1/2$ is the unique fixed point of this transformation and proved that this point is the most suitable choice under this set. This last comment may be the most subtle idea in our paper because it suggests that the $\mathbb{Z}
_{2}$ action is rather simple for explaining the origin of the very special ordering $\widehat{T}_{1/2}=\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{U(x)}\widehat{P}U(x)\widehat
{P}\sqrt{U(x)}$, due to the special feature of the point $\alpha=1/2$. We have seen that there is another remarkable property concerning the fixed point, that is the operator $\widehat{\mathcal{Z}}$ which implements the $\mathbb{Z}
_{2}$ action acts as $\mathcal{Q}_{1/2}$ if $\alpha=1/2$, however it plays the role of an intertwiner operator between $\mathcal{Q}_{\alpha}$ and $\mathcal{Q}_{1-\alpha}$ for each $\alpha\neq1/2$ of the set $\mathfrak{S}_{\alpha_{n}}$.
We have constructed PDM CS in the Klauder-Perelomov’s sense through the exact SUSY symmetry and proved that the $\mathbb{Z}
_{2}$ action acts on them as a functional factor as long as $\alpha\neq1/2$. Finally we have also shown that the fixed point has another remarkable effect; its associated PDM CS saturate the generalized position-momentum uncertainty relation, while this latter is minimized for $\alpha\neq1/2$. A quite important result of this minimization is that the sign of the superpotential $\mathcal{W}_{\alpha}(x)$ is entirely determined.
[99]{}
B. Mielnik, J. Math. Phys. **25,** 3387 (1984).
M. M. Nieto, Phys. Lett. **145B**, 208 (1984).
S. H. Dong, *Factorization Method in Quantum Mechanics* (The Netherlands, Springer, 2007) and references therein.
K. Chadan and P. C. Sabatier, *Inverse Problems in Quantum Scattering Theory* (Springer, Berlin, 1977).
F. Cooper, A. Khare and U. Sukhatme, Phys. Rep. **251,** 267 (1995).
F. Iachello, *Lie Algebra and Applications*. Lect. Notes Phys. 708 (Springer, Berlin, 2006).
R. Bravo and M. S. Plyushchay, Phys. Rev. D **93,** 105023 (2016) and references therein.
J.-M. Lévy-Lebland, Phys. Rev. A **52,** 1845 (1995); Eur. J. Phys. **13,** 215 (1992).
B. Roy and P. Roy, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. **35,** 3961 (2002).
R. Koç and M. Koka, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. **36**, 8105 (2003).
B. Bagchi, B. Banerjee, C. Quesne and V. M. Tkachuk, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. **38,** 2929 (2005).
A. Gunguly and L. M. Nieto, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. **40,** 7265 (2007).
A. A. Suzko and A. Schulze-Halberg, Phys. Lett. A **372**, 5865 (2008).
S.-A. Yahiaoui and M. Bentaiba, Int. J. Theor. Phys. **48,** 315 (2009).
B. Midya and B. Roy, Phys. Lett. A **373,** 4117 (2009).
G. Lévai and O. Özer, J. Math. Phys. **51**, 092103 (2010).
S. H. Mazharimousavi, Phys. Rev. A **85,** 034102 (2012).
P. Ring and P. Schuck, *The Nuclear Many Body Problems* (Springer, New York, 1980), p. 211.
C. Quesne and V. M. Tkachuk, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. **37,** 4267 (2004).
L. Jiang, L.-Z. Yi and C.-S. Jia, Phys. Lett. A **345,** 279 (2005).
O. Mustafa and S. H. Mazharimousavi, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. **41,** 244020 (2008) and references therein.
P. Harrison, *Quantum Wells, Wires and Dots. Theoretical and Computational Physics of Semiconductor Nanostructures* (John Wiley & Sons, LTD, 2005).
G. Bastard, *Wave Mechanics Applied to Semiconductor Heterostructures* (Les Ulis: Éditions de physique, 1998).
O. von Roos, Phys. Rev. B **27,** 7547 (1983).
E. Schrödinger, Naturwiss **14**, 664 (1926).
R. J. Glauber, Phys. Rev. **131**, 2766 (1963).
D. J. Fernández, V. Hussin and L. M. Nieto, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. **27,** 3547 (1994).
J.-P. Gazeau, *Coherent States in quantum Mechanics* (Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 2009).
S.-A. Yahiaoui and M. Bentaiba, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. **47,** 025301 (2014); J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. **45,** 444034 (2012).
V. C. Ruby and M. Senthilvelan, J. Math. Phys. **51,** 52106 (2010).
S. Cruz y Cruz and O. Rosas-Ortiz, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. **42,** 185205 (2009); Int. J. Theor. Phys. **50,** 2201 (2011).
N. Amir and S. Iqbal, J. Math. Phys. **56**, 062108 (2015); Commun. Theor. Phys. **66,** 41 (2016).
M. S. Kumar and A. Khare, Phys. Lett. A **217,** 73 (1996).
R. A. Morrow and K. R. Brownstein, Phys. Rev. B **30,** 678 (1984).
Q. J. Zhu and H. Kroemer, Phys. Rev. B **27,** 3519 (1983).
D. J. BenDaniel and C. B. Duke, Phys. Rev. B **152**, 683 (1966).
M.-A. Fiset and V. Hussin, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. **624,** 012016 (2015)
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Secure multiparty computations enable the distribution of so-called shares of sensitive data to multiple parties such that the multiple parties can effectively process the data while being unable to glean much information about the data (at least not without collusion among all parties to put back together all the shares). Thus, the parties may conspire to send all their processed results to a trusted third party (perhaps the data provider) at the conclusion of the computations, with only the trusted third party being able to view the final results. Secure multiparty computations for privacy-preserving machine-learning turn out to be possible using solely standard floating-point arithmetic, at least with a carefully controlled leakage of information less than the loss of accuracy due to roundoff, all backed by rigorous mathematical proofs of worst-case bounds on information loss and numerical stability in finite-precision arithmetic. Numerical examples illustrate the high performance attained on commodity off-the-shelf hardware for generalized linear models, including ordinary linear least-squares regression, binary and multinomial logistic regression, probit regression, and Poisson regression.'
author:
- |
Chuan Guo, Awni Hannun, Brian Knott, Laurens van der Maaten,\
Mark Tygert, and Ruiyu Zhu
bibliography:
- 'crypto.bib'
title: 'Secure multiparty computations in floating-point arithmetic'
---
Introduction
============
Passwords and long account and credit-card numbers are the dominant security measures, not because they are the most secure, but because they are the most conveniently implemented. Some data demands the highest levels of security and privacy protections, while for other data processing efficiency and sheer convenience are paramount — some security is better than none (which tends to be the alternative). The present paper proposes privacy-preserving, secure multiparty computations performed solely in the IEEE standard double-precision arithmetic that dominates most platforms for numerical computations. The scheme amounts to lossy, leaky cryptography, with the loss of accuracy and leakage of information carefully controlled via mathematical analysis and rigorous proofs. Information loss balances against roundoff error, providing perfect privacy at a specified finite precision of computations.
Perfect privacy at a given precision is when the information leakage is less than the specified precision (precision being limited due to roundoff error). The present paper provides perfect privacy at a precision of about $10^{-5}$ in the IEEE standard double-precision arithmetic of [@ieee]; observing the encrypted outputs leaks no more than a millionth of a bit per input real number, whereas roundoff alters the results by around one part in a hundred thousand. In a megapixel image, the encrypted image would leak at most a single bit — enough information to discern whether the original image is dim or bright, perhaps, but no more. Performing all computations in floating-point arithmetic facilitates implementations on existing hardware, including both commodity central-processing units (CPUs) and graphics-processing units (GPUs), whereas alternative methods based on integer modular arithmetic could require difficult specialized optimizations to attain performance on par with the scheme proposed in this paper (even then, schemes based on integer modular arithmetic would have to contend with tricky issues of discretization and precision in order to handle the real numbers required for machine learning and statistics).
The algorithms and analysis consider the traditional [*honest-but-curious*]{} model of threats: we assume that the multiple parties follow the agreed-upon protocols correctly but may try to glean information from data they observe; the secure multiparty computations prevent any of the parties from gleaning much information without all parties conspiring together to break the scheme.
Our analysis provides no guarantees about what information leaks when all parties collude to reveal encrypted results. If all parties conspire to collect together all their shares or send them to a collecting agency, then the unified collection will reveal the secrets of whatever results get collected. If the collected information results from training a machine-learned model, then revealing the trained model can compromise the confidentiality of the data used to train that model, unless the model is differentially private. Ensuring privacy even after revealing the results of secure multiparty computations is complementary to securing the intermediate computations. The present paper only guarantees the privacy of the intermediate computations, providing no guarantees about what leaks when all parties collude to reveal the final results of their secure multiparty computations.
This paper has the following structure: Section \[smpc\] introduces secure multiparty computations in floating-point arithmetic, reviewing classical methods such as additive sharing and Beaver multiplication. Section \[leakage\] upper-bounds the amount of information that can leak, referring to Appendices \[mainproof\], \[simpleproof\], and \[detailed\] for full, rigorous proofs. Section \[polynomials\] reviews techniques for efficient, highly accurate polynomial approximations to many real functions of interest (notably those in Table \[polytable\]). Section \[numex\] validates an implementation on synthetic examples and illustrates its performance on real measured data, too; the examples apply various generalized linear models, including ordinary linear least-squares regression, binary and multinomial logistic regression, probit regression, and Poisson regression. Appendices \[chebappendix\], \[sgdrev\], and \[glmrev\] very briefly review Chebyshev series, minibatched stochastic gradient descent, and generalized linear models, respectively — readers may wish to refer to those appendices as concise refreshers.
Throughout, all numbers and random variables are real-valued, even when not stated explicitly.
Secure multiparty computations {#smpc}
==============================
Secure multiparty computations allow holders of sensitive data to securely distribute so-called shares of their data to multiple parties such that the multiple parties can process the data without revealing the data and can only reconstruct the data by colluding to put back together (that is, to sum) all the shares. We briefly review an arithmetic scheme in the present section. The arithmetic scheme supports addition and multiplication, as discussed in the present section, as well as functions that polynomials can approximate accurately, as discussed in Section \[polynomials\] below. To be concrete and simplify the presentation, we focus first on secure two-party computations, in Subsection \[two-party\], then sketch an extension to several parties in Subsection \[several\].
Two-party computations {#two-party}
----------------------
We can hide a matrix $X$ by masking with a random matrix $Y$, so that one party holds $X-Y$ and the other party holds $Y$. Given other data, say $U$, and another random matrix $V$ hiding $U$, so that one party holds $U-V$ and the other party holds $V$, the parties can then independently form the sums $(U-V)+(X-Y)$ and $V+Y$ required to reconstruct $U+X = (U-V)+(X-Y)+(V+Y)$ if all these matrices have the same dimensions. This is known as “additive sharing,” as described, for example, by [@bogdanov-laur-willemson]. Additive sharing thus supports privacy-preserving addition of $U$ and $X$.
As introduced by [@beaver], used by [@bogdanov-laur-willemson], and reviewed in Table \[Beaver\], privacy-preserving multiplication of $U$ and $X$ is also possible whenever $U$ and $X$ are matrices such that their product $UX$ is well-defined. Summing across the two parties in line 10 of Table \[Beaver\] would yield $PR + (U-P)R + P(X-R) + (U-P)(X-R) = UX$, as desired. Notice that $U-P$ and $X-R$ in lines 8 and 9 of Table \[Beaver\] are still masked by the random matrices $P$ and $R$ whose values are unknown to the two parties. The all-reduce in lines 8 and 9 requires the parties to conspire and distribute to each other the results of summing their respective shares of lines 6 and 7, but does not require the parties to get shares of any secret distributed data — that was necessary only for the original data $U$ and $X$ being multiplied (and this “original” data can be the result of prior secure multiparty computations). Also, all values on lines 3–5 are independent of $U$ and $X$, so can be precomputed and stored on disk. As with addition, multiplication via the Beaver scheme never requires securely distributing secret shares, so long as the input data and so-called Beaver triples $(P, R, PR)$ from Table \[Beaver\] have already been securely distributed into shares. The secure distribution of shares is completely separate from the processing of the resulting distributed data set. Communication among the parties during processing is solely via the all-reduce in lines 8 and 9.
Table \[Beaver\]’s scheme also works with matrix multiplication replaced by convolution of sequences.
line source party 1 party 2
------ --------------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------
1 distributed data $U-V$ $V$
2 distributed data $X-Y$ $Y$
3 read from disk $P-Q$ $Q$
4 read from disk $R-S$ $S$
5 read from disk $PR-T$ $T$
6 line 1 $-$ line 3 $(U-V)-(P-Q)$ $V-Q$
7 line 2 $-$ line 4 $(X-Y)-(R-S)$ $Y-S$
8 all reduce line 6 $U-P$ $U-P$
9 all reduce line 7 $X-R$ $X-R$
10 line 5 $+$ (line 8)(line 4) $+$ $(PR-T) + (U-P)(R-S)$ $+$ $T + (U-P)S$ $+$
(line 3)(line 9) $+$ $(P-Q)(X-R)$ $+$ $Q(X-R)$ $+$
(line 8)(line 9)/2 $(U-P)(X-R)/2$ $(U-P)(X-R)/2$
: Ledgers for two parties in a Beaver multiplication of $U$ and $X$[]{data-label="Beaver"}
Table \[Beaver\] simplifies to Table \[squaring\] for the case when $U$ and $X$ are scalars such that $U = X$. Summing across the two parties in line 6 of Table \[squaring\] yields $P^2 + 2P(X-P) + (X-P)^2 = X^2$, as desired. Notice that this recovers $X^2$ from a sum involving several terms as large as $P^2$; if $|X| \le 1 < 3 < \gamma$ and $|P| \le \gamma$ (as well as $|T| \le \gamma^2$, where $T$ cancels when summing across the two parties in line 6), then we obtain $X^2$ to precision upper-bounded by $6\gamma^2 \cdot {\varepsilon}$, where ${\varepsilon}$ denotes the machine precision (${\varepsilon}$ is approximately $2.2 \times 10^{-16}$ in the IEEE standard double-precision arithmetic of [@ieee]). Theorem \[Beaverdetails\] proves that the information leakage may be as large as $6/\gamma$ if $P$, $Q$, and $Y$ are distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma, \gamma]$ and $T$ is distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma^2, \gamma^2]$ (similarly, $P$, $Q$, $R$, $S$, $V$, and $Y$ in Table \[Beaver\] should be distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma, \gamma]$ while $T$ should be distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma^2, \gamma^2]$). Balancing the roundoff bound with the information bound requires $6\gamma^2 \cdot {\varepsilon}= 6/\gamma$, so that $\gamma = 1/\sqrt[3]{{\varepsilon}}$ (so $\gamma \approx 10^5$ for IEEE standard double-precision arithmetic).
line source party 1 party 2
------ ------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------ --------------------------
1 distributed data $X-Y$ $Y$
2 read from disk $P-Q$ $Q$
3 read from disk $P^2-T$ $T$
4 line 1 $-$ line 2 $(X-Y)-(P-Q)$ $Y-Q$
5 all reduce line 4 $X-P$ $X-P$
6 line 3 $+$ (line 2)(line 5) $\cdot$ 2 $+$ $(P^2-T) + (P-Q)(X-P) \cdot 2$ $+$ $T + Q(X-P) \cdot 2$ $+$
(line 5)$^2$/2 $(X-P)^2/2$ $(X-P)^2/2$
: Ledgers for two parties in a Beaver squaring of $X$[]{data-label="squaring"}
Several-party computations {#several}
--------------------------
Extending Subsection \[two-party\] beyond two parties is straightforward. The steps in the algorithms, summarized in the columns labeled “source” in Tables \[Beaver\] and \[squaring\], stay as they were (the division by 2 in the last line of Table \[Beaver\] and in the last line of Table \[squaring\] becomes division by the number of parties). Distributing additive shares of data across several parties works as follows: for each piece of data to be distributed (in machine learning, a “piece” may naturally be a sample or example from the collection of all samples or examples), we generate $n$ independent and identically distributed random matrices $Y_1$, $Y_2$, …, $Y_n$, where $n$ is the number of parties (the number of parties need not relate to the total number of pieces, samples, or examples of data being distributed). We randomly permute the parties and then distribute to them (in that random order) $X + Y_1 - Y_2$, $Y_2 - Y_3$, $Y_3 - Y_4$, …, $Y_{n-1} - Y_n$, $Y_n - Y_1$, where $X$ is the piece of data being shared. We generate different independent random variables and random permutations for different pieces of data. The distribution of the difference between independent random matrices drawn from the same distribution is the same for each party, making this an especially simple generalization to the case of several parties. Distributing additive shares to several parties leaks somewhat more information than limiting to only two parties; the present paper focuses on the case of two parties for simplicity.
Information leakage {#leakage}
===================
This section bounds the amount of information-theoretic entropy that can leak when adding noise for masking, drawing heavily on canonical concepts from information theory, as detailed, for example, by [@cover-thomas].
We denote by $X$ the scalar random variable that we want to hide, and by $Y$ an independent variate that we add to $X$ to effect the hiding. To simplify the analysis, we assume that the distribution of $Y$ arises from a probability density function. Then, revealing $X+Y$ leaks the following number of bits of information about $X$: $$\label{mutual}
H(X) - H(X \;|\; X+Y) = I(X;\; X+Y) = H(X+Y) - H(X+Y \;|\; X) = H(X+Y) - H(Y).$$ In the left-hand side of (\[mutual\]), $H$ denotes the Shannon entropy measured in bits if the distribution of $X$ is discrete, and the differential entropy measured in bits (rather than nats) if the distribution of $X$ is continuous. In the right-hand sides of (\[mutual\]), $H$ denotes the differential entropy measured in bits (not nats); $I$ denotes the mutual information. Given a prior on $X$, Bayes’ Rule yields the full posterior distribution for $X$ given $X+Y$; the information gain (or loss or leakage) defined in (\[mutual\]) is a summary statistic characterizing the divergence of the posterior from the prior.
Recall that mutual information is the fundamental limit on how much information can be gleaned from observing the outputs of a noisy channel; in our setting, we purposefully add noise in order to reveal only the results of communications via a (very) noisy channel, purposefully obscuring with noise the signal containing data being kept confidential and secure.
The information leakage is at most $\beta/\gamma$ bits if $|X| \le \beta < \gamma$ and $Y$ is distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma, \gamma]$, as stated in the following theorem and proven in Appendix \[mainproof\]:
\[infoleak\] Suppose that $X$ and $Y$ are independent scalar random variables and $\beta$ and $\gamma$ are positive real numbers such that $|X| \le \beta < \gamma$ and $Y$ is distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma, \gamma]$. Then, the information leaked about $X$ from observing $X+Y$ satisfies $$\label{worst}
I(X; X+Y) \le \frac{\beta}{\gamma},$$ where $I$ denotes the mutual information between $X$ and $X+Y$, measured in bits (not nats); the mutual information satisfies (\[mutual\]), which expresses $I$ as a change in entropy. The inequality in (\[worst\]) is an equality when $X$ is $\beta$ times a Rademacher variate.
The following theorem, proven in Appendix \[simpleproof\], states that the information leakage from hiding data multiple times is at most the sum of the information leaking from each individual hiding.
\[chaining\] Suppose that $X$, $Y$, and $Z$ are independent scalar random variables. Then, $$\label{subadditivity}
I(X;\, X+Y,\, X+Z) \le I(X;\, X+Y) + I(X;\, X+Z),$$ where $I$ denotes the mutual information.
The procedures of Tables \[Beaver\] and \[squaring\] can also leak information, but not much — consider Table \[squaring\]: Party 2 observes nothing about the input data $X$ other than $X-P$, and Theorem \[infoleak\] bounds how much information that reveals about $X$. Party 1 observes $X-Y$, $P-Q$, $P^2-T$, $(X-Y)-(P-Q)$, $X-P$, and $(P^2-T) + 2(P-Q)(X-P) + (X-P)^2/2$. The following theorem, proven in Appendix \[detailed\], bounds how much information about $X$ these observations reveal.
\[Beaverdetails\] Suppose that $X$, $Y$, $P$, $Q$, and $T$ are independent scalar random variables and $\gamma$ is a positive real number such that $|X| \le 1 < 3 < \gamma$, the random variable $T$ is distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma^2, \gamma^2]$, and $Y$, $P$, and $Q$ are distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma, \gamma]$. Then, $$\begin{gathered}
\label{mainsquare}
I\Bigl(X;\,
X-Y,\, P-Q,\, P^2-T,\, (X-Y)-(P-Q),\, X-P,\,
(P^2-T) + 2(P-Q)(X-P) + (X-P)^2/2\Bigr) \\
\le \frac{5}{\gamma} + \frac{1}{\gamma^2},\end{gathered}$$ where $I$ denotes the mutual information measured in bits, and its arguments (aside from $X$) are the observations in Table \[squaring\] under the column for “party 1.”
The following theorem states the classical data-processing inequality:
\[dataproc\] Suppose that random matrices $X$ and $Z$ are conditionally independent given a random matrix $Y$. Then, $$I(X; Z) \le I(X; Y)$$ and $$I(X; Z) \le I(Y; Z),$$ where $I$ denotes the mutual information.
The following is a corollary of Theorem \[dataproc\]:
Suppose that $X$ and $Y$ are random matrices and $f$ is a deterministic function. Then, $$\label{complicated}
I(X; f(Y)) \le I(X; Y),$$ where $I$ denotes the mutual information.
Combining (\[mutual\]) and (\[complicated\]) shows that even very complicated manipulations such as the iterations in Section \[polynomials\] below cause no further information leakage, despite changing the added noise in some highly nonlinear fashion: (\[complicated\]) guarantees that no information leaks beyond the individual maskings obeying (\[worst\])–(\[mainsquare\]), so long as the manipulations are deterministic algorithms (or randomized algorithms with randomization independent of the data being masked).
Polynomial approximations {#polynomials}
=========================
Polynomials can approximate many functions of interest in machine learning, allowing the accurate approximation of those functions using only additions and multiplications. Section \[smpc\] above discusses schemes that multiple parties can use to perform additions and multiplications securely. The present section describes polynomial approximations useful in tandem with the schemes of Section \[smpc\]. Subsection \[Newton\] leverages the method of Newton and Raphson. Subsection \[Chebyshev\] uses Chebyshev series. Subsection \[softmax\] utilizes Padé approximation, in the method of scaling and squaring. The method of Newton and Raphson tends to be the most efficient, while Chebyshev series apply to a much broader class of functions. The method of scaling and squaring is for exponentiation. Table \[polytable\] lists the functions that each subsection treats.
$f(x)$ Name Subsection
---------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------ ---------------
${\mathop{\mathrm{sgn}}}(x)$ sign or signum \[Newton\]
$|x| = x {\mathop{\mathrm{sgn}}}(x)$ absolute value \[Newton\]
$1/x$ reciprocal \[Newton\]
$1/\sqrt{x}$ raise to $-1/2$ power \[Newton\]
$x^{-1/8}$ raise to $-1/8$ power \[Newton\]
$\operatorname{ReLU}(x) = \max(x, 0)$ rectified linear unit \[Newton\]
$\tanh(x)$ hyperbolic tangent \[Chebyshev\]
$1/(1 + \exp(-x))$ logistic \[Chebyshev\]
$\int_{-\infty}^x \exp(-y^2/2) \, dy \bigm/ \sqrt{2\pi}$ CDF of standard normal \[Chebyshev\]
$\exp(x)$ exponential \[softmax\]
: Subsections providing polynomial approximations to various functions[]{data-label="polytable"}
Newton iterations {#Newton}
-----------------
Various iterations derived from the Newton method for finding zeros of functions allow the computation of functions such as ${\mathop{\mathrm{sgn}}}(x)$, $1/x$, and $1/\sqrt{x}$ using only additions and multiplications (not requiring any divisions or square roots); in this subsection, $x$ denotes a real number.
According to [@kenney-laub], the Newton-Schulz iterations for computing ${\mathop{\mathrm{sgn}}}(x)$ are $$\label{sgn}
y_{k+1} = y_k (3 - y_k^2) / 2,$$ with $y_0 = x / \gamma$, where $|x| \le \gamma$ (and the desired loss of accuracy relative to the machine precision is less than a factor of $\gamma$).
According to [@kenney-laub], the Schulz (or Newton) iterations for computing $1/x$ when $x>0$ are $$\label{inverse}
y_{k+1} = y_k (2 - x y_k),$$ with $y_0 = 1$. Rescaling $x$ (and then adjusting the resulting reciprocal) is important to align with the domain of convergence and high accuracy illustrated in Figure \[reciprocal\]; and similar observations pertain to the rest of the iterations of the present subsection. In Subsection \[softmax\] below, $x$ can range from 1 to the number of terms in the softmax (so requires scaling by the reciprocal of the number of terms in the softmax).
According to [@guo-higham], the Newton iterations for computing $1/\sqrt{x}$ when $x>0$ are $$\label{invs}
y_{k+1} = y_k (3 - x y_k^2) / 2,$$ with $y_0 = 1$; similarly, the Newton iterations for computing $x^{-1/8}$ when $x>0$ are $$\label{inv8}
y_{k+1} = y_k (9 - x y_k^8) / 8,$$ with $y_0 = 1$.
Figures \[reciprocal\]–\[absval\] illustrate the errors obtained from (\[sgn\])–(\[inv8\]); note that the scale of the vertical axes in Figures \[reciprocal\]–\[inv8root\] involve 1e–16. In the figures, the tilde denotes the approximation computed via the Newton iterations (\[sgn\])–(\[inv8\]); for example, $\widetilde{1/x}$ approximates $1/x$.
A common operation in the deep learning of [@lecun-chopra-hadsell-ranzato-huang] and others is the rectified linear unit $$\label{relu}
\operatorname{ReLU}(x) = \max(x, 0) = \frac{x (1 + {\mathop{\mathrm{sgn}}}(x))}{2},$$ easily obtained from (\[sgn\]).
Chebyshev series {#Chebyshev}
----------------
Chebyshev series provide efficient approximations to smooth functions using only additions and multiplications. The approximations are especially efficient for odd functions, such as $$\label{tanh}
f(x) = \tanh(x) = \frac{\exp(x) - \exp(-x)}{\exp(x) + \exp(-x)},$$ $$\label{logit}
f(x) = \frac{1}{1 + \exp(-x)} - \frac{1}{2} = \tanh(x/2) / 2,$$ and $$\label{probit}
f(x) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \int_{-\infty}^x \exp(-y^2/2) \, dy - \frac{1}{2};$$ in this subsection, $x$ denotes a real number. The function in (\[tanh\]) is the hyperbolic tangent. The function in (\[logit\]) is a constant plus the standard logistic function, familiar from logistic regression. The function in (\[probit\]) is a constant plus the cumulative distribution function for the standard normal distribution, familiar from probit regression. Performing logistic regression or probit regression by maximizing the log-likelihood relies on the evaluation of (\[logit\]) or (\[probit\]), respectively, at least when using a gradient-based optimizer, the method of Newton and Raphson, or the method of scoring. Details about these functions and regressions are available, for example, in the monograph of [@mccullagh-nelder].
Appendix \[chebappendix\] reviews algorithms for computing approximations via Chebyshev series of odd functions, with accuracy determined via two parameters, $n$ and $z$, where the degree of the (odd) approximating polynomial is $2n-1$, and $[-z, z]$ is the interval over which the approximation is valid. Setting $n = 50$ and $z = 10$ yields 7-digit accuracy for the approximation of (\[tanh\]); setting $n = 22$ and $z = 5$ yields 4-digit accuracy for the approximation of (\[logit\]); and setting $n = 34$ and $z = 10$ yields 5-digit accuracy for the approximation of (\[probit\]). In Section \[numex\] below, we err on the side of caution, defaulting to $n = 60$ and $z = 20$ for (\[tanh\]) and (\[logit\]) and to $n = 50$ and $z = 20$ for (\[probit\]), while also discussing the results from other choices.
Softmax
-------
As reviewed, for example, by [@lecun-chopra-hadsell-ranzato-huang], a common operation in machine learning is the so-called “softmax” transforming $n$ non-positive real numbers $x_1$, $x_2$, …, $x_n$ into the $n$ positive real numbers $\exp(x_1)/Z$, $\exp(x_2)/Z$, …, $\exp(x_n)/Z$, where $Z = Z(x_1, x_2, \dots, x_n) = \sum_{k=1}^n \exp(x_k)$. These are the probabilities at unit temperature in the Gibbs distribution associated with energies $-x_1$, $-x_2$, …, $-x_n$, where $Z$ is the partition function. Once we have computed the exponentials, summation yields $Z$ directly; the secure multiparty computations of Section \[smpc\] support such summation. Division by $Z$ is available via the iterations in (\[inverse\]) of Subsection \[Newton\].
Thus, given real numbers $x$ and $\beta$ such that $-\beta \le x \le 0$, and a real number ${\varepsilon}$ such that $0 < {\varepsilon}< 1$, we would like to calculate $\exp(x)$ to precision ${\varepsilon}$. We use the method of scaling and squaring, as reviewed, for example, by [@higham]. If we let $n$ be the least integer that is at least $\log_2(2\beta^2/{\varepsilon})$, then squaring $\exp(x/2^n)$ yields $\exp(x/2^{n-1})$, squaring $\exp(x/2^{n-1})$ yields $\exp(x/2^{n-2})$, and so on, so that $n$ successive squarings will yield $\exp(x)$; further, $1 + x/2^n$ approximates $\exp(x/2^n)$: $$\left| \exp(x/2^n) - 1 - x/2^n\right|
= \left| \sum_{k=2}^{\infty} (x/2^n)^k/k! \right|
= (x/2^n)^2 \left| \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} (x/2^n)^k/(k+2)! \right|
\le (x/2^n)^2 \exp(x/2^n),$$ that is, $$1 + x/2^n = (1 + \delta) \exp(x/2^n), \quad |\delta| \le (x/2^n)^2,$$ while $$\left|(1 + \delta)^{2^n} - 1\right|
\le \left(1 + (x/2^n)^2\right)^{2^n} - 1
\le \left(\exp((x/2^n)^2)\right)^{2^n} - 1
= \exp(x^2/2^n) - 1 \le 2x^2/2^n \le {\varepsilon},$$ so $n$ successive squarings of $1 + x/2^n$ yields $\exp(x)$ to relative accuracy ${\varepsilon}$ (or better). We use $n = 20$ successive squarings in all numerical experiments of Section \[numex\] below.
Given a real number $\gamma > 3\beta$, less than $6n\beta/\gamma$ bits can leak from computing the approximation to $\exp(x)$ if we add to $1 + x/2^n$ a random variable distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma/2^n, \gamma/2^n]$, and double the width of the added noise upon each of the $n$ squarings, in accord with Theorems \[infoleak\], \[chaining\], and \[Beaverdetails\] of Section \[leakage\].
Clearly, we can enforce that a real number $x$ be non-positive by applying $-\operatorname{ReLU}(-x)$ from (\[relu\]). Computing the softmax of real numbers that may not necessarily be non-positive is also possible, even without risk of leaking any information beyond the case for non-positive numbers. Indeed, we can replace each real number $x_j$ with $x_j - \sum_{k=1}^n \operatorname{ReLU}(x_k)$, without altering the probability distribution produced by the softmax; we perform such replacement in our implementation of multinomial logistic regression. When implementing a softmax for multinomial logistic regression, we include a negative offset in the bias for the input to the softmax. That is, we adjust the bias to be a constant amount less, constant over all classes in the classification. Subtracting such a positive constant $C$ tends to make $x_1 - C$, $x_2 - C$, …, $x_n - C$ negative even before replacing each real number $x_j - C$ with $x_j - C - \sum_{k=1}^n \operatorname{ReLU}(x_k - C)$. Subtracting a constant $C$ reduces the sum $\sum_{k=1}^n \operatorname{ReLU}(x_k - C)$; without subtracting the constant, the sum $\sum_{k=1}^n \operatorname{ReLU}(x_k)$ can adversely impact accuracy if the sum becomes too large. Subtracting the constant $C$ reduces accuracy by a factor of up to $\exp(C)$; we set $C = 5$ (so $\exp(C) \approx 148$ — a tad more than two digits) for our numerical experiments reported in the following section, Section \[numex\].
Numerical examples {#numex}
==================
Via several numerical experiments, this section illustrates the performance of the scheme proposed above. All examples reported in the present section use two parties for the private computations. Subsection \[several\] outlines an extension to several parties. The terminology “in private” refers to computations fully encrypted via the scheme introduced above, while “in public” refers to computations in plaintext. Subsection \[synthetic\] validates the scheme on examples for which the correct answer is known by construction. Subsection \[realdata\] applies the scheme to classical data sets.
All examples use minibatched stochastic gradient descent to maximize the log-likelihood under the corresponding generalized linear model, at the constant learning rates specified below (except where noted for probit regression). Appendix \[sgdrev\] briefly reviews stochastic gradient descent with minibatches and weight decay; Appendix \[glmrev\] briefly reviews generalized linear models.
In all cases, we learn (that is, fit) not only the vector of weights to which the design matrix gets applied, but also a constant offset known as the “bias” in the literature on stochastic gradient descent. Thus, the linear function of the weight (fitted parameter) vector $w$ in the generalized linear model is actually the affine transform $Aw + c$, where $A$ is the design matrix and $c$ is the bias vector whose entries are all the same constant offset, learned or fitted together with $w$ during the iterations of stochastic gradient descent (whereas $A$ stays fixed during the iterations). In multinomial logistic regression, the entries of the bias vector $c$ are constant for each class (constant over all covariates and data samples), but the constant may be different for different classes.
In the subsections below, we view linear least-squares regression as a generalized linear model with the link function being the identity; equivalently, we take the parametric family defining the statistical model to be an affine transform of the vector of weights (parameters) plus independent and identically distributed normal random variables. The log-likelihood of a such a model summed over all samples in the design matrix $A$ is simply a constant minus $\|Aw+c-b\|_2^2/2$, where $\| \cdot \|_2$ denotes the Euclidean norm, $w$ is the vector of weights (parameters), $Aw+c$ is the affine transform defined by the design matrix $A$ and bias vector $c$, and $b$ is the vector of targets. For simplicity, when we report the “negative log-likelihood” or “loss” in plots, averaged over the $m$ samples in the design matrix $A$, we report $\|Aw+c-b\|_2^2 / m$, ignoring the constant and factor of 2.
The implementation of encrypted computations builds on CrypTen of [@crypten], which in turn builds on PyTorch. The implementation uses only IEEE standard double-precision arithmetic. All experiments ran on one of Facebook’s computer clusters for research, which enables rapid communication between the multiple parties. In actual deployments, communications between the multiple parties are likely to have high latency, dramatically impacting the speed of the multiparty computations. The speed of such communications would vary significantly between different applications and arrangements, likely requiring separate analyses and characterizations of computational efficiency for different deployments. Yet, while timings are fairly unique to the particular computational environment, the accuracies we report below should be fully representative for most applications.
Validations on synthetic data {#synthetic}
-----------------------------
For the synthetic examples discussed in the following sub-subsections, we set $m = 64$ and $n = 8$ for the numbers of rows and columns in the design matrices being constructed. Figure \[synthwidths\] displays the discrepancy of the computed results from the ideal solution (the ideal is known a-priori to two-digit accuracy by construction in these synthetic examples) as a function of the maximum value $\gamma$ of the random variable distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma, \gamma]$. In accordance with the analysis in Subsection \[two-party\] above, the figure reports that $\gamma = 10^5$ works well, yielding the roughly two-digit agreement that would be optimal for the synthetic data sets constructed in the following sub-subsections, so we set $\gamma = 10^5$ for the remainder of the paper. The logistic and probit regressions reported below both rely on the Chebyshev approximations reviewed in Subsection \[Chebyshev\] above, with the approximations being valid over the interval $[-20, 20]$ (so $z = 20$ in the notation of Subsection \[Chebyshev\]). Figure \[synthterms\] indicates that the degree 40 approximations suffice for optimal accuracy, while even degrees 6–12 produce reasonably accurate results (accurate enough for most applications in machine learning for prediction, in which only residuals or matching targets matters). For the remainder of the paper, we use 120 terms in the Chebyshev approximation of the logistic function (or $\tanh$), and 100 terms in the Chebyshev approximation of the inverse probit (or the cumulative distribution function of a standard normal variate). For both Figures \[synthwidths\] and \[synthterms\], we trained for 10,000 iterations with 8 samples in each iteration’s minibatch, thus sweeping through a random permutation of the full synthetic data set 1,250 times (each sweep is known as an “epoch”). The following sub-subsections detail the construction of our synthetic data sets.
### Linear least-squares regression (identity link)
We form the design matrix $A$ and target vector $b$ as follows. We orthonormalize the columns of an $m \times (n + 1)$ matrix whose entries are all independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.)standard normal variates to obtain an $m \times n$ matrix $A$ whose columns are orthonormal ($A$ is the leftmost block of $n$ columns) and an $m \times 1$ column vector $v$ that is orthogonal to all columns of $A$ and such that $\| v \|_2 = 1$ ($v$ is the remaining column). We define the ideal weights $w$ to be an $n \times 1$ column vector whose entries are i.i.d. standard normal variates. We define $b$ to be the $m \times 1$ column vector $$b = Aw + 10 v$$ so that by construction $$\min_x \| Ax - b \|_2^2 = \min_x \| Ax - Aw \|_2^2 + \| 10 v \|_2^2
= \| 10 v \|_2^2 = (10)^2.$$ Needless to say, obtaining $x = w$ drives $\| Ax - b \|_2$ to its minimum, 10.
After 10,000 iterations (which is 1,250 epochs) with 8 samples per minibatch at the learning rate $3 \times 10^{-2}$, the residuals $\| Ax + c - b \|_2$ obtained by training in public and by training in private are both equal to 10.0 to three significant figures. For training in private (training in public yields very similar results), the Euclidean norm of the difference between the ideal $w$ and the computed weight vector $x$ is 0.025 (the Euclidean norm of the difference between $w/\|w\|_2$ and $x/\|x\|_2$ is 0.004), and all entries of the vector $c$ are $-0.008$ (which is $-0.003$ when divided by the Euclidean norm of $x$); that these values are so small certifies the correctness of the training.
### Logistic regression (logit link)
We define the ideal weights $w$ to be the result of normalizing an $n \times 1$ column vector whose entries are i.i.d. standard normal variates, that is, we divide the vector whose entries are i.i.d. by its Euclidean norm, ensuring $$\label{normalization}
\|w\|_2 = 1.$$ The construction of the design matrix $A$ and target vector $t$ is more involved; readers interested only in the results and not the details of the construction may wish to skip to the last two paragraphs of the present sub-subsection.
For $j = 1$, $2$, …, $10$, we construct an $n \times 1$ column vector $v^{(j)}$ whose entries are i.i.d. standard normal variates, project off the component of $v^{(j)}$ along $w$ to obtain $u^{(j)}$, $$\label{orthogonalization}
u^{(j)} = v^{(j)} - w \sum_{k = 1}^n v^{(j)}_k w_k,$$ and set $$\label{positive}
A_{2j, k} = u^{(j)}_k + 0.02 w_k$$ and $$\label{negative}
A_{2j+1, k} = u^{(j)}_k - 0.02 w_k$$ for $k = 1$, $2$, …, $n$. For the remaining $m - 20$ rows of $A$, we use $m - 20$ rows from the result of orthonormalizing the columns of an $m \times n$ matrix whose entries are all i.i.d. standard normal variates.
We construct the $m \times 1$ column vector $$\label{matvec}
b = A w$$ and define the target classes $$\label{targets}
t_j = \operatorname{round}(\sigma(b_j)),$$ for $j = 1$, $2$, …, $m$, where “$\operatorname{round}$” rounds to the nearest integer (0 or 1) and $\sigma$ is the standard logistic function $$\label{logisticfunc}
\sigma(x) = \frac{1}{1 + \exp(-x)}.$$
Combining (\[matvec\]), (\[positive\]), (\[negative\]), (\[orthogonalization\]), and (\[normalization\]) yields $$b_{2j} = \sum_{k=1}^n A_{2j,k} w_k = 0.02$$ and $$b_{2j+1} = \sum_{k=1}^n A_{2j+1,k} w_k = -0.02$$ for $j = 1$, $2$, …, $10$. Since, for $j = 1$, $2$, …, $10$, $b_{2j}$ is slightly positive while $b_{2j+1}$ is slightly negative, the target classes $t_{2j}$ and $t_{2j+1}$ defined in (\[targets\]) will be 1 and 0, respectively, even though the difference between the corresponding $(2j)$th and $(2j+1)$th rows of $A$ is small — combining (\[positive\]), (\[negative\]), and (\[normalization\]) yields that the Euclidean norm of their difference is 0.04. The decision hyperplane separating class 0 from class 1 will thus have to pass between 10 pairs of points in $n$-dimensional space ($n = 8$), with the points in each pair very close to each other (albeit on opposite sides of the decision hyperplane). Classifying all these points correctly hence determines the hyperplane to reasonably high accuracy.
Needless to say, obtaining $x = w$ and $c = 0$ produces perfect accuracy for the logistic regression which classifies by rounding the result of (\[logisticfunc\]) applied to each entry of $Ax + c$, as then $Ax = Aw = b$, and the target classes in $t$ are the result of (\[logisticfunc\]) applied to each entry of $b$. In fact, obtaining $x$ as any positive multiple of $w$ together with $c = 0$ yields perfect accuracy — any positive multiple of a vector orthogonal to the hyperplane separating the two classes specifies that same hyperplane.
After 10,000 iterations (which is 1,250 epochs) with 8 samples per minibatch at the learning rate 3, training binary logistic regression in private (training in public produces very similar results) drives the Euclidean norm of the difference between $x/\|x\|_2$ and the ideal $w/\|w\|_2$ to 0.006 and drives every entry of $c / \|x\|_2$ to 0.006, where $c$ is the vector of offsets (whose entries are all the same). That these values are so small validates the training. The log-likelihood, averaged over all $m = 64$ samples, changes from $-0.785$ to $-0.088$ over the 10,000 iterations (needless to say, the log-likelihood cannot exceed 0). The accuracy becomes exactly perfect (that is, 1).
When training multinomial logistic regression for two classes on the same synthetic data set with the same settings, similar validation attains: for training in private (training in public yields very similar results), the Euclidean norm of the difference between the ideal $w/\|w\|_2$ and the computed $x/\|x\|_2$ becomes $0.008$, and every entry of $c/\|x\|_2$ becomes either $-0.037$ or $-0.033$, where $c$ contains the bias offsets. The log-likelihood, averaged over all $m = 64$ samples, changes from $-0.958$ to $-0.047$ over the 10,000 iterations, and the accuracy becomes perfect (that is, exactly 1). Of course, using multinomial logistic regression with a binomial distribution rather than standard logistic regression makes no sense, but these results certify the correctness of the multinomial logistic regression nonetheless.
### Probit regression (probit link) {#probitlink}
The design matrix $A$ and target vector $t$ for probit regression are the same as for logistic regression, but replacing the sigmoid $\sigma$ defined in (\[logisticfunc\]) with the inverse probit $$\label{inverseprobit}
\sigma(x) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \int_{-\infty}^x \exp(-y^2/2) \, dy,$$ which is also known as the cumulative distribution function for standard normal variates. An iteration of stochastic gradient descent involves selecting rows of the design matrix $A$ and collecting them together into a matrix $R$, as well as collecting together the corresponding targets from $t$ into a vector $s$ (the number of rows is the size of the minibatch). One iteration of stochastic gradient descent for maximizing the log-likelihood in logistic regression updates the weight vector $x$ by adding to $x$ the learning rate $\eta$ times the transpose $R^\top$ applied to the difference between the corresponding target samples $s$ and $\sigma$ defined in (\[logisticfunc\]) applied to each entry of $Rx+c$; with a minor abuse of notation, we could write that $x$ updates to $x + \eta R^\top (s-\sigma(Rx+c))$. Since the sigmoid defined in (\[inverseprobit\]) is numerically very similar to the sigmoid defined in (\[logisticfunc\]) (after scaling such that the variances of the sigmoids are the same), we use the same updating formula for probit regression as for logistic regression, but using the design matrix $A$ associated with probit regression rather than that for logistic regression, and using the sigmoid $\sigma$ associated with probit regression rather than that for logistic regression. A naïve application of stochastic gradient descent for maximizing the log-likelihood in probit regression would update the weight vector in the same direction, but scaled slightly, effectively altering the learning rate a tiny bit from iteration to iteration; we omit the extra computations required to follow the naïve method exactly.
As with logistic regression, obtaining $x = w$ and $c = 0$ produces perfect accuracy for the probit regression which classifies by rounding the result of (\[inverseprobit\]) applied to each entry of $Ax + c$. And, again, obtaining $x$ as any positive multiple of $w$ together with $c = 0$ yields perfect accuracy — any positive multiple of a vector orthogonal to the hyperplane separating the two classes specifies that same hyperplane. After 10,000 iterations (which is 1,250 epochs) with 8 samples per minibatch at the learning rate 3, training in private (training in public produces very similar results) drives the Euclidean norm of the difference between $x/\|x\|_2$ and the ideal $w/\|w\|_2$ to 0.006 and drives every entry of $c / \|x\|_2$ to 0.005, where $c$ is the vector of offsets (whose entries are all the same). That these values are so small validates the training. The log-likelihood, averaged over all $m = 64$ samples, changes from $-0.918$ to $-0.058$ over the 10,000 iterations (needless to say, the log-likelihood cannot exceed 0). The accuracy becomes precisely perfect (that is, 1).
### Poisson regression (log link)
We obtain the design matrix $A$ by orthonormalizing the columns of an $m \times n$ matrix whose entries are i.i.d. standard normal variates. We define $w$ to be 10 times the result of normalizing an $n \times 1$ column vector whose entries are i.i.d. standard normal variates, that is, we divide the vector whose entries are i.i.d. by its Euclidean norm, and then multiply by 10, ensuring $$\label{bigten}
\|w\|_2 = 10.$$ We construct the $m \times 1$ column vector $$\label{biased}
b = Aw + 3,$$ where “3” indicates the $m \times 1$ column vector whose entries are all 3. We then define the target counts $$\label{inttargets}
t_j = \operatorname{round}(\exp(b_j)),$$ for $j = 1$, $2$, …, $m$, where “$\operatorname{round}$” rounds to the nearest integer (0, 1, 2, …). Using 10 as the norm of $w$ in (\[bigten\]) ensures that the integers $t_1$, $t_2$, …, $t_m$ vary over a significant range, while using 3 in the right-hand side of (\[biased\]) ensures that, on average, half will be greater than $\exp(3) \approx 20$. Having targets that vary over a significant range and with many not too small ensures that the maximum-likelihood estimates of $w$ and 3 in Poisson regression are close to $w$ and 3 with reasonably high accuracy — the discretization from the rounding operation in (\[inttargets\]) matters little when many counts are large and spread over a range significantly greater than the discretization spacing.
After 10,000 iterations (which is 1,250 epochs) with 8 samples per minibatch at the learning rate $3 \times 10^{-3}$, training in private (training in public produces very similar results) drives the Euclidean norm of the difference between $x/\|x\|_2$ and the ideal $w/\|w\|_2$ to 0.003 and drives every entry of $c-3$ to 0.003, where $c$ is the vector of offsets (whose entries are all the same). That these values are so small certifies the correctness of the training, as does the following result: the log-likelihood for the obtained weight vector $x$ and offset $c$, averaged over all $m = 64$ samples, is $-2.349$ after the 10,000 iterations, which matches the log-likelihood for the ideal weight vector $w$ and ideal offset (3) to three-digit precision.
Performance on measured data {#realdata}
----------------------------
The following sub-subsections illustrate the application of the scheme proposed above to several benchmark data sets, namely, handwritten digits from MNIST, forest covers from covtype, and the numbers of deaths from horsekicks in corps of the Prussian army over two decades.
### MNIST
We use both binary and multinomial logistic regression, as well as probit regression, to analyze a classic data set of handwritten digits, created by Yann LeCun, Corinna Cortes, and Christopher J. C. Burges via merging two sets from the National Institute of Standards and Technology; the mixed NIST set is available at <http://yann.lecun.com/exdb/mnist> as a training set of 60,000 samples and a testing set of 10,000 examples. Each sample is a centered 28-pixel $\times$ 28-pixel grayscale image of one of the digits 0–9, together with a label for which one; pixel values can range from 0 to 1. For multinomial logistic regression we use all 10 classes (with one class per digit); for binary logistic and probit regressions, we use the 2 classes corresponding to the digits 0 and 1, for which there are 12665 samples in the training set, and 2115 samples in the testing set. We set the number of samples in a minibatch to 50 for training with all 10 classes, and to 85 for training with only the 2 classes corresponding to the digits 0 and 1. We trained for 20 epochs (that is, 24,000 iterations) at learning rate $10^{-2}$ with all 10 classes, and for 30 epochs (that is, 4,470 iterations) at learning rate $10^{-3}$ with only the 2 classes corresponding to the digits 0 and 1. During training for all 10 classes, we supplemented each iteration of stochastic gradient descent with weight decay of $10^{-3}$, which is equivalent to adding to the objective function being minimized (that is, to the negative log-likelihood) a regularization term of $10^{-3}$ times half the square of the Euclidean norm of the weights. This weight decay has negligible impact on accuracy yet ensures that the constant 5 we subtract from the bias in the stochastic gradient descent is sufficient to make almost all inputs of the softmax be non-positive, as suggested in the last paragraph of Subsection \[softmax\] above.
Figure \[mnisttrain\] plots the results of training and Figure \[mnisttest\] displays the performance of the resulting trained model when applied to the testing set, both as a function of the maximum value $\gamma$ of the random variable distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma, \gamma]$; the figures show that $\gamma = 10^5$ works well, in agreement with the analysis in Subsection \[two-party\] above. Table \[mnisttab\] details the results for $\gamma = 10^5$; training in public produces the same results at the precision reported in the table. For this application to machine learning, even $\gamma = 10^6$ produces practically perfect predictions during both training and testing. Logistic regression corresponds to the logit link; probit regression corresponds to the probit link. The value of the log-likelihood averaged over the testing set is remarkably similar to the average value over the training set, showing that training generalizes well to the independent testing set.
Figure \[mnistaccs\] displays the results of training multinomial logistic regression for all 10 classes (one class per digit), along with applying the resulting trained model to the testing set, as a function of the maximum $\gamma$ of the random variable distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma, \gamma]$; the accuracy exceeds 0.9 from $\gamma = 10^3$ to $\gamma = 10^6$. The generalization from the training set to the testing set is ideal. At $\gamma = 10^5$, the training loss is 0.318, the testing loss is 0.305, the training accuracy is 0.913, and the testing accuracy is 0.917; training in public yields the same results to three-digit precision.
---------- ------- ------- ---------- ----------
train test train test
link loss loss accuracy accuracy
identity 0.063 0.057
logit 0.039 0.033 0.997 0.999
probit 0.025 0.019 0.997 0.999
---------- ------- ------- ---------- ----------
: Values of the negative log-likelihood (the “loss”) and accuracy averaged over the training samples or testing samples from MNIST, with $\gamma = 10^5$ being the maximal possible value of the random variable distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma, \gamma]$ added to shares of the data[]{data-label="mnisttab"}
### Forest cover type
We use both binary and multinomial logistic regression, as well as probit regression, to analyze standard data on the type of forest cover based on cartographic variates from Jock A. Blackard of the United States Forest Service, Denis J. Dean of the University of Texas at Dallas, and Charles W. Anderson of Colorado State University (with copyright retained by Jock A. Blackard and Colorado State University); the original data is available from the archive of [@dua-graff] at <http://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/covertype> and the preprocessed and formatted versions that we use are available from the work of [@chang-lin] at <http://www.csie.ntu.edu.tw/~cjlin/libsvmtools/datasets/binary.html#covtype.binary> (for binary classification) and <http://www.csie.ntu.edu.tw/~cjlin/libsvmtools/datasets/multiclass.html#covtype> (for the multinomial logistic regression).
We predict one of 7 types of forest (or one of 2 for the binarized data) based on 10 integer-valued covariates (elevation, aspect, slope, horizontal and vertical distances to bodies of water, horizontal distance to roadways, horizontal distance to fire points, and hillshade at 9am, 12pm, and 3pm), as well as one-hot encodings of 4 types of wilderness areas and 40 types of soil. Thus, there are 54 covariates in all, including the one-hot encodings. (A one-hot encoding is a vector whose entries are all 0 except for one 1 in the position corresponding to the associated type.) For normalization, we subtract the mean from each of the integer-valued covariates (not from the one-hot encodings) and then divide by the maximum absolute value. We randomly permute and then partition the data into a training set of 500,000 samples and a testing set of the other 81,012 samples. We trained for 20 epochs (that is, 10,000 iterations) with 1,000 samples per minibatch. The learning rate for the binary classification was 3 (for identity link was 0.1) and for the multi-class (7-class) classification was 1. During training for all 7 classes, we supplemented each iteration of stochastic gradient descent with weight decay of $10^{-3}$, to be consistent with our training for all 10 classes of MNIST in the previous sub-subsection. This weight decay barely impacts accuracy yet makes the constant 5 that we subtract from the bias in the stochastic gradient descent shift almost all inputs of the softmax to be non-positive, as suggested in the last paragraph of Subsection \[softmax\] above.
Figure \[covtypetrain\] displays the results of training and Figure \[covtypetest\] depicts the performance of the resulting trained model when applied to the testing set, both as a function of the width $\gamma$ of the random variable distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma, \gamma]$; the figures show that $\gamma = 10^5$ works well, in accordance with the analysis in Subsection \[two-party\] above. Table \[covtypetab\] details the results for $\gamma = 10^5$; training in public yields the same results to within $\pm 0.001$ of those reported in the table. In fact, even $\gamma = 10^6$ works perfectly fine for this application to machine learning. Logistic regression corresponds to the logit link; probit regression corresponds to the probit link. The value of the log-likelihood averaged over the testing set is reassuringly close to the average value over the training set, demonstrating good generalization from the training set to the testing set.
Figure \[covtypeaccs\] displays the results of training multinomial logistic regression for all 7 classes, together with applying the resulting trained model to the testing set, as a function of the maximum $\gamma$ of the random variable distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma, \gamma]$; the accuracy is excellent from $\gamma = 10^3$ to $\gamma = 10^6$. The generalization from the training set to the testing set is perfect. At $\gamma = 10^5$, the training loss is 0.705, the testing loss is 0.711, the training accuracy is 0.710, and the testing accuracy is 0.710; training in public produces the same results to within $\pm 0.001$.
---------- ------- ------- ---------- ----------
train test train test
link loss loss accuracy accuracy
identity 0.175 0.176
logit 0.515 0.515 0.755 0.758
probit 0.517 0.517 0.755 0.756
---------- ------- ------- ---------- ----------
: Values of the negative log-likelihood (the “loss”) and accuracy averaged over the training samples or testing samples from data on forest cover type, with $\gamma = 10^5$ being the maximal possible value of the random variable distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma, \gamma]$ added to shares of the data[]{data-label="covtypetab"}
### Deaths from horsekicks
We use Poisson regression to analyze the classical data from Ladislaus Bortkiewicz tabulating the numbers of deaths from horsekicks in 14 corps of the Prussian army for each of the 20 years from 1875 to 1894, available (with extensive discussion) in the work of [@stigler]. This data is a canonical example of counts which follow the Poisson distribution. We consider four separate Poisson regressions, for the following sets of covariates: (0) no covariates, (1) one-hot encodings of the corps, (2) second-order polynomials of the years, and (3) concatenating the one-hot encodings of the corps and the second-order polynomials of the years. The one-hot encoding of a corps is a vector with 14 entries, one of which is 1 and 13 of which are 0; the position of the entry that is 1 corresponds to the associated corps. The second-order polynomials of the years arise from using as covariate vector a vector with 3 entries, the entries being the constant 1, the number of years beyond 1875, and the square of the number of years beyond 1875; Poisson regression considers linear combinations of these entries, thus forming quadratic functions of the years.
The log-likelihoods of the fully trained models are the same to three-digit precision when comparing training in public to training in private; with 14 samples per minibatch, convergence of the log-likelihoods required 50,000 iterations (which is 2,500 epochs) with the second-order polynomials of the years in the covariates but only 10,000 iterations (500 epochs) without, all at a learning rate $2 \times 10^{-2}$. The negative log-likelihoods of the trained models for the four sets of covariates converge to (0) 1.124, (1) 1.077, (2) 1.107, and (3) 1.061, averaged over all samples (there are 280 samples in total — 14 corps for each of 20 years). Twice the negative log-likelihood is sometimes called the “deviance,” which is generally defined only up to an additive constant. The decrease in deviance when moving from covariates (0) to (1) is 26.3, the decrease from (0) to (2) is 9.5, and from (0) to (3) is 35.3; these deviances refer to the totals over all 280 samples, so are 280 times the average over the samples. The degrees of freedom corresponding to each of these changes is less than the decrease in deviance, indicating some minor heterogeneity in the data. (The baseline deviance generally has no statistical interpretation in terms of a universal distribution such as $\chi^2$; changes in deviance when changing covariates are what matter.)
With 14 samples per minibatch, each iteration of stochastic gradient descent takes about $1.7 \times 10^{-2}$ seconds when training in private for any of the four sets of covariates; the smallest set (0) takes about $0.5 \times 10^{-2}$ seconds less per iteration than the largest set (3). When training in public, each iteration takes about $1.7 \times 10^{-4}$ seconds for any of the four sets of covariates. Training in private thus takes about 100 times longer than training in public on standard machines in a cluster for software development at Facebook.
Proof of Theorem \[infoleak\] {#mainproof}
=============================
A simple, standard computation yields that the differential entropy, in bits, of a random variable $Y$ distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma, \gamma]$ is $$\label{standard}
H(Y) = \log_2(2\gamma).$$ Combining (\[mutual\]), (\[standard\]), and the upper-bound on $H(X+Y)$ from the following lemma yields (\[worst\]), completing the proof of Theorem \[infoleak\].
\[basiclemma\] Suppose that $X$ and $Y$ are independent scalar random variables and $\beta$ and $\gamma$ are positive real numbers such that $|X| \le \beta < \gamma$ and $Y$ is distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma, \gamma]$. Then, $$\label{maxent}
H(X+Y) \le \frac{\beta}{\gamma} + \log_2(2\gamma),$$ where $H$ denotes the differential entropy measured in bits (not nats), with equality attained in (\[maxent\]) when $X$ is $\beta$ times a Rademacher variate, that is, when $X = \beta$ with probability $1/2$ and $X = -\beta$ with probability $1/2$.
Denoting the cumulative distribution function of $X$ by $F$, the probability density function of $X+Y$ is $$\label{convolution}
g(y) = \frac{1}{2\gamma} \int_{-\gamma}^{\gamma} dF(y-x)
= \frac{1}{2\gamma} \int_{y-\gamma}^{y+\gamma} dF(x)
= \frac{F(y+\gamma) - F(y-\gamma)}{2\gamma}.$$ Combining $|X| \le \beta$ and the definition of a cumulative distribution function yields that $F(x) = 0$ for $x < -\beta$ and $F(x) = 1$ for $x > \beta$, so (\[convolution\]) becomes (as diagrammed in Figure \[visualization\]) $$g(y) = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
0, & y < -\gamma-\beta \\
\frac{F(y+\gamma)}{2\gamma}, & -\gamma-\beta < y < -\gamma+\beta \\
\frac{1}{2\gamma}, & -\gamma+\beta < y < \gamma-\beta \\
\frac{1 - F(y-\gamma)}{2\gamma}, & \gamma-\beta < y < \gamma+\beta \\
0, & y > \gamma+\beta
\end{array}\right.$$ and the entropy in bits of $X+Y$ is $$\begin{gathered}
H(X+Y) = -\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} g(y) \, \log_2(g(y)) \, dy \\
= -\frac{1}{2\gamma} \int_{\gamma-\beta}^{\gamma+\beta} \left(
F(\gamma-y) \, \log_2\left(\frac{F(\gamma-y)}{2\gamma}\right)
+ \left(1 - F(y-\gamma)\right) \,
\log_2\left(\frac{1 - F(y-\gamma)}{2\gamma}\right)
\right) \, dy \\
- \frac{1}{2\gamma} \int_{-\gamma+\beta}^{\gamma-\beta}
\log_2\left(\frac{1}{2\gamma}\right) \, dy \\
= -\frac{1}{2\gamma} \int_{-\beta}^{\beta} \Bigl(
F(-y) \, \log_2(F(-y)) + \left(1 - F(y)\right) \, \log_2(1 - F(y))
\Bigr) \, dy + \log_2(2\gamma) \\
= -\frac{1}{2\gamma} \int_{-\beta}^{\beta} \Bigl(
F(y) \, \log_2(F(y)) + \left(1 - F(y)\right) \, \log_2(1 - F(y))
\Bigr) \, dy + \log_2(2\gamma).
\label{entropy}\end{gathered}$$
The function $p \log_2(p) + (1-p) \log_2(1-p)$ is minimal for $0 < p < 1$ at $p = 1/2$, so the integral in the right-hand side of (\[entropy\]) is minimal when $F(y) = 1/2$ for $|y| < \beta$, in which case (\[entropy\]) becomes (\[maxent\]) with equality attained when $X$ is $\beta$ times a Rademacher variate.
Proof of Theorem \[chaining\] {#simpleproof}
=============================
For any scalar random variables $X$, $Y$, and $Z$, the definition of mutual information states $$\label{def}
I(X;\, X+Y,\, X+Z) = H(X+Y,\, X+Z) - H(X+Y,\, X+Z \;|\; X),$$ $$\label{def2}
I(X;\, X+Y) = H(X+Y) - H(X+Y \;|\; X),$$ and $$\label{def3}
I(X;\, X+Z) = H(X+Z) - H(X+Z \;|\; X),$$ where $H$ denotes entropy. Furthermore, the subadditivity of entropy for any arbitrary random variables yields $$\label{subentropy}
H(X+Y,\, X+Z) \le H(X+Y) + H(X+Z).$$ Taking $X$, $Y$, and $Z$ to be independent then yields $$\begin{gathered}
\label{independence}
H(X+Y,\, X+Z \;|\; X) = H(Y,\, Z \;|\; X) = H(Y,\, Z) = H(Y) + H(Z) \\
= H(Y \;|\; X) + H(Z \;|\; X) = H(X+Y \;|\; X) + H(X+Z \;|\; X).\end{gathered}$$ Combining (\[def\])–(\[independence\]) yields (\[subadditivity\]), completing the proof of Theorem \[chaining\].
Proof of Theorem \[Beaverdetails\] {#detailed}
==================================
We suppose that $X$, $Y$, $P$, $Q$, and $T$ are independent scalar random variables and $\gamma$ is a positive real number such that $|X| \le 1 < 3 < \gamma$, the random variable $T$ is distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma^2, \gamma^2]$, and $Y$, $P$, and $Q$ are distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma, \gamma]$. Then, since $(X-Y)-(P-Q)$ is just the difference between $X-Y$ and $P-Q$, providing no more and no less information than $X-Y$ and $P-Q$ on their own without $(X-Y)-(P-Q)$, and $(P^2-T) + 2(P-Q)(X-P) + (X-P)^2/2$ is also merely a deterministic combination of the observations $P^2-T$, $P-Q$, and $X-P$, providing no more and no less information than $P^2-T$, $P-Q$, and $X-P$ on their own without $(P^2-T) + 2(P-Q)(X-P) + (X-P)^2/2$, the mutual information satisfies $$\begin{gathered}
\label{nomorenoless}
I\Bigl(X;\,
X-Y,\, P-Q,\, P^2-T,\, (X-Y)-(P-Q),\, X-P,\,
(P^2-T) + 2(P-Q)(X-P) + (X-P)^2/2\Bigr) \\
= I(X;\, X-Y,\, P-Q,\, P^2-T,\, X-P).\end{gathered}$$ Since $X-Q = (X-P)+(P-Q)$ and $P-Q = (X-Q)-(X-P)$ establish a bijection between the pair $X-P$ and $X-Q$ and the pair $X-P$ and $P-Q$, it follows that $$\label{bijection}
I(X;\, X-Y,\, P-Q,\, P^2-T,\, X-P) = I(X;\, X-Y,\, X-Q,\, X-P,\, P^2-T).$$ Combining (\[subadditivity\]) and the fact that $X$, $Y$, $Q$, $P$, and $T$ are independent yields $$\label{lemmapp}
I(X;\, X-Y,\, X-Q,\, X-P,\, P^2-T)
\le I(X;\, X-Y) + I(X;\, X-Q) + I(X;\, X-P,\, P^2-T).$$ Combining (\[nomorenoless\])–(\[lemmapp\]) and (\[squares\]) from the following lemma, together with (\[worst\]), yields (\[mainsquare\]), completing the proof of Theorem \[Beaverdetails\].
Suppose that $X$, $P$, and $T$ are independent scalar random variables and $\gamma$ is a positive real number such that $|X| \le 1 < 3 < \gamma$, the random variable $P$ is distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma, \gamma]$, and $T$ is distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma^2, \gamma^2]$. Then, $$\label{squares}
I(X;\, X-P,\, P^2-T) \le I(X;\, X-P) + \frac{2}{\gamma} + \frac{1}{\gamma^2},$$ where $I$ denotes the mutual information measured in bits.
The proof begins with a string of identities, systematically simplifying (or re-expressing) their right-hand sides. Indeed, since $X^2-2XP+P^2$ is simply the square of $X-P$, it follows that $$\label{complication}
I(X;\, X-P,\, P^2-T) = I(X;\, X-P,\, X^2-2XP+P^2,\, P^2-T).$$ Since $X^2-2XP+T = (X^2-2XP+P^2) - (P^2-T)$ and $P^2-T = (X^2-2XP+P^2) - (X^2-2XP+T)$ establish a bijection between the pair $X^2-2XP+P^2$ and $P^2-T$ and the pair $X^2-2XP+P^2$ and $X^2-2XP+T$, it follows that $$I(X;\, X-P,\, X^2-2XP+P^2,\, P^2-T) = I(X;\, X-P,\, X^2-2XP+P^2,\, X^2-2XP+T).$$ Since $X^2-2XP+P^2$ is simply the square of $X-P$, it follows that $$I(X;\, X-P,\, X^2-2XP+P^2,\, X^2-2XP+T) = I(X;\, X-P,\, X^2-2XP+T).$$ The chain rule for mutual information yields $$\label{chainrule}
I(X;\, X-P,\, X^2-2XP+T) = I(X;\, X-P) + I(X;\, X^2-2XP+T \;|\; X-P).$$
The definition of mutual information states $$\begin{gathered}
\label{infodef}
I(X;\, X^2-2XP+T \;|\; X-P) \\
= H(X^2-2XP+T \;|\; X-P) - H(X^2-2XP+T \;|\; X-P,\, X),\end{gathered}$$ where $H$ denotes the differential entropy measured in bits. Since $T$ is independent of $X$ and $P$, the last term in the right-hand side of (\[infodef\]) is $$\label{conditioned}
H(X^2-2XP+T \;|\; X-P,\, X) = H(X^2-2XP+T \;|\; P, X) = H(T).$$ The fact that $T$ is distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma^2, \gamma^2]$ yields via a simple, straightforward calculation that $$\label{exact}
H(T) = \log_2(2\gamma^2).$$
We now upper-bound the first term in the right-hand side of (\[infodef\]), by defining $$S = X^2-2XP$$ and noticing $$\label{maxS}
|S| \le |X|^2 + 2|X||P| \le 1 + 2\gamma.$$ That conditioning never increases entropy yields that the first term in the right-hand side of (\[infodef\]) satisfies $$\label{conditioning}
H(S+T \;|\; X-P) \le H(S+T).$$ Combining (\[maxent\]) and the fact that $T$ is distributed uniformly over $[-\gamma^2, \gamma^2]$ yields that, maximizing over all random variables $S$ such that $|S| \le \beta = 1 + 2\gamma$ (even dropping the constraint that $S = X^2-2XP$ in the maximization), $$\label{unconstrained}
H(S+T) \le \frac{1+2\gamma}{\gamma^2} + \log_2(2\gamma^2)
= \frac{2}{\gamma} + \frac{1}{\gamma^2} + \log_2(2\gamma^2).$$
Combining (\[infodef\])–(\[unconstrained\]) yields that, maximizing over any random variable $X$ such that $|X| \le 1$, $$\label{other}
I(X;\, X^2-2XP+T \;|\; X-P) \le \frac{2}{\gamma} + \frac{1}{\gamma^2}.$$ Combining (\[complication\])–(\[chainrule\]) and (\[other\]) yields (\[squares\]).
Chebyshev series for odd functions {#chebappendix}
==================================
In this appendix, we review the approximation of odd functions via Chebyshev series, as summarized for general (not necessarily odd) functions in Sections 4–6 of [@curry].
Given a real-valued differentiable function $f$ on $[-z, z]$ that is odd, that is, $$f(-x) = -f(x)$$ for any real number $x$ such that $-z \le x \le z$, we can approximate $f$ via its Chebyshev series, as follows. First, we select a sufficiently large positive integer $n$ and compute $$\label{chebcoeffs}
c_j = \frac{2}{n} \sum_{k=1}^n
\cos\left(\frac{j(2k-1)\pi}{4n}\right) \;
f\left(z \cos\left(\frac{(2k-1)\pi}{4n}\right)\right)$$ for $j = 1$, $3$, …, $2n-1$; the approximation will converge as $n$ increases. Having calculated $c_1$, $c_3$, …, $c_{2n-1}$ from (\[chebcoeffs\]), we can compute a good approximation to $f$ evaluated at any real number $y$ such that $-z \le y \le z$: $$\label{approx}
f(y) \approx \sum_{j=1}^n c_{2j-1} \, T_{2j-1}(y/z),$$ where $T_j(x)$ denotes the Chebyshev polynomial of degree $j$ evaluated at $x = y/z$.
To calculate the right-hand side of (\[approx\]) efficiently using only additions and multiplications involving the input $$\label{normalized}
x = y / z,$$ we evaluate the sums $$\label{partialsums}
s_{2k-1} = \sum_{j=1}^k c_{2j-1} \, T_{2j-1}(x)$$ for $k = 1$, $2$, …, $n$, via the following recurrence: $$\label{update}
t_{2k+1} = (4 x^2 - 2) t_{2k-1} - t_{2k-3}$$ and $$s_{2k+1} = s_{2k-1} + c_{2k+1} t_{2k+1},$$ started with $$t_1 = x,$$ $$t_3 = (4 x^2 - 3) x,$$ $$s_1 = c_1 t_1,$$ and $$s_3 = s_1 + c_3 t_3.$$ The final sum $s_{2n-1}$ is equal to the right-hand side of (\[approx\]), due to (\[normalized\]) and (\[partialsums\]).
Review of stochastic gradient descent with minibatches {#sgdrev}
======================================================
As discussed in any standard reference on modern machine learning, such as that of [@bottou-curtis-nocedal], minibatched stochastic gradient descent (SGD) calculates a vector $w$ of parameters that minimizes the expected value ${{\bf E}}(\ell(X; w))$, where $\ell$ is a function of both $w$ and a random vector $X$. The expected value is known as the “risk” and $\ell$ is known as the “loss.” SGD minimizes the expected loss without having direct access to the probability distribution of $X$, instead relying solely on samples of $X$ (usually drawn at random from a so-called “training set”). Minibatched SGD generates a sequence of approximations via iterations, $$\label{SGD}
w^{(k+1)} = w^{(k)} - \frac{\eta}{m} \sum_{j=1}^{m}
\frac{\partial}{\partial w} \ell(x^{(j,k)}; w)
\biggm{|}_{w = w^{(k)}},$$ where $\eta$ is a positive real number known as the “learning rate,” $\partial/\partial w$ denotes the gradient with respect to $w$ (which is $\ell$’s second argument), $m$ is the number of samples in a so-called “minibatch,” and $x^{(1,k)}$, $x^{(2,k)}$, …, $x^{(m,k)}$ denote samples from $X$. The iterations fail to minimize the expected loss when $\eta$ is constant rather than decaying to 0 as the iterations proceed, but fixing $\eta$ at a sensibly small value is a common practice in machine learning (and still ensures convergence to the minimum of the empirical risk under suitable conditions on $\ell$, that is, to the minimum of the average of the loss, averaged over all samples in a fixed, finite training set).
Minimizing the regularized objective function ${{\bf E}}(\ell(X; w)) + \rho \|w\|^2_2 / 2$, where $\rho$ is a nonnegative real number and $\|w\|_2$ denotes the Euclidean norm of $w$, is a common way of ensuring that $w$ not become too large. Adding such regularization to SGD is also known as “weight decay,” and the iterations in (\[SGD\]) become $$w^{(k+1)} = w^{(k)} - \frac{\eta}{m} \sum_{j=1}^{m}
\frac{\partial}{\partial w} \ell(x^{(j,k)}; w)
\biggm{|}_{w = w^{(k)}} -\;\; \eta \rho w^{(k)};$$ we used some weight decay for the multinomial logistic regression of the measured data in Subsection \[realdata\] (but used no weight decay for any other results reported above, nor did we use any weight decay for iterative updates to the so-called bias offsets in $c$ from the following appendix).
Review of generalized linear models {#glmrev}
===================================
As discussed in any standard reference on generalized linear models, such as that of [@mccullagh-nelder], a generalized linear model regresses a random vector $Y$ of so-called targets against a matrix $X$ of so-called covariates via the model $$\label{glm}
g({{\bf E}}(Y|X)) = Xw + c,$$ where $g$ is known as the “link function,” ${{\bf E}}(Y|X)$ is the conditional expectation of the vector $Y$ of targets given $X$ (the matrix of covariates), $w$ is a vector of so-called “weights” (or “parameters”), and $c$ is a vector whose entries are independent of the values of $X$, known as “biases.” Table \[glmtab\] lists several special cases of generalized linear models. Given independent samples of pairs $(x^{(1)}, y^{(1)})$, $(x^{(2)}, y^{(2)})$, …, $(x^{(n)}, y^{(n)})$, the standard method of fitting the vectors $w$ of weights and $c$ of biases is to minimize the negative of the natural logarithm of the likelihood, that is, to minimize the empirical risk $-\frac{1}{n} \sum_{k=1}^n \ln(p(y^{(k)} | x^{(k)}; w, c))$, where $p(y^{(k)} | x^{(k)}; w, c)$ denotes the probability (at the parameter values $w$ and $c$) of observing $y^{(k)}$ given $x^{(k)}$. Minimizing $-{{\bf E}}(\ln(p(Y|X; w, c)))$ via the minibatched stochastic gradient descent of the previous appendix is another (nearly equivalent) approach.
The probability distribution of $Y$ given $X$ for all of the generalized linear models considered in Table \[glmtab\], except for probit regression, is a so-called “exponential family” of the form $$\label{expfam}
p(y|x; w, c) = h(y) \exp(y^\top xw + y^\top c - \psi(xw + c)),$$ where $h$ is a nonnegative-valued function, and $\psi$ is known as the “log partition function”: $\psi(\theta) = \|\theta\|_2^2/2$ for the normal distribution, $\psi(\theta) = \ln(1+\exp(\theta))$ for the Bernoulli distribution, and $\psi(\theta) = \exp(\theta)$ for the Poisson distribution. For all these cases, substituting (\[expfam\]) and taking the gradient with respect to $\theta$ of both sides of $\int p(y|x; w, c) \, dy = 1$ yields after a straightforward calculation that $\partial \psi/\partial \theta = {{\bf E}}(Y|x)$, where $\theta = xw + c$; combined with (\[glm\]) this yields that $g(\partial \psi/\partial \theta) = \theta$, so the link $g$ is the inverse of $\partial \psi/\partial \theta$.
Combining (\[expfam\]) and the chain rule yields that the gradient with respect to $w$ of $\ln(p(y|x; w, c))$ is $$\frac{\partial}{\partial w} \ln(p(y|x; w, c)) = x^\top \left( y
- \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial \theta}\biggm|_{\theta = xw + c} \right)$$ and the gradient with respect to $c$ of $\ln(p(y|x; w, c))$ is $$\frac{\partial}{\partial c} \ln(p(y|x; w, c)) =
y - \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial \theta}\biggm|_{\theta = xw + c}.$$ Thus, the stochastic gradient descent of the previous appendix requires nothing more than addition, matrix-vector multiplications, and evaluation of the inverse ($\partial \psi/\partial \theta$) of the link $g$. Needless to say, the inverse of the identity function is the identity function, the inverse of $\ln$ is $\exp$, and the inverse of the inverse of the cumulative distribution function $\Phi$ for the standard normal distribution is $\Phi$. A simple calculation shows that the inverse of the logit function $g(\mu) = \ln(\mu/(1-\mu))$ is the standard logistic function $\partial \psi/\partial \theta = 1/(1+\exp(-\theta))$ and that the softmax detailed in Subsection \[softmax\] above inverts $\ln$ applied entrywise to a probability vector (the softmax simply applies $\exp$ entrywise and then normalizes to form a proper probability distribution).
The probability distribution for probit regression is an exponential family, but not of the form in (\[expfam\]); we handle this special case as detailed in Sub-subsection \[probitlink\].
---------------------- ------------- ---------------- -------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
linear least squares $N(\mu, I)$ identity $\mu$ all real vectors
logistic regression Bernoulli logit $\ln(\mu/(1-\mu))$ unit interval $[0, 1]$
probit regression Bernoulli probit $\Phi^{-1}(\mu)$ unit interval $[0, 1]$
Poisson regression Poisson log $\ln(\mu)$ nonnegative real numbers
multinomial logistic multinomial log performed $\ln$ of each prob.simplex $\sum_{j=1}^k\hspace{-.1em}\mu_j\hspace{-.05em}=\hspace{-.05em}1$
regression entry-by-entry entry of $\mu$ and $\mu_1$, $\mu_2$, …, $\mu_k \ge 0$
---------------------- ------------- ---------------- -------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
: Special cases of generalized linear models, where $N(\mu, I)$ denotes the (possibly multi-variate) normal distribution with mean $\mu$ and variance-covariance matrix being the identity matrix $I$, and $\Phi$ is the cumulative distribution function for the standard normal distribution (so $\Phi^{-1}$ is the corresponding quantile function, the inverse of $\Phi$); “linear least squares” is also known as “ordinary least squares” or the “general” linear model — a special case of the “generalized” linear model[]{data-label="glmtab"}
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
We would like to thank Shubho Sengupta and Andrew Tulloch.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Let $\mathrm G$ be a reductive split $p$-adic group and let $\mathrm U$ be the unipotent radical of a Borel subgroup. We study the cohomology with trivial ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-coefficients of the profinite nilpotent group $N = \mathrm U({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$ and its Lie algebra $\mathfrak n$, by extending a classical result of Kostant to our integral $p$-adic setup. The techniques used are a combination of results from group theory, algebraic groups and homological algebra.'
author:
- Niccolò Ronchetti
title: 'On the cohomology of integral $p$-adic unipotent radicals'
---
Introduction
============
In this paper we study the cohomology of the group of integral points of unipotent radicals of $p$-adic algebraic groups.
Let $p \ge 5$ be a prime number. Let $F$ be a $p$-adic field, with ring of integer ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$, and denote $d = [F : {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}]$. Let $\mathrm G$ be a connected, reductive, split $F$-group. Fix once and for all a maximal split $F$-torus $\mathrm T$, as well as a Borel subgroup $\mathrm B$ containing $\mathrm T$ and defined over $F$. Let $\mathrm U = \mathcal R_u(\mathrm B)$ be the unipotent radical of $\mathrm B$.
We also fix integral, smooth ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-models for all the group schemes considered above (see \[notationsection\] for their construction), and we still denote them by $\mathrm G, \mathrm B, \mathrm U, \mathrm T$.
Our main object of study is the continuous cohomology of the profinite group $\mathrm U({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$ with coefficients into finitely generated ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-modules, in particular the trivial module, and we want to understand these objects as $\mathrm T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$-modules.
Our first result is a slight modification of a celebrated theorem of Kostant that describes Lie algebra cohomology for the unipotent ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-Lie algebra $\mathfrak u = {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\mathrm U$. We prove a ‘$p$-adic integral’ version, very similar (but not identical) to those already proven in [@PT; @vigre; @GK].
[thm]{}[kostant]{}\[Kostant’s theorem\] \[kostantthm\] Let $\mathrm G$ be simple and simply connected. Suppose that $p \ge h$, the Coxeter number of $\mathrm G$. Consider the trivial $\mathfrak u$-module ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$. Then its cohomology is $$H^n_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \mathfrak u, {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right) \cong \bigoplus_{w \in W, l(w) = n} V_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F}(w \cdot 0)$$ where $V_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F}(\lambda)$ is the highest-weight $\mathrm T$-module associated[^1] to the character $\lambda$ and $l(w)$ denotes the length of the Weyl element $w$, defined as in section \[notationsection\].
This is proved in section \[kostantsubsection\], mainly following the ideas in [@vigre].
Let $\mathfrak n$ be the Lie algebra $\mathfrak u$, viewed as a ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-algebra (see section \[notationsection\] for the precise setup). Since we are interested in cohomology with ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-coefficients, we record the following corollary which follows from theorem \[kostantthm\].
[cor]{}[kostantcorollary]{} \[kostantcor\] Suppose $F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}$ is Galois.
The only ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T ({\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}) = \mathrm T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$-modules appearing in the cohomology $ H^n_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( \mathfrak n, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right)$ are of the form $V_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \sum_i (w_i \cdot 0) \right)$ as we vary $\{ w_i \}_{i=1}^d$ in the Weyl group subject to the condition that $\sum_{i=1}^d l(w_i) = n$. In particular, $H^*(\mathfrak n, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}})$ is a finite, free ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-module.
Fix an unordered $d$-uple $\underline w = \{ w_i \}_{i=1}^d$ of Weyl group elements (possibly repeated) whose sum of lengths is $n$. The multiplicity of the module $V_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \sum_i \left( w_i \cdot 0 \right) \right)$ in $H^n_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( \mathfrak n, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right)$ is the number of ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})$-orbits on $C_{\underline w}$ where $C_{\underline w}$ is the set of all bijections ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Aut}}}(F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}) {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}\underline w$ and ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F/ {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})$ acts by precomposition.
We introduce ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Aut}}}(F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})$ in the definition of the set $C_{\underline w}$ to emphasize that we are assigning a $w_i$ to each Galois element in ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})$, but we do not care about the group structure yet - until we consider the ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})$-orbits on $C_{\underline w}$.
It may happen that different unordered $d$-uples $\{ w_i \}$ and $\{ w'_i \}$ give the same character $\sum_i (w_i \cdot 0) = \sum_i (w'_i \cdot 0)$ and therefore the two $\mathrm T$-modules are isomorphic. Understanding when that happens seems to be quite a difficult combinatorial problem which we have not attempted to solve.
Next, we study the continuous group cohomology of $N = \mathrm U({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$ by comparing it with the Lie algebra cohomology of $\mathfrak n$. More precisely, we follow Polo and Tilouine’s blueprint in section 3 of [@PT] to obtain a spectral sequence relating Lie algebra cohomology and group cohomology. The notation and terminology related to filtered algebras are defined in section \[spectralsection\].
[thm]{}[equivariantss]{} \[Lietogroupss\] Consider the augmentation filtration on the completed group algebra ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]$. Let $V$ be a finitely generated ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-module with a continuous action of $\mathrm B({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$. Suppose that as a filtered $T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F) \sharp {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]$-module, $V$ has a bounded and discrete filtration.
Then there exists a convergent spectral sequence of $\mathrm T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$-modules $$E_1^{r,s} = H^{r+s}_{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}, {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}V \right)_r \Rightarrow E_{\infty}^{r,s} = H^{r+s}_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]} ( {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}, V )_r = H^{r+s} (N, V)_r.$$ that converges to the graded $\mathrm T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$-module associated to a $\mathrm T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$-equivariant filtration of $H^*(N, V)$.
Finally, we show that for the trivial module $V = {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$, the spectral sequence converges at the first page, so that the previous results yield
[thm]{}[groupLie]{} \[groupLiecomparison\] There is a $\mathrm T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$-equivariant isomorphism $$H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( \mathfrak n, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right) \cong {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}H^* \left( N, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right)$$ between the Lie algebra cohomology of the ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-Lie algebra $\mathfrak n$ and the graded module associated to the $\mathrm T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$-equivariant filtration of $H^*(N, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}})$ induced by the augmentation ideal.
The proofs of these theorems follow the outline of Polo and Tilouine’s work ([@PT], section 3): we filter the completed group algebra ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]$ by powers of the augmentation ideal, show that the associated graded algebra is isomorphic to the enveloping algebra of $\mathfrak n$, and then prove that the filtered complex spectral sequences in theorem \[Lietogroupss\] collapses on the first page, giving us the isomorphism of theorem \[groupLiecomparison\].
Notation {#notationsection}
--------
We collect in this section some notation and terminology used throughout the rest of the paper.
Let $\mathrm G$ be a connected, reductive, split $F$-group. We fix an ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-model of $\mathrm G$ as in theorem 1.2 of [@Conrad2], due to Demazure and Gabriel. This ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-model (still often denoted $\mathrm G$) is a smooth, affine group scheme with connected, reductive fibers.
Since $\mathrm G$ is split (being a Chevalley group scheme of a split $F$-group), we can choose a maximal ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-torus in it which is fiberwise split (see example 3.1 of [@Conrad2]), and we denote it by $\mathrm T$. Its generic fiber $\mathrm T_F$ is a maximal, split $F$-torus in $\mathrm G_F$ and all maximal, split $F$-tori of $\mathrm G_F$ are $F$-conjugate to it.
We consider next the roots $\Phi( \mathrm G, \mathrm T)$ of $\mathrm T$ on $\mathrm G$ (see sections 3-5 of [@Conrad] for the theory of root data over ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-reductive groups). Fix a cocharacter $\lambda \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \mathbb G_m, \mathrm T \right)$ not annihilated by any root in $\Phi \left( \mathrm G, \mathrm T \right)$ - this defines a Borel subgroup $\mathrm B = \mathrm P_{\mathrm G}(\lambda)$ over ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$ (we use the dynamical description of parabolic subgroups as in [@Conrad], see in particular sections 4.1 and 5.2), as in example 3.1 of [@Conrad2].
As mentioned in the introduction, we will often abuse notation and suppress the fiber-subscript, so $\mathrm G$, $\mathrm B$ and $\mathrm T$ will be used to denote both the ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-models and their generic fibers, the meaning being clear from context.
Our choice of the Borel subgroup $\mathrm B$ determines a basis of simple roots $\Delta = \{ \alpha_1, \ldots, \alpha_r \}$ as well as a choice of positive roots $\Phi^+ = \Phi^+(\mathrm G, \mathrm T)$ inside $\Phi(\mathrm G,\mathrm T)$.
For each positive root $\alpha \in \Phi^+(\mathrm G, \mathrm T)$, we define the height of $\alpha$ as $$h(\alpha) = \sum_i n_i \textnormal{ where } \alpha = \sum_i n_i \alpha_i.$$
We denote by $\rho$ the half-sum of the positive roots $\Phi^+ $. If $\mathrm G$ is simply connected then $\rho \in X^* \left( \mathrm T \right)$. In this instance, the height $h(\alpha)$ is also equal to $\langle \alpha^{\vee}, \rho \rangle$ by proposition 29, section 1 of [@Bourbaki], where ${\langle \cdot , \cdot \rangle: X_*(\mathrm T) \times X^* (\mathrm T) {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z}}}$ is the usual perfect pairing between cocharacter and character lattice.
The Coxeter number of $\mathrm G$ is the maximum $h$ of $\langle \alpha^{\vee}, \rho \rangle +1$ as $\alpha$ varies among the positive roots.
We fix an ordering of the positive roots such that the height is non-decreasing, we have then $\Phi^+ = \{ \alpha_1, \ldots, \alpha_n\}$. The Weyl group $W = N_{\mathrm G}(\mathrm T) / \mathrm T$ is generated by the simple reflections $\{ s_{\alpha} \}_{\alpha \in \Delta}$. This gives the notion of length of a Weyl element $w \in W$: the smallest possible number of simple reflections needed to write $w$ as a word in the $s_{\alpha}$’s.
Recall the dot action of the Weyl group $W$ on the character lattice: $$w \cdot \lambda = w(\lambda + \rho ) - \rho \qquad \forall w \in W, \lambda \in X^*(\mathrm T).$$
For each root $\alpha \in \Phi^+$ we have the associated root group $\mathrm U_{\alpha}$, an ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-group scheme isomorphic to $\mathbb G_a$, and we fix isomorphisms $\theta_{\alpha}: \mathbb G_a {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}\mathrm U_{\alpha}$ giving rise to a Chevalley system, as explained for instance in proposition 6.3.4 and remark 6.3.5 of [@Conrad].
As theorem 5.1.13 in [@Conrad] explains, the multiplication map is then an isomorphism of ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-schemes: $$\label{multiplicationisom} \prod_{\alpha \in \Phi^+} \mathrm U_{\alpha} {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}\mathrm U$$ where the product of the root groups is ordered accordingly to the ordering of $\Phi^+$ we have fixed.
Denote $\mathfrak u_{\alpha} = {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\mathrm U_{\alpha}$ the ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-Lie algebra of the root group $\mathrm U_{\alpha}$.
For technical purposes, it is convenient to bring down our setup to ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$. It is known (see for instance [@oesterle], proposition A.3.7) that Weil restriction along the finite, free map ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\hookrightarrow {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$ preserves split unipotent group schemes. Denote then $\mathrm U' = {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm U }}$ the Weil restriction of $\mathrm U$ to ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$ (a split, unipotent group scheme over ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$) and $\mathfrak n = {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathfrak u }}$ its ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-Lie algebra.[^2] Similarly, for each root $\alpha$ we let $\mathrm U'_{\alpha} = {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm U_{\alpha} }}$ and $\mathfrak n_{\alpha} = {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathfrak u_{\alpha} }}$ be the Weil restrictions of the root group corresponding to $\alpha$ and its Lie algebra. The conjugation action of $\mathrm T$ on $\mathrm U$ and the induced action on $\mathfrak u$ are algebraic, and thus can be brought down to ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$ to get algebraic actions of the (non-split) torus ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T$ on $\mathrm U'$ and $\mathfrak n$ defined over ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$.
Finally, denote by $N = \mathrm U'({\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}) \cong \mathrm U({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$ the integral points of $\mathrm U$, and similarly $N_{\alpha} = \mathrm U'_{\alpha}({\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}) \cong \mathrm U_{\alpha}({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$.
When computing Lie algebra cohomology, we will use a subscript to remind the reader what linear structure we are using: for instance $H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( \mathfrak n, - \right)$ is the cohomology of the ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-Lie algebra $\mathfrak n$ while $H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \mathfrak u, - \right)$ is the cohomology of the ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-Lie algebra $\mathfrak u$.
Further directions and applications
-----------------------------------
This paper arose from the goal of describing $H^* \left( \mathrm U ({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F) , {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z}}/ p^n \right)$ as a $\mathrm T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$-module, and in particular when the cohomology groups $H^a \left( \mathrm T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F), H^b \left( \mathrm U ({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F) , {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z}}/ p^n \right) \right)$ vanish. This understanding was crucial to extend the results of the author’s PhD thesis to a larger generality. On the other hand, the results of this paper are independent of the rest of the author’s thesis and are thus written separately.
It is clear that the results and the proofs in this paper go through in the more general setup when $\mathrm B$ is replaced by a parabolic subgroup $\mathrm P$, $\mathrm U$ is replaced by the unipotent radical of the parabolic $\mathcal R_u ( \mathrm P)$ and the torus $\mathrm T$ is replaced by a Levi subgroup $\mathrm L \cong \mathrm P / \mathcal R_u(\mathrm P)$. Indeed, the sources [@PT; @vigre; @FP] work in this greater generality of a parabolic subgroup $\mathrm P$, and the work of Hartley [@hartley1; @hartley2] can immediately be adapted to a general unipotent radical $\mathcal R_u(\mathrm P)$. One will then get a description of $H^* \left( \mathcal R_u(\mathrm P) ({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F), {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right)$ as a $\mathrm L({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$-module. We have not made this result explicit simply because understanding $H^a \left( \mathrm L({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F), H^b \left( \mathcal R_u (\mathrm P) ({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F) , {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z}}/ p^n \right) \right)$ is much harder whenever $\mathrm L$ is not a torus, and thus the intended original application of this paper’s results to the author’s thesis does not follow through.
The sources [@PT; @vigre; @FP; @GK] deal with the cohomology of $\mathrm U$ with coefficients in a particular class of highest weight modules (and not just trivial coefficients). It would be interesting to pursue this line of investigation, and understand how much of the present paper can be carried through to this more general setup of coefficients in a highest weight module with nontrivial $\mathrm U$-action. While Kostant’s theorem \[kostantthm\] and the results of section \[finalsection\] (in particular the existence of the equivariant spectral sequence of theorem \[Lietogroupss\]) should be amenable to this general setup, it is not immediately clear how to replace the step in the proof of corollary \[kostantcor\] that uses Kunneth’s theorem.\
The interest in the cohomology of analytic $p$-adic groups, for example the ones considered in this paper, has spiked in recent years due to their connection to various area of representation theory and number theory, such as $\mod p$ and $p$-adic representation theory of reductive $p$-adic groups.
One potential application of the computations in this paper is the following: in [@GK], Grosse-Klonne studies universal modules $M_{\chi} (V)$ for $\bmod p$ spherical Hecke algebras $\mathcal H(G,K,V)$ of $p$-adic groups. Among other results, he describes some sufficient conditions for the freeness of the universal modules: these conditions are precisely expressed in terms of the cohomology $H^* \left( N, V \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\overline { \mathbb F_p}}}\right)$ (see proposition 6.4 and theorem 8.2 in [@GK], which consider the special case $F = {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}$). It is conceivable that by combining corollary \[kostantcor\] and theorem \[groupLiecomparison\] one gets a description of $H^*(N, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}})$ (and more generally of $H^*(N,V)$ for a special class of highest weight modules $V$, if the technical obstacle explained above can be removed) and hence of $H^*(N, {\ensuremath{\overline { \mathbb F_p}}})$ (resp. $H^*(N, V \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\overline { \mathbb F_p}}})$), explicit enough to extend the aforementioned results in [@GK] to the case of a general $p$-adic field $F$.
The freeness of the universal module over its Hecke algebra would have many important consequences, for instance the existence of supersingular representations for $\mathrm G(F)$ over ${\ensuremath{\overline { \mathbb F_p}}}$ (see remark 5b in the introduction of [@GK]). This was an open problem for a general $p$-adic reductive group in characteristic $p$ and has only very recently been settled by Vigneras in [@vigneras] besides a few special cases. Vigneras’ approach is through a detailed and careful study of Hecke algebras via their presentations, and it would be interesting to have a different proof of existence.
Acknowledgments
---------------
This paper owes a debt of gratitude to my advisor Akshay Venkatesh, who encouraged me to pursue this project to extend my thesis’s results to a larger generality and suggested the correct strategy to approach the problem. I also want to thank Nivedita Bhaskhar, Rita Fioresi and Mihalis Savvas for helpful conversations, and an anonymous referee for suggesting some improvements.
Lie algebra cohomology
======================
In this section we compute the Lie algebra cohomology of $\mathfrak u$ and of $\mathfrak n$ with coefficients in ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$ and ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$ respectively. This is based on a version of Kostant’s theorem for unipotent ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-Lie algebras very similar to those proved by Polo and Tilouine in [@PT] and by the authors of [@vigre].
Reduction steps {#reductionsteps}
---------------
We start with some reductions: we are interested in the ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T({\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}) = \mathrm T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$-action on $H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} (\mathfrak n, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}})$. Since the action is via conjugation, it certainly factors through the center $\mathrm Z_{\mathrm G}$. Moreover, when we pass from $\mathrm G$ to its adjoint quotient $\mathrm G / \mathrm Z_{\mathrm G}$, the unipotent radical maps isomorphically onto its image, so the same is true for its Lie algebra. We can thus assume that $\mathrm G$ is semisimple and adjoint. In fact, the same reasoning allows us to consider any element of the central isogeny class of $\mathrm G$, since maximal tori also correspond to one another under the central isogeny $\mathrm G^{\mathrm {sc}} {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}\mathrm G^{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{ad}}}}$. For example, we could equivalently assume that $\mathrm G$ is semisimple and simply connected.
Recall that a connected, reductive $F$-group is said to be *simple* if it does not have any nontrivial smooth proper connected normal subgroup. As explained in corollary 10.1.3 of [@CF], the multiplication map $$\prod_i \mathrm G_i {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}\mathrm G$$ from the product of the simple factors of $\mathrm G$ to $\mathrm G$ itself is a central isogeny, and it is an isomorphism if $\mathrm G$ is simply connected or adjoint (which we are free to assume). Moreover, if $\mathrm G$ is simply connected (resp. adjoint), then each of the $\mathrm G_i$ is also simply connected (resp. adjoint), and maximal split tori, Borel subgroups and their unipotent radicals correspond under the product map.
In particular, $\prod \mathrm T_i \cong \mathrm T$ where each $\mathrm T_i$ is a maximal split torus of $\mathrm G_i$ and $\prod \mathrm U_i \cong \mathrm U$ where $\mathrm U_i$ is the unipotent radical of the Borel subgroup $\mathrm B_i = \mathrm G_i \cap \mathrm B$ of $\mathrm G_i$.
For the Lie algebras, we obtain that $\prod_i \mathfrak u_i \cong \mathfrak u$ where the isomorphism is equivariant for the action of $\prod \mathrm T_i({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F) \cong \mathrm T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$ - the same clearly holds for the Weil restrictions $\prod_i \mathfrak n_i \cong \mathfrak n$ with equivariant $\prod {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T_i ({\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}) \cong {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T ({\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}})$-actions. The Kunneth formula gives then $$H^n_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( \mathfrak n, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right) \cong \bigoplus_{\sum k_i = n} \bigotimes_i H^{k_i}_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( \mathfrak n_i, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right),$$ where obviously the actions of ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T({\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}})$ on the left and of $\prod {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T_i({\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}})$ on the right correspond. This shows that for the purpose of understanding the ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T({\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}})$-action on $H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( \mathfrak n , {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right)$ we can assume that $\mathrm G$ is simple. Moreover, the Kunneth formula also gives $$H^n \left( N, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right) \cong \bigoplus_{\sum k_i = n} \bigotimes_i H^{k_i} \left( N_i, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right)$$ where we denote $N_i = {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm U_i }} ({\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}) = \mathrm U_i({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$, and again the isomorphism is equivariant for the action of ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T({\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}) \cong \prod {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T_i({\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}})$.
Therefore, it suffices to prove theorem \[groupLiecomparison\] in case of $\mathrm G$ simple and simply connected, and the case of general connected reductive split $\mathrm G$ follows from the above reasoning.
\[Liecohomologybasechange\] Let $\mathfrak g$ be a ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-Lie algebra. Let $F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}$ be a finite extension. Denote $\mathfrak g_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} = \mathfrak g \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$ the ‘base change’ of $\mathfrak g$ to ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$. Let $V$ be a $\mathfrak g$-module which is a finite, free ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-module. Then $$H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \mathfrak g_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F}, V \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right) \cong H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( \mathfrak g, V \right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F.$$ In particular, if $F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}$ is Galois, then $$H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \mathfrak g_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F}, V \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)^{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})} \cong H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( \mathfrak g, V \right).$$
Recall that for any free ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-module $W$, the cohomology of $\mathfrak g_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F}$ with coefficients in $W$ is defined as the homology of the complex $$C^{\bullet} (\mathfrak g_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F}, W) : = {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \bigwedge^{\bullet} \mathfrak g_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F}, W \right).$$ The differential is defined as $$df (x_0, \ldots, x_q) = \sum_{0 \le i < j \le q} (-1)^{i+j} f \left( [x_i, x_j], x_0, \ldots, \hat {x_i}, \ldots, \hat {x_j}, \ldots, x_q \right) +$$ $$+ \sum_{i=0}^q (-1)^i x_i. f \left( x_0, \ldots, \hat{x_i}, \ldots, x_q \right).$$ Since every $\bigwedge^n \mathfrak g$ is a free ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-module, we have natural isomorphisms $${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( \bigwedge^n \mathfrak g, V \right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \cong {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \left( \bigwedge^n \mathfrak g \right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, V \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right),$$ where we also notice that since ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$ is a free ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-module, we have $\left( \bigwedge^n \mathfrak g \right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \cong \bigwedge^n \left( \mathfrak g_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \right)$ in a natural way.
In fact, these isomorphisms are compatible with the differentials, where on the left hand side we have $d \otimes {\ensuremath{\mathrm{id}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F}$ and on the right hand side $f \otimes x \mapsto df \otimes x$, so that we obtain an isomorphisms of complexes $$\label{homtensor} C^{\bullet} ( \mathfrak g, V) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \cong C^{\bullet} \left( \mathfrak g_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F}, V \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$$
Using that ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$ is finite, free as a ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-module, and hence flat, the universal coefficient theorem as in [@rotman] (corollary 7.56) guarantees that we obtain isomorphisms $$\label{basechangeLiecohomology} H^n_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( \mathfrak g, V \right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \cong H^n_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \mathfrak g_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F}, V \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$$ as the relevant ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Tor}}}_1^{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( H^{n-1}(\mathfrak g, V), {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$ group is always zero. This proves the first part of the claim.
Suppose now that $F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}$ is Galois. ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})$ acts on the complex $${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( \bigwedge^{\bullet} \mathfrak g, V \right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$$ on the second factor, and through the isomorphism of complexes in formula \[homtensor\] we obtain a Galois action on ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \bigwedge^{\bullet} \mathfrak g_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} , V \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$ defined as $$(\gamma.f)(x_1, \ldots, x_q) : = \gamma \left( f \left( \gamma^{-1}.x_1, \ldots, \gamma^{-1}.x_q \right) \right) \qquad \forall \gamma \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F/ {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}).$$ Since the Galois action on ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( \bigwedge^{\bullet} \mathfrak g, V \right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$ obviously commutes with the differential, the same holds for this Galois action on ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \bigwedge^{\bullet} \mathfrak g_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} , V \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$ and thus it descends to an action on the cohomology $H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \mathfrak g_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F}, V \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$.
In particular, the isomorphism in formula \[basechangeLiecohomology\] respects the Galois action, where on the left hand side this Galois action is only on the second tensor factor. The second claim of the lemma follows immediately.
Kostant’s theorem {#kostantsubsection}
-----------------
Our goal in this section is to prove theorem \[kostantthm\] which we recall for the reader’s convenience.
We start building towards the proof of this theorem by doing some reductions as well as introducing some technical tools. We follow the ideas in [@vigre], with considerable simplifications since we are only considering the case of the unipotent radical of a Borel subgroup, and not of a general parabolic subgroup.
By the classification of simple algebraic groups and work of Chevalley, we know that $\mathrm G$, as well as $\mathfrak g$ and $\mathfrak u$, have ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-models since their structure constants can be defined over ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z}}$. For all highest weight $\mathrm T$-modules we have $$V_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} (w \cdot 0) \cong V_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} (w \cdot 0) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F,$$ hence it is clear thanks to lemma \[Liecohomologybasechange\] that it suffices to prove the theorem for $F = {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}$.
Fix a ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-basis of weight vectors $\{ x_{\alpha} \}_{\alpha \in \Phi^+}$ for $\mathfrak u$, and let $\{ f_{\alpha} \}_{\alpha \in \Phi^+}$ be the dual ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-basis of $\mathfrak u^*$. Notice that the cohomology of $\mathfrak u$ can equivalently be computed by the complex $\bigwedge^{\bullet} (\mathfrak u^*)$, and that a basis of $\bigwedge^k (\mathfrak u^*)$ is given by $$f_{\underline{\alpha}} = f_{\alpha_1} \wedge \ldots \wedge f_{\alpha_k}$$ as $\alpha_1, \ldots, \alpha_k$ vary in $\Phi^+$.
Given a subset $\Psi \subset \Phi^+$, we define $$\langle \Psi \rangle := \sum_{\beta \in \Psi} \beta$$ and for $w \in W$ we define $$\Phi(w) = w \Phi^- \cap \Phi^+.$$
\[rootlemma\] Let $w \in W$.
1. The size of $\Phi(w)$ is the length $l(w)$.
2. $w \cdot 0 = - \langle \Phi(w) \rangle$.
3. If $w \cdot 0 = - \langle \Psi \rangle$ for some $\Psi \subset \Phi^+$, then $\Psi = \Phi(w)$.
Part 1 is corollary 1.7 in [@humphreys], part 2 is proposition 3.19 in [@knapp] and part 3 is lemma 3.1.2 in [@vigre].
We make explicit the following result, explained in section 3.2 of [@vigre]. Let $w \in W$, so that by lemma \[rootlemma\] $w \cdot 0 = - \langle \Phi(w) \rangle$ and $\Phi(w)$ is the unique subset of positive roots satisfying that equality. Enumerate $\Phi(w) = \{ \beta_1, \ldots, \beta_n \}$.
\[highestweightinkostant\] The vector $$f_{\Phi(w)} : = f_{\beta_1} \wedge \ldots \wedge f_{\beta_n}$$ has weight $w \cdot 0$ in $\bigwedge^n \left( \mathfrak u^* \right)$, and in fact spans (over ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$) the relevant eigenspace. Moreover, it descends to a nonzero element of $H^n \left( \mathfrak u, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right)$ and $n$ is the only degree where the weight $w \cdot 0$ appears.
It is clear that $f_{\Phi(w)}$ has weight exactly $ - \langle \Phi(w) \rangle = w \cdot 0$, where the minus sign appears because $\mathrm T$ is acting on the dual Lie algebra. Any weight in $\bigwedge^{\bullet} \left( \mathfrak u^* \right)$ has to be a sum of negative roots, so lemma \[rootlemma\] guarantees that if $w \cdot 0$ appears as a weight, such a sum should be $- \langle \Phi(w) \rangle$, which on the other hand can only appear in degree $| \Phi(w)| = l(w)$ (by lemma \[rootlemma\]). Finally, it is clear thanks to the alternating property that any other ‘arrangement’ of the roots $\{ \beta_1, \ldots, \beta_n \} = \Phi(w)$ to create a vector in $\bigwedge^n \left( \mathfrak u^* \right)$ has to be a multiple of $f_{\Phi(w)}$.
Now, since the differentials in the complex $\bigwedge^{\bullet} \left( \mathfrak u^* \right)$ are $\mathrm T$-equivariant, they preserve the weights and hence $f_{\Phi(w)}$ must descend to a cohomology class in $H^n \left( \mathfrak u, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right)$ - indeed the weight $w \cdot 0$ does not appear in $\bigwedge^{n+1} \left( \mathfrak u^* \right)$ and hence $f_{\Phi(w)}$ is a cocycle, but the weight $w \cdot 0$ does not appear in $\bigwedge^{n-1} \left( \mathfrak u^* \right)$ and hence $f_{\Phi(w)}$ is not a coboundary.
The fact that the weight $w \cdot 0$ only appears in degree $n$ in $H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( \mathfrak u, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right)$ is a consequence of the same fact for the complex $\bigwedge^{\bullet} \left( \mathfrak u^* \right)$, since the Lie algebra cohomology $H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}}(\mathfrak u, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}})$ is a $\mathrm T$-equivariant subquotient of it.
Lemma \[highestweightinkostant\] shows that we have an injection $$i: \bigoplus_{w \in W, l(w) = n} V_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}}(w \cdot 0) \hookrightarrow H^n_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}}( \mathfrak u, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}})$$ of a finite, free ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-module into a finitely generated ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-module.
To show that this injection is an equality, it suffices to prove that $i \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \overline{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}}$ and $i \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\overline { \mathbb F_p}}}$ are isomorphisms.
Now, theorem 4.1.1 in [@vigre] constructs the same injection for ${\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}$ and ${\ensuremath{\overline { \mathbb F_p}}}$-coefficients, and proves that the injection is indeed an isomorphism. The proof with ${\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}$-coefficients works verbatim with $\overline {{\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}}$-coefficients, since it simply uses that ${\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}$ is an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero. The universal coefficient theorem (applied in the same fashion as in formula 2.1.2 in [@vigre]) yields that $$H^n \left( \mathfrak u_{\overline {{\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}}}, \overline{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}} \right) \cong H^n \left( \mathfrak u, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \overline{ {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}}$$ since $\overline {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}$ is a divisible ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-module. As for the Weyl modules $V_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} (\lambda)$, it is immediate that $V_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} (\lambda) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \overline {{\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}}$ is the highest weight $\overline {{\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}}$-module of highest weight $\lambda$. This fact and theorem 4.1.1 in loc. cit. show that $i \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \overline {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}$ is indeed an isomorphism.
It remains to check that $i \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\overline { \mathbb F_p}}}$ is an isomorphism. Since theorem 4.1.1 is proven with ${\ensuremath{\overline { \mathbb F_p}}}$-coefficients, we only need to show that $i \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\overline { \mathbb F_p}}}$ coincides with the map of theorem 4.1.1 of loc. cit.
For the Weyl modules, it is again obvious that $V_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}}(w \cdot 0) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\overline { \mathbb F_p}}}\cong V_{{\ensuremath{\overline { \mathbb F_p}}}}(w \cdot 0)$, as both sides are $1$-dimensional ${\ensuremath{\overline { \mathbb F_p}}}$-modules on which $\mathrm T({\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}})$ acts as $w \cdot 0$. To show that $H^n \left( \mathfrak u , {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\overline { \mathbb F_p}}}\cong H^n \left( \mathfrak u_{{\ensuremath{\overline { \mathbb F_p}}}}, {\ensuremath{\overline { \mathbb F_p}}}\right)$ it suffices to show that $H^{n-1} \left( \mathfrak u, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right)$ is a free ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-module, and then the universal coefficient theorem ([@rotman], corollary 7.56) will yield the required isomorphism. This is clear by induction on $n$: the base case $n=0$ has simply $H^0_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( \mathfrak u, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right) \cong {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$, while the inductive step uses that we have proven the theorem for $n-1$, so that $H^{n-1} (\mathfrak u, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}) \cong \bigoplus_{w \in W, l(w) =n-1} V_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} (w \cdot 0)$ is a finite, free ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-module.
We can now take Kostant’s theorem \[kostantthm\] as a starting point, and compute the cohomology of $\mathfrak n$, a ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-Lie algebra, with coefficients in the trivial module ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$. Notice that we cannot immediately apply Kostant’s theorem to $\mathfrak n = {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathfrak u }}$, since this is not (in general) the Lie algebra of the unipotent radical of a Borel subgroup of a split group.
Suppose that $F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}$ is Galois, then lemma \[Liecohomologybasechange\] gives that $$H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( \mathfrak n, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right) \cong H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \mathfrak n_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F}, {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)^{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F/ {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})},$$ so we aim to compute the right hand side. Because of the technical nature of the following argument, for the sake of clarity we drop the shortcut notation $\mathfrak u$, $\mathfrak n$ and use instead ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\mathrm U$, ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} U \right)$ and so on.
As explained in [@CGP], appendix A.7 we have an isomorphism $${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}(\mathrm U) \cong {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} U \right)$$ of ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-Lie algebras, and we also have (by the discussion after formula 2.1.3 in [@CGP]) $${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} U \right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \cong {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} U \right) \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$$ and since $$\left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} U \right) \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \cong \prod_{\sigma \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F/ {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})} \mathrm U \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$$ we conclude that $${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} U \right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \cong \prod_{\sigma \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F/ {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})} {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( \mathrm U \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right).$$ These isomorphisms are compatible for the action of $$\left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T \right) \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \cong \prod_{\sigma \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F/ {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})} \mathrm T \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F,$$ in the sense that the left side acts naturally on ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} U \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$ and the right side acts componentwise on $\prod_{\sigma \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F/ {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})} {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( \mathrm U \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$.
Therefore when taking cohomology, we obtain the isomorphism $$H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} U \right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right) \cong H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \prod_{\sigma \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F/ {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})} {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( \mathrm U \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right), {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$$ and by Kunneth’s theorem the latter module is isomorphic to $$\bigotimes_{\sigma \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F/ {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})} H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( \mathrm U \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right), {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$$ where the action of $\prod_{\sigma \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F/ {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})} \mathrm T \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$ is again component-wise.
The Galois group ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F/{\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})$ acts on both ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$ and ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} U \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$ on the ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-factor, compatibly with the conjugation action of the first group on the second (because the conjugation action is algebraic). In particular, this implies that the torus action on the cohomology of ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} U \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$ is Galois-semilinear - see also formula \[galoistorusequivariance\] afterwards.
Therefore, the Galois-fixed submodule of $H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} U \right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$ - which coincide with $H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} U \right), {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right)$ by lemma \[Liecohomologybasechange\] and the isomorphisms described above - is acted upon by the Galois-fixed subtorus of ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$, which is just ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T$. In fact, taking Galois-invariants (on both the torus and the cohomology module) recovers the natural action of ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T$ on $H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} U \right), {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right)$ which is exactly what we aim to compute.
We start by noticing that we can apply Kostant’s theorem \[kostantthm\] to each $\sigma$-twist, and obtain that the $\mathrm T \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-module $H^{n_{\sigma}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( \mathrm U \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right), {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$ is a direct sum of characters indexed by Weyl-group elements of length $n_{\sigma}$: $$H^n_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( \mathrm U \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right), {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right) \cong \bigoplus_{l(w_{\sigma})=n_{\sigma}} V_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( w_{\sigma} \cdot 0 \right)$$ where the $\sigma$-subscript simply reminds us which Galois-twist we are looking at. This and the discussion above show, in particular, that $H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} U \right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$ is a finite, free ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-module.
Assume first that $| {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})| = d$ is coprime to $p$. Then the averaging operator $$\label{projectionidempotent} e:= \frac{1}{d} \sum_{\gamma \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})} \gamma : H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} U \right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right) {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} U \right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$$ is an idempotent projection on the Galois-fixed submodule of $H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} U \right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$.
The semilinearity of the Galois action means that for each $f \in H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( \mathrm U \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right), {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$, $t \in \mathrm T \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$ and $\gamma \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F/{\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})$ we have $$\label{galoistorusequivariance} \gamma. \left( t.f \right) = \gamma(t). \gamma(f)$$ where $\gamma(t) \in \mathrm T \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \gamma \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$ and $\gamma(f) \in H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( \mathrm U \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \gamma \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right), {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$.
In particular, if $\lambda \in X^*(\mathrm T)$ and $f$ is in the $\lambda$-eigenspace for $\mathrm T \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$ we have that $$\gamma(t). \gamma(f) = \gamma. \left( t.f \right) = \gamma. \left( \lambda(t) \cdot f \right) = \gamma \left( \lambda(t) \right) \cdot \gamma(f) = \lambda \left( \gamma(t) \right) \gamma(f)$$ where the last equality, where we swap $\gamma$ and $\lambda$, holds since $\lambda$ is an algebraic character. This shows that $\gamma(f)$ is in the $\lambda$-eigenspace for $\mathrm T \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \gamma \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$.
We compute the Galois-fixed submodule of $H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} U \right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$ by computing the image of a basis of $H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} U \right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$ under the projection operator $e$. Fix then a cohomological degree $n$, as well as $$f_{\underline w} = \otimes f_{w_{\sigma}} \in \bigotimes_{\sigma \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \left( w_{\sigma} \cdot 0 \right) \subset \bigotimes_{\sigma \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})} H^{l(w_{\sigma})}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\left( \mathrm U \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right), {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$$ where $\underline w = \left( w_{\sigma} \right)_{\sigma \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F/ {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})}$ remembers the eigenspace to which $f_{\underline w}$ belongs under the torus action of $\prod_{\sigma \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F/ {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})} \mathrm T \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$, and $\sum_{\sigma} l(w_{\sigma}) = n$.
Then equation \[galoistorusequivariance\] and the discussion following it shows that for each Galois element $\gamma$, the cohomology class $\gamma.f$ belongs to the $\prod_{\sigma} \mathrm T \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-eigenspace where each $\mathrm T \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \gamma \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$ acts via $w_{\sigma} \cdot 0$ - that is, letting $t = \left( t_{\sigma} \right)_{\sigma} \in \prod_{\sigma} \mathrm T \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$, we obtain then $$\label{extendedtorusaction} t. \left( \gamma.f_{\underline w} \right) = \prod_{\sigma} (w_{\sigma} \cdot 0) \left( t_{\gamma \sigma} \right) ( \gamma.f_{\underline w} )$$
Therefore, if we apply the idempotent $e$ we obtain that $$t. \left( e.f_{\underline w} \right) = t. \left( \frac{1}{d} \sum_{\gamma \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F/{\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})} \gamma.f_{\underline w} \right) = \frac{1}{d} \sum_{\gamma \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})} t. (\gamma.f_{\underline w}) = \frac{1}{d} \sum_{\gamma \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})} \left( \prod_{\sigma} (w_{\sigma} \cdot 0) \left( t_{\gamma \sigma} \right) ( \gamma.f ) \right).$$ We now describe how the Galois-invariant subtorus of $\left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T \right) \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$ embeds into the isomorphic $\prod_{\sigma} \mathrm T \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$. Let $A$ be the ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-algebra of the affine group ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T$, then the Galois action on ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$ induces, at the level of ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-points, an action on $\left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T \times_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right) ({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F) = {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \textnormal{-alg}} \left( A \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F , {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$ given by $$f \mapsto \left( a \otimes x \stackrel{\gamma}{\mapsto} \gamma \left( f \left( a \otimes \gamma^{-1}(x) \right) \right) \right).$$ For each ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-algebra $B$ we have a natural adjunction isomorphism ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \textnormal{-alg}} \left( A \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F , B \right) \cong {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\textnormal{-alg}} \left( A , B \right)$. Transporting the Galois action in the case $B = {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$ yields that $${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\textnormal{-alg}} \left( A , {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right) \ni f \stackrel{\gamma}{\mapsto} \Big( a \mapsto \gamma (f(a)) \Big).$$ It is thus immediate to see that an element $f \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\textnormal{-alg}} \left( A , B \right)$ is Galois-invariant if and only if it has image contained in ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$, which is to say it factors through $A {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\hookrightarrow {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$.
Let $\widetilde A$ be the ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-algebra of the affine group $\mathrm T$. The universal property of Weil restriction says that for any ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-algebra $C$ we have a natural adjunction isomorphism $${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \textnormal{-alg}} \left( \widetilde A , C \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right) \cong {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\textnormal{-alg}} \left( A , C \right),$$ functorial in $C$. In particular, taking first $C = {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$ and then $C= {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$ gives the following diagram, where the rows are canonical isomorphisms and the columns are inclusions of Galois-invariants, induced by the obvious post-compositions on ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}$-groups: $$\xymatrix{ \mathrm T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F) = {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \textnormal{-alg}} \left( \widetilde A , {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right) \ar[r]^{\sim} \ar@{^{(}->}[d] & {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\textnormal{-alg}} \left( A , {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right) = {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T({\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}) \ar@{^{(}->}[d] \\ \mathrm T( {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F ) = {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \textnormal{-alg}} \left( \widetilde A , {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right) \ar[r]^{\sim} & {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\textnormal{-alg}} \left( A , {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right) = {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T ({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F) }$$ Finally, the isomorphism of ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-algebras $${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}\prod_{\sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \qquad x \otimes y \mapsto \left( x \otimes_{\sigma} y \right)_{\sigma}$$ shows that the subalgebra ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$ maps into the ‘diagonally embedded’ $\{ \left( 1 \otimes_{\sigma} x_{\sigma} \right)_{\sigma} \, | \, x_{\sigma} = x_{\sigma'} \textnormal{ for all } \sigma, \sigma' \}$.
Therefore, along the isomorphisms $$\mathrm T \left( {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right) \cong \mathrm T \left( \prod_{\sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \sigma } {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right) \cong \prod_{\sigma} \mathrm T \left( {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F, \sigma} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right) \cong \prod_{\sigma} \left( \mathrm T \times_{\sigma^{-1}} {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right) ({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$$ the Galois-fixed torus ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T ({\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}) = \mathrm T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$ embeds ‘diagonally’.
In particular, equation \[extendedtorusaction\] shows that an element of this diagonally embedded torus $t = (t_{\sigma})_{\sigma}$ (with all $t_{\sigma}$ being equal, and henceforth denoted by $t$) acts on $\gamma. f_{\underline w}$ as multiplication by $\prod_{\sigma} \left( w_{\sigma} \cdot 0 \right) (t)$. This is independent of $\gamma$, and therefore the $\mathrm T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$ action on $e .f_{\underline w}$ is via the same character.
We have thus shown that every irreducible ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Res}_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \mathrm }} T({\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}) = \mathrm T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$-submodule of $H^n_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( \mathfrak n, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right)$ is of the form $V_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \sum_i w_i \cdot 0 \right)$ for $w_1, \ldots, w_d \in W$ with $\sum_i l(w_i)=n$. It remains to find out the multiplicity of each of these irreducible modules.
Fix then an unordered $d$-uple $\underline w = \{ w_i \}_{i=1}^d \in W^d$ with $\sum_i l(w_i)=n$, and possibly some $w_i$’s are repeated. The bijections $\sigma: {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Aut}}}(F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}) {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}\underline w$ index the cohomology classes $f_{\sigma.\underline w} = \otimes_{\sigma \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Aut}}}(F/{\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})} f_{w_{\sigma}}$ such that $e(f_{\sigma.\underline w})$ is in the $\sum_i \left( w_i \cdot 0 \right)$-eigenspace for the Galois-fixed subtorus $\mathrm T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$, and in fact we have shown that the the images under the projection operator $e$ of the various $f_{\underline w}$ (as we vary $\underline w$) yield a basis of $H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( \mathfrak n , {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right)$.
Two different bijections $\sigma, \sigma': {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Aut}}}(F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}) {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}\underline w$ yield cohomology classes $f_{\sigma.\underline w}$ and $f_{\sigma' . \underline w}$ who have the same image under the projection operator $e$ if and only if there is some $\gamma \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})$ such that $\gamma.f_{\sigma.\underline w} = f_{\sigma' . \underline w} $, which is to say if and only if $\sigma. \underline w$ and $\sigma'. \underline w$ are in fact in the same Galois orbit. This shows the formula for the multiplicity. Finally, we notice that we can relax the assumption that $p$ does not divide $d$: indeed, we consider $H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \mathfrak n_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F}, {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} F$, with the Galois and the torus action only on the first factor. The averaging operator $e$ is well defined on this tensor product (even if it does not preserve the lattice $H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \mathfrak n_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F}, {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)$), and is a projection operator on $\left( H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \mathfrak n_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F}, {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} F \right)^{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F/{\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})} \cong H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \mathfrak n_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F}, {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)^{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})} \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} F$. The same argument as before shows now that $\mathrm T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$ acts on $H^n_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \mathfrak n_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F}, {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \right)^{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Gal}}}(F / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})} \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} F$ via the characters $V_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} \left( \sum_{\sigma} w_{\sigma} \cdot 0 \right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} F$ as we vary $\underline w = (w_{\sigma})$ among Weyl group elements whose sums of lengths is $n$.
We state the result.
Comparison between group and Lie algebra cohomology {#finalsection}
===================================================
In this section we prove theorem \[groupLiecomparison\], whose outline of the proof has been given in the introduction. As mentioned in subsection \[reductionsteps\], we can and do assume that $\mathrm G$ is simple.
The Lie algebra as a graded algebra
-----------------------------------
In this subsection we show that $\mathfrak n$ is naturally isomorphic to the graded Lie algebra associated to the lower central series filtration of $N$. We are inspired by two sources that prove very similar results. One of the source is Polo-Tilouine [@PT], sections 3.3 and 3.6, and the other is Friedlander-Parshall [@FP], proposition 4.2. Both sources are considering nilpotent groups over ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z}}$, but adapting it to our $p$-adic situation is not difficult.
Let $\{ C^i(N)\}_{i \ge 1}$ be the lower central series of $N$ - this has a description in terms of root groups as in lemma \[centralseriesandrootgroups\] below. Consider the graded algebra ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N : = \bigoplus_i C^i(N) / C^{i+1}(N)$. This is a ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-Lie algebra (with brackets given by taking commutators), since each quotient $C^i(N) / C^{i+1}(N)$ is a finite, free ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-module - again by lemma \[centralseriesandrootgroups\].
Our running assumption on the residue characteristic $p \ge 5$ implies that the coefficients appearing in the Chevalley commutation relations (see for instance Carter [@carter], theorem 5.2.2) are invertible in ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$, which is crucial for the following result.
\[centralseriesandrootgroups\] For all $n \ge 1$ we have $$C^n(N) = \prod_{h(\alpha) \ge n} N_{\alpha}$$ where as usual the product on the right is taken with respect to our fixed non-decreasing ordering of the roots.
By induction on $n$, the case $n=1$ being given by the isomorphism in equation \[multiplicationisom\].
Suppose the claim holds for $n-1$, so that $C^{n-1}(N) = \prod_{h(\alpha) \ge n-1} N_{\alpha}$. By definition, $C^n(N) = [N, C^{n-1}(N)]$ so the commutation relations in [@carter] (theorem 5.2.2) make it clear that the inclusion $C^n(N) \subset \prod_{h(\alpha) \ge n} N_{\alpha}$ holds.
For the other inclusion, we show that the $N_{\beta}$’s having $h(\beta)= m \ge n$ are contained in $C^n(N)$ by decreasing induction on $m$. For the base case, fix $\beta$ a root of maximal height $h(\beta) = m$ and take a simple root $\alpha_i$ such that $\beta - \alpha_i =\alpha \in \Phi^+$. Then $h(\alpha) = m-1 \ge n-1$, so that $N_{\alpha} \subset C^{n-1}(N)$. Consider then the commutator $$[\theta_{\alpha_i}(1), \theta_{\alpha}(1) ] = \theta_{\beta} (c)$$ for some $c \in {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F^*$ by the aforementioned commutation relations and our assumption on the residue characteristic $p \ge 5$. The fact that there is no other factor on the right hand side is precisely due to the maximality of $m$, so that there are no other roots of the form $h \alpha_i + k \alpha$ for $i,k \ge 1$. This shows that $N_{\beta} \subset [C^1(N), C^{n-1}(N)] = C^n(N)$.
Suppose now that we have shown that all $N_{\beta'}$’s having $l(\beta') \ge m+1 > n$ are contained in $C^n(N)$. Fix $\beta$ with $l(\beta)=m \ge n$, take again a simple root $\alpha_i$ such that $\beta - \alpha_i = \alpha \in \Phi^+$ and consider the commutator $$[\theta_{\alpha_i}(1), \theta_{\alpha}(1)] = \prod_{h, k \ge 1} \theta_{h \alpha_i + k \alpha} \left( c_{h,k,\alpha_i,\alpha} \cdot (\pm 1) \right).$$ The only positive root on the right hand side whose height is less than $m+1$ is the one corresponding to $h=1=k$, that is, it is exactly $\beta$. Therefore, $$[\theta_{\alpha_i}(1), \theta_{\alpha}(1)] = \theta_{\beta} (c) \cdot u'$$ for some $c \in {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F^*$ and $u' \in \prod_{h(\beta') \ge m+1} N_{\beta'} \subset C^n(N)$. In particular, we obtain that $N_{\beta} \subset C^n(N)$.
Notice now that the height function $h$ provides us also with a grading (in fact, with a filtration) on the Lie algebra $\mathfrak n$: that is to say, $\mathfrak n (m) = \bigoplus_{h(\alpha) = m} \mathfrak n_{\alpha}$. The usual commutation formulas show that the bracket operation is compatible with the grading, i.e. $\left[ \mathfrak n(m), \mathfrak n(n) \right] \subset \mathfrak n(m+n)$.
\[unipotentLieiso\] The family of maps $$\theta_n: C^n(N) / C^{n+1}(N) \cong \prod_{h(\alpha)=n} N_{\alpha} \stackrel{\prod \theta_{\alpha}^{-1}}{{\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}} \bigoplus_{h(\alpha)=n} \mathfrak n_{\alpha}$$ indexed by $n$ provides an isomorphism of graded ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-Lie algebras ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N \cong \mathfrak n$.
We are making a small abuse of notation by implicitly identifying $\mathbb G_a \cong {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Lie} \,}}\mathrm U_a \cong \mathfrak u_{\alpha}$ via $\operatorname d \theta_{\alpha}$.
The fact that the maps $\theta_n$ are ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-linear and provide a bijection ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}\mathfrak n$ is clear from lemma \[centralseriesandrootgroups\], what needs to be shown is that the family of maps $\{ \theta_n \}$ respects the brackets. This rests on the usual commutation formulas of [@carter], section 5.2, as explained by Friedlander and Parshall in their proof of proposition 4.2 in [@FP].
The universal enveloping algebra
--------------------------------
We now prove that the filtration given by the powers of the augmentation ideal on the completed group algebra ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]$ has associated graded algebra isomorphic to the universal enveloping algebra $\mathcal U(\mathfrak n)$. We adapt the argument from Hartley’s exposition in [@hartley1], section 2.
Let then $I = \langle x - 1 \rangle_{x \in N}$ be the augmentation ideal, that is to say, the kernel of the augmentation map ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]] {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$. This is a two sided ideal and is closed for the profinite topology of ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]$.
We filter ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]$ by powers of $I$, and consider the associated graded algebra $${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]] : = \bigoplus_{n \ge 0} I^n / I^{n+1}.$$ The associativity of the multiplication operation in the group algebra yields that the operation $$(x + I^{n+1})(y + I^{m+1}) :=xy + I^{m+n+1}$$ on ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]$ is associative. In particular, we get a graded ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-Lie algebra structure, where the bracket operation is defined as $[x,y] = xy -yx$.
It is well-known (see for example Passi [@passi] chapter III section 1.5) that if $x \in C^n(N)$ (the $n$-th subgroup in the lower central series for $N$) then $x-1 \in J^n$, the $n$-th power of the augmentation ideal $J \subset {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[N]$, the (uncompleted) group algebra. In particular, the closure of $J$ in ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]$ is exactly $I$, and the same holds for the respective powers. We have then a morphism of graded ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-Lie algebras: $$\label{inducingmap} {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]] \qquad x C^{n+1}(N) \mapsto (x-1) + I^{n+1} \quad \forall x \in C^n(N).$$ Indeed it is easy to check that $$xyx^{-1}y^{-1} -1 = [x,y]_N -1 \equiv [x-1,y-1]_{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]} = (x-1)(y-1)-(y-1)(x-1) = xy-yx \bmod I^{m+n+1}$$ for any $x \in C^n(N), y \in C^m(N)$.
We denote by $\mathcal U({\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N)$ the universal enveloping algebra of ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N \cong \mathfrak n$ as a graded ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-Lie algebra. That is, $\mathcal U({\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N)$ is the initial object in the category of ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-associative graded Lie algebras equipped with graded ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-Lie algebra maps from ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N$.
In fact, $\mathcal U({\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N)$ is the usual enveloping algebra of the ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-Lie algebra ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N$, with the grading induced by that of ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N$.
Since ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]$ is a graded associative ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-Lie algebra, the above map \[inducingmap\] extends to $$\label{envelopinmap} \Theta: \mathcal U({\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N) {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]].$$ We will show in theorem \[envelopingalgebraiso\] that $\Theta$ is an isomorphism.
We now describe a homogeneous ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-basis for the graded Lie algebra ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N$. Recall from lemma \[centralseriesandrootgroups\] that $C^n(N) = \prod_{h(\alpha) \ge n} N_{\alpha}$, so that we have an isomorphism $\prod_{h(\alpha) = n} N_{\alpha} \cong C^n(N) / C^{n+1}(N)$ induced by the injection of the root groups inside $C^n(N)$.
Fix once and for all an isomorphism ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \cong {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}^d$ of free ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-modules. Then we have ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}^d \cong {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F \cong N_{\alpha}$ where the second isomorphism is $\theta_{\alpha}$. Since both maps are ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-linear, this provides us with a ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-basis $B_{\alpha} = \{ x^{\alpha}_1, \ldots, x^{\alpha}_d \}$ (the image of the standard basis of the free ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-module ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}^d$) for each $N_{\alpha}$.
We conclude that $$B_n = \bigcup_{h(\alpha) = n} B_{\alpha}$$ (as usual, ordered accordingly to the ordering on the roots fixed before) is a ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-basis for $C^n(N) / C^{n+1}(N)$. The union of the $B_n$’s as $n$ increases provides us then with a ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-basis $B = \{ x_1, \ldots, x_M \}$ of ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N$ formed by homogeneous elements and ordered in (weakly) increasing degree. For each element $x_j \in B$ we denote by $\mu(x_j)$ the integer such that $x_j \in B_n$ - that is to say, the height of the root $\alpha(j)$ such that $x_j \in N_{\alpha(j)}$ - and by $X_j$ the subgroup of $N_{\alpha(j)} \cong {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}^d$ which is ‘${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-spanned’ by $x_j$ (an isomorphic image of ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$).
\[augmentationlemma\] For each $n \ge 1$, define $E_n$ to be the ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-span (inside ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[N]$) of the elements $$(1 - y_1) \cdot \ldots \cdot (1 - y_s) \textnormal{ such that } y_j \in X_{k_j} \textnormal{ and } \sum \mu(x_{k_j}) \ge n.$$ Here, we ordered the products so that if $j < j'$ then $k_j \le k_{j'}$ which is to say that $x_{k_j}$ comes no later than $x_{k_{j'}}$ in our ordering fixed above.[^3] Then $J^n = E_n$, and in particular the closure of $E_n$ in ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]$ coincides with $I^n$.
This follows closely section 2 in [@hartley2]. First of all just like in lemma 2.2 of loc. cit., one shows that $E_n E_m \subset E_{n+m}$ - the proof goes through verbatim, since it’s not much more than a re-arrangement lemma. In particular since the product map in ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]$ is continuous we can take closures to get $$\overline {E_a} \cdot \overline {E_b} \subset \overline {E_{a+b}} \textnormal{ for all } a,b \ge 1.$$
Now notice that clearly $E_1 \subset J$. On the other hand, each $g \in N$ can be written down uniquely (thanks to the isomorphism in formula \[multiplicationisom\]) as an ordered product $g = \prod_{\alpha} g^{\alpha}$ with $g^{\alpha} \in N_{\alpha}$. Since we fixed isomorphisms $N_{\alpha} \cong {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}^d$, we obtain that $g^{\alpha} = \prod_{i=1}^d y_i^{\alpha}$ (again an ordered product) for $y_i^{\alpha} \in X_i^{\alpha}$. Replacing each $y_i^{\alpha}$ by $\left( 1 - (1 - y_i^{\alpha}) \right)$ and expanding the product one gets that $$g = 1 + \sum_{\textnormal{all products}} (-1)^s (1-y'_1) \cdot \ldots \cdot (1-y'_s).$$ In particular, $1-g$ is in $E_1$. Since $\{ 1-g \}_{g \in N}$ is a ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-basis for the augmentation ideal $J \subset {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[N]$, we obtain that $E_1 = J$, and taking closures that $\overline E_1 = I$.
Now, as $J^{n+1} = J^n \cdot J$, we obtain by induction on $n$ that $J^n \subset E_n$.
The other inclusion is clear, since $y_j \in {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}.x_j \subset C^{\mu(x_j)}(N)$ implies that $(1-y_j) \in J^{\mu(x_j)}$. Therefore, $J^n = E_n$ and taking closures, we obtain $$\overline {E_n} = \overline {J^n} = I^n.$$
For each element $x_k$ of our basis $B$ and each $r \ge 0$, we define the following elements of ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[N]$: $$u_r^{(k)} = x_k^{- {\lceil\frac{r}{2}\rceil}} (x_k-1)^r = \left\{ \begin{array}{ccc} 1 & \textnormal{ if } r=0 \\ x_k^{-i} (x_k-1)^{2i} & \textnormal{ if } r=2i \\ x_k^{-i}(x_k-1)^{2i-1} & \textnormal{ if } r=2i-1 \end{array} \right.$$ For each $M$-uple of non-negative integers $\mathbf j = (j_1, \ldots, j_M)$ we set $$u(\mathbf j) := u_{j_1}^{(1)} \cdot \ldots \cdot u_{j_M}^{(M)}$$ having weight $$\mu(\mathbf j) := \sum_{k=1}^M j_k \mu(x_k).$$
\[augmentationpowersbases\] A topological ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-basis of $I^n$ is given by $$\mathcal B_n = \left\{ u(\mathbf j) \, | \, \mu(\mathbf j) \ge n \right\}.$$ By ‘topological ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-basis’ we mean that these elements are ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-linearly independent, and that the closure of their ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-span in ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]$ coincide with $I^n$.
Denote $I_k \subset {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[X_k]]$ the augmentation ideal. Notice that if $y_j \in X_{k_j}$, then $(1-y_j) \in I_{k_j}$. Grouping together the factors $(1-y_j)$’s corresponding to the same subgroup $X_k$, we obtain that $E_n$ is spanned by products $\xi_1 \cdot \ldots \xi_M$ such that $\xi_k \in I_k^{j_k}$ and $\sum j_k \mu(x_k) \ge n$ (we allow $j_k=0$ if no factor corresponding to $X_k$ appears).
We now construct topological ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-bases for the powers of the augmentation ideal $I_k$. In fact, we already have:
\[Zpgroupalgebra\] The set $\{ u_t^{(k)} \}_{t \ge r}$ is a topological ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-basis for $I_k^r$ - i.e. they are ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-linearly independent and their ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-span is dense in $I_k^r$.
Exactly like in lemma 2.4 in [@hartley2] one proves that $\{ u_0^{(k)}, \ldots, u_r^{(k)} \}$ is a ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-basis for $\sum_{i=- {\lceil\frac{r}{2}\rceil}}^{{\lfloor\frac{r}{2}\rfloor}} {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}x_k^i$. In particular, $\{ u_r^{(k)} \}_{r \ge 0}$ is a ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-basis for $\bigoplus_{i \in {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z}}} {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}x_k^i$, which shows the ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-linear independence statement. Now notice that once we take the closure of this in ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[X_k]]$, we obtain the entire group algebra. This is best seen from the fact that ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z}}\hookrightarrow {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$ is a dense embedding, or even more explicitly from the well-known isomorphisms $\psi: {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[X_k]] {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[T]]$ (ring of formal power series in one variable) obtained by sending $(x_k -1) \mapsto T$.
The definition of the $u_i^{(k)}$’s makes it clear that $I_k^r \supset \sum_{t \ge r} {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}u_t^{(k)}$. On the other hand, we have $$\label{directsumgroupalgebra} {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[X_k]] = \sum_{i=- {\lceil\frac{r}{2}\rceil}} ^{{\lfloor\frac{r}{2}\rfloor}} {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}x_k^i \oplus \overline{\sum_{i \ge r} {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}u_i^{(k)}},$$ again this can be seen by considering the analogous statement in the isomorphic ring ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[T]]$.
Intersecting both sides of equation \[directsumgroupalgebra\] with $I_k^r$ yields that $I_k^r = \left( I_k^r \cap \sum_{i=- {\lceil\frac{r}{2}\rceil}} ^{{\lfloor\frac{r}{2}\rfloor}} {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}.x_k \right) \oplus \overline{\sum_{i \ge r} {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}u_i^{(k)}}$, so it suffices to prove that the first summand is zero to complete the proof of the claim.
We have shown that $\sum_{i=- {\lceil\frac{r}{2}\rceil}} ^{{\lfloor\frac{r}{2}\rfloor}} {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}x_k^i$ is the ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-span of $\{ u_0^{(k)}, \ldots, u_{r-1}^{(k)} \}$. Applying the aforementioned isomorphism ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[X_j]] \cong {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[T]]$ and working in the target ring, one sees that $I_j^r = (T^r)$ but the only element in the ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-span of $\psi \left( \{ u_0^{(k)}, \ldots, u_{r-1}^{(k)} \} \right) = \{ 1, T(T+1)^{-1}, T^2(T+1)^{-1}, \ldots, T^{r-1} (T+1)^{- {\lceil\frac{r}{2}\rceil}} \} $ divisible by $T^r$ is zero.
The claim showed that the set $\{ u_r^{(k)} \}_{r \ge j_k}$ is a topological ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-basis for $I_k^{j_k}$, or in other words that $\overline {\{ u_r^{(k)} \}_{r \ge j_k} } = I_k^{j_k}$. Therefore the generic element spanning $E_n$ is of the type $$\xi_1 \cdot \ldots \cdot \xi_M \textnormal{ with } \xi_k \in I_k^{j_k} = \overline {\{ u_r^{(k)} \}_{r \ge j_k} } \textnormal{ and } \sum_k j_k \mu(x_k) \ge n.$$ But now continuity of the product map in ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]$ means that the product of the closures $\prod_k \overline {\{ u_r^{(k)} \}_{r \ge j_k} }$ is contained in the closure of the product $ \prod_k \{ u_r^{(k)} \}_{r \ge j_k}$ and this latter product coincide exactly with the ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-span of the $u(\mathbf j)$ having $\mu(\mathbf j) \ge n$.
Finally, the ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-linear independence of the $u(\mathbf j)$’s follows from the ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-linear independence of the single factors $u_{j_k}^{(k)}$ proved in claim \[Zpgroupalgebra\].
We are finally ready to show the main theorem of this subsection - the bulk of the work has already been done.
\[envelopingalgebraiso\] The map $\Theta: \mathcal U({\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N) {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]$ defined as in formula \[envelopinmap\] is an isomorphism of graded associative ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-Lie algebras.
Recall that $\Theta$ is induced by the map ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]$ sending $x C^{n+1}(N) \mapsto (x-1) + I^{n+1}$. We will describe ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-basis for $\mathcal U({\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N)$ and ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]$ and show that $\Theta$ sends one into the other.
The ordered basis $B$ for ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N$ provides, by the Poincaré-Birkhoff-Witt theorem, a ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-basis for $\mathcal U({\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N)$ consisting of the monomials $$x_1^{j_1} \cdot \ldots \cdot x_M^{j_M}$$ for all $M$-uples of non-negative integers $\mathbf j = (j_1, \ldots j_m)$. Moreover, this is a basis of homogeneous elements for the grading on $\mathcal U({\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N)$ induced by the grading on ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N$, where $$\deg \left( x_1^{j_1} \cdot \ldots \cdot x_M^{j_M} \right) = \sum_{k=1}^M j_k \mu(x_k).$$ In particular, a basis for the subspace of degree $n$ homogeneous elements of $\mathcal U({\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N)$ is given by $$\left\{ x_1^{j_1} \cdot \ldots \cdot x_M^{j_M} \right\} \textnormal{ such that } \sum_k j_k \mu(x_k) = n. \label{envelopingbasis}$$
We switch our attention to ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]$. For each $M$-uple of non-negative integers $\mathbf j = (j_1, \ldots, j_m)$, we notice that $$u(\mathbf j) \equiv v(\mathbf j) := (x_1-1)^{j_1} \cdot \ldots \cdot (x_M-1)^{j_m} \bmod I^{\mu(\mathbf j) +1}$$ since when we compute $u(\mathbf j) - v(\mathbf j)$ we pick up an additional factor of $(x_k^{\pm 1} - 1)$, which is in $I$.
Therefore, a ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-basis[^4] of $I^n / I^{n+1}$ is given by $$\label{groupalgebrabasis} \{ v(\mathbf j) + I^{n+1} \} \textnormal{ such that } \mu(\mathbf j) = n.$$ Finally, we conclude by noticing that the map $\Theta$ gives $$x_1^{j_1} \cdot \ldots \cdot x_M^{j_M} \mapsto (x_1-1)^{j_1} \cdot \ldots \cdot (x_M-1)^{j_M} = v(\mathbf j)$$ so that the two ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-basis correspond to each other.
Comparison via a spectral sequence {#spectralsection}
----------------------------------
In this subsection we introduce a spectral sequence which relates cohomology of (modules over) a filtered algebra and cohomology of (modules over) the associated graded algebra. This is a crucial ingredient to prove theorem \[groupLiecomparison\].
We start by recalling a general setup for filtered and graded rings and modules.
We follow Polo and Tilouine’s ideas from [@PT], but we will need take into account the topology of our profinite algebras (like ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]$) as well. In particular, this calls for adapting the results of Grunenfelder ([@grunenfelder]) and Sjodin ([@sjodin]) to the topological setup.
Let then $A$ be a profinite topological ring (not necessarily commutative) equipped with a descending filtration $\{ F^n A\}_{n \ge 0}$ such that each $F^n A$ is a closed two-sided ideal in $A$ (for example, the filtration induced by the powers of a closed two-sided ideal). Every $A$-module is assumed to be a left $A$-module, every left $A$-module is assumed to have a topology for which the action map is continuous, and every morphism of left $A$-modules is assumed to be continuous.
We consider the category $\mathcal F_A$ of filtered (topological) left $A$-modules. All filtrations are decreasing and indexed by ${\ensuremath{\mathbb N}}$ (unless we say otherwise, see for example the filtration on ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}$-spaces below), and each $F^n M$ is closed in $M$. The action of $A$ is such that $F^h A . F^k M \subset F^{h+k} M$.
Given a map of filtered $A$-modules $f:M {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}N$ we say that $f$ has filt-degree $k$ if $f(F^h M) \subset F^{h+k} N$ for all $h$ (where we assume $F^t N = N$ if the filtration on $N$ is indexed by ${\ensuremath{\mathbb N}}$ and $t < 0$).
Notice that the filt-degree of a morphism is not unique, if it exists: indeed if $f$ has filt-degree $k$ than it also has filt-degree $k-i$ for each $i \ge 1$, because the filtration on $N$ is descending.
We denote by $\underline {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}(M,N)$ the morphism of finite filt-degree, but as morphisms in the category $\mathcal F_A$ we only consider the morphisms of filt-degree $0$.
A filt-degree $0$ morphism $f \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{\mathcal F_A}(M,N)$ is said to be strict if $f(F^h M) = {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Im}}}f \cap F^h N$ for all $h$.
The filtration $\left\{ F^n M \right\}$ of an $A$-module $M$ is said to be
- *discrete* if $F^n M = 0$ for $n$ large enough.
- *complete* if $M = \varprojlim_n M / F^n M$.
- *exhaustive* if $M = \bigcup_n F^n M$. This is usually the case, if we set e.g. $F^0 M = M$ and $F^k M = F^k A . M$.
- *bounded* if $F^n M = M$ for some $n \in {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z}}$.
We also have the corresponding concepts of graded topological ring, graded topological left modules, and so on. In particular if $A$ is a filtered topological ring, then ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}A$ is a graded topological ring. The mapping $M \mapsto {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}M$ defines a functor from $\mathcal F_A$ to $\mathcal G_{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}A}$, the category of graded left ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}A$-modules. If $B$ is a graded ring, the morphisms in the category $\mathcal G_B$ preserve the degree.
A short exact sequence of strict morphisms in $\mathcal F_A$ stays exact upon applying ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}$.
Notice that for each $M, N \in \mathcal F_A$ we can ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z}}$-filter $\underline {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}(M,N)$ by $$F^n \underline {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}(M,N) = \left\{ f: M {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}N \textnormal{ of filt-degree } n \right\}.$$
1. This filtration is exhaustive, since we defined $\underline {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}(M,N)$ to be the morphisms respecting the filtration and having finite filt-degree (possibly negative).
2. It is often the case that $\underline {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}(M,N) \neq {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A(M,N)$, i.e. that there are $A$-module maps $M {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}N$ which do not have a filt-degree (see section 4 of [@sjodin] for a counterexample).
We now want conditions to ensure that each $A$-module map $f: M {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}N$ has a finite filt-degree.
\[filtfreeandfg\] Let $M \in \mathcal F_A$.
- We say that $M$ is filt-free if it is a free object in ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Mod}}}(A)$, and there is a basis $\{x_i\}$ with integers $h(i)$ such that $$F^n M = \sum_i F^{n-h(i)}A . x_i. \qquad \forall n.$$ Equivalently, $M$ is a direct sum of shifts[^5] of $A$, as mentioned in section 3.4 of [@PT].
- We say that $M$ is filt finitely generated (filt f.g.) if there exists a finite set $\{x_i, h(i)\}$ with $x_i \in M$ and $h(i) \in {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z}}$ such that $$F^n M = \sum_i F^{n-h(i)} A. x_i \qquad \forall n.$$
Let $M,N \in \mathcal F_A$. Suppose that $M$ is filt f.g. and that the filtration on $N$ is exhaustive. Then $${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A(M,N) = \underline {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}(M,N).$$
We also have a map $$\phi(M,N): {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}\underline {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}(M,N) {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}A} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}M, {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N \right)$$ defined in the obvious way, and functorial in $M$ and $N$.
\[grHomcommute\] Suppose $M$ is filt-free. Then $\phi(M,N)$ is an isomorphism for all $N \in \mathcal F_A$.
\[strictresolutionexists\] Every $M \in \mathcal F_A$ admits a filt-free resolution $L_{\bullet} {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}M {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}0$ by strict morphisms (called a *strict resolution*).
If the filtration on $A$ is exhaustive and complete and the associated graded ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}A$ is Noetherian, then every $M \in \mathcal F_A$ such that ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}M$ is finitely generated admits a strict resolution by filt-free, f.g. modules $L_i$.
If $M$ is filt f.g. and has an exhaustive filtration then we can also choose a strict resolution by filt-free, f.g. modules $L_i$.
The first two statements are taken verbatim from the aforementioned sources. Remark 5.2.2 says that if $M \in \mathcal F_A$ is filt f.g. and has an exhaustive filtration, then it admits a strict epimorphism $f_0: L {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}M {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}0$ with $L$ filt-free and finitely generated. Replacing $M$ by $\ker f_0$ with the induced filtration as a submodule of $L$ (see section I.2 in [@NVO]) and iterating yields the required filt-free, f.g. resolution.
Suppose now that $M \in \mathcal F_A$ is filt f.g. and that either of the latter two statements of the proposition applies, so that $M$ admits a strict, filt-free, f.g. resolution: $$\ldots {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}L_n \stackrel{f_n}{{\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}} \ldots {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}L_1 \stackrel{f_1}{{\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}} L_0 \stackrel{f_0}{{\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}} M {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}0,$$ recall in particular that each $f_i$ has filt-degree $0$.
Fix $N \in \mathcal F_A$ and suppose its filtration is exhaustive. Then applying ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A ( - , N )$ to the above resolution yields the complex $$0 {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A(M,N) {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A (L_0, N) \stackrel{d_0}{{\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}} {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A (L_1, N) \stackrel{d_1}{{\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}} \ldots {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A(L_n, N ) \stackrel{d_n}{{\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}} \ldots$$ whose homology is, by definition, ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Ext}}}^*_A(M,N)$ since each $L_i$ is a free (hence projective) $A$-module.
On the other hand, our previous lemmas and the assumption that each $L_i$ is filt f.g. says that ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A(L_i,N) = \underline {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}(L_i, N)$ is filtered. We obtain then that the complex ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A (L_{\bullet}, N)$ is a filtered complex, since the differentials $d_i$ are compatible with the filtrations (the $d_i$’s have filt-degree $0$ because the $f_i$’s do).
We can consider then the spectral sequence of this filtered complex: following appendix A of [@RZ] we have that the $E_1$-page is the homology of the associated graded complex. More precisely, applying the functor ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}$ we obtain an associated graded complex $$0 {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}\underline {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}(L_0, N) \stackrel{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}d_0}{{\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}} {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}\underline {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}(L_1, N) \stackrel{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}d_1}{{\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}} \ldots {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}\underline {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}(L_n, N) \stackrel{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}d_n}{{\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}} \ldots$$ and then $E_1^{r,s} = H^{r+s} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}\underline {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}(L_{\bullet}, N) \right)_r$, that is to say, the $(r+s)$-th homology of the complex of degree-$r$ graded pieces.
The spectral sequence has $E_{\infty}$-page being the homology groups of the complex ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A(L_{\bullet}, N)$, with grading induced by the filtration of the complex. More precisely, $E_{\infty}^{r,s} = ( H^{r+s} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A(L_{\bullet}, N) \right)_r )$.
As explained in theorem A.3.1(b) of [@RZ], for the spectral sequence to converge it suffices for the filtration on the complex ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A (L_{\bullet}, N)$ to be bounded and discrete: for each $n$ we want integers $u(n) < v(n)$ such that $F^{u(n)} {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A (L_n, N) = {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A (L_n, N)$ (bounded) and $F^{v(n)} {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A(L_n, N) = 0$ (discrete).
\[Homdiscretefilt\] Suppose that $N$ has a bounded and discrete filtration, and that $L$ is filt-free, direct sum of shifts of bounded degree. Then ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A(L,N) = \underline {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}(L,N)$ has bounded and discrete filtration.
The assumption on $L$ means that in definition \[filtfreeandfg\], $L$ is a (possible infinite) direct sum of shifts $A^{(h(j))}$ with $h(j)$ bounded above and below. We fix such bounds $h \le h(j) \le H$.
We have then $F^h L = \bigoplus_{j \in J} F^{h-h(j)} A = \bigoplus_{j \in J} A = L$, so that the filtration on $L$ is bounded. In particular, it is exhaustive and hence lemma 13 in [@sjodin] guarantees that $\underline {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}(L,N)$ has a discrete filtration.
Let now $f \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A(L,N)$ and $x \in F^n L = \bigoplus_{j \in J} F^n A^{(h(j))}$, so $x = \sum_j x_j$ is a finite sum with $x_j \in F^n A^{(h(j))} = F^{n-h(j)} A$. Fix $k$ such that $F^k N = N$, which exists as the filtration on $N$ is bounded. Then we have $$f(x_j) = x_j f(1_j) \in F^{n-h(j)} A. N = F^{n-h(j)} A . F^k N \subset F^{n-h(j)+k} N \subset F^{n-H+k} N$$ where the last inclusion is due to $H \ge h(j)$ and the filtration on $N$ being decreasing.
In particular, $f(x) = \sum_j f(x_j) \in F^{n-H+k} N$ and thus $f$ has filt-degree $k-H$. This shows that the every $A$-morphism has finite filt-degree, so that ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A(L,N) = \underline {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}(L,N)$, and that the filtration is bounded.
The proposition clearly applies to each $L = L_i$ obtained above, since those are filt-free, f.g. modules, so they are finite direct sums. In particular, we showed that the spectral sequence is convergent.
Consider now the $E_1$-page of the spectral sequence, having $E_1^{r,s} = H^{r+s} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}\underline {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}(L_{\bullet}, N) \right)_r$. Since ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}\underline {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}(L_{\bullet}, N) \cong {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}A} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}L_{\bullet}, {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N \right)$ by lemma \[grHomcommute\], and ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}L_n$ is a free ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}A$-module for each $n$, this graded complex is the one computing the higher derived functors of ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}A} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}M, {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N \right)$. In other words, $H^{r+s} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}A} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}L_{\bullet}, {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N \right) \right)_r \cong {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Ext}}}^{r+s}_{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}A} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}M, {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N \right)_r$.
We proved the following theorem:
\[abstractspectral\] Let $M \in \mathcal F_A$ be such that it admits a strict resolution by filt-free, f.g. modules $L_{\bullet} {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}M {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}0$. Let $N \in \mathcal F_A$ have a bounded and discrete filtration. Then there exists a cohomological spectral sequence with first page $$E_1^{r,s} = {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Ext}}}^{r+s}_{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}A} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}M, {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N \right)_r \Rightarrow E_{\infty}^{r,s} = {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Ext}}}_A^{r+s} \left(M, N \right)_r$$ converging to the graded module associated to the filtered ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Ext}}}_A^{r+s} \left( M,N \right)$.
Just like Polo and Tilouine in section 3 of [@PT], we also discuss an equivariant version. From now on we assume that $A$ is a ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-algebra, for ease of notation. Suppose that we have a group of automorphisms $\Lambda$ acting on the filtered ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-algebra $A$, i.e. a subgroup of ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Aut}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}}(A)$ that preserves the filtration.
We can then consider the ‘smash product’ ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z}}_p[\Lambda] \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} A$. The ring structure on this smash product is given by $$(\lambda_1 \otimes a_1) (\lambda_2 \otimes a_2) = \lambda_1 \lambda_2 \otimes a_1 \lambda_1(a_2).$$ We denote the smash product by $\Lambda \sharp A$. Notice that the ring embedding $\phi: A {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}\Lambda \sharp A$ sending $a \mapsto 1 \otimes a$ turns $\Lambda \sharp A$ into a free right $A$-module. Explicitly, $A^{\oplus \Lambda} \stackrel{\sim}{{\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}} \Lambda \sharp A$ via the map $(a_{\lambda}) \mapsto \sum_{\lambda} \lambda \otimes \lambda(a_{\lambda})$.
We can put on $\Lambda \sharp A$ the filtration induced by $\phi$, in the sense that $F^n( \Lambda \sharp A)$ is the two-sided ideal generated by $\phi(F^n A)$. Restriction of scalars along the embedding $A {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}\Lambda \sharp A$ induces a functor $\mathcal F_{\Lambda \sharp A} {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}\mathcal F_A$, so in particular every filtered $\Lambda \sharp A$-module[^6] can be considered as a filtered $A$-module.
Notice that the actual filtration on $M \in \mathcal F_{\Lambda \sharp A}$ does not change, and hence the abelian group ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}M$ is unambiguously defined, whether we are considering it as a ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}A$-module or as a ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}(\Lambda \sharp A)$-module.
\[inducedidealfiltration\] Suppose that $F^n A = I^n$ for a fixed (two-sided) ideal $I$ of $A$. Let $I'$ be the right ideal of $\Lambda \sharp A$ generated by $I$. Then $I'$ is a two-sided ideal of $\Lambda \sharp A$, and the filtration induced by $\phi$ is the $I'$-adic filtration.
The first part of the claim is an easy check. For the second, we need to show that if $I' = (\Lambda \sharp A)I$, then $(I')^n = (\Lambda \sharp A)I^n$. The definition of $I'$ settles the base case of the induction: for the inductive step, one needs to show that if $$\sum_i t_i \hat t_i \in (I')^{n+1} \textnormal{ with } t_i \in I', \, \hat t_i \in (I')^n,$$ then we can write this sum as a linear combination of elements $(\lambda \otimes a) (1 \otimes \tau) \in (\Lambda \sharp A) (1 \otimes I^n)$. Obviously it suffices to treat the case of a single product $t \hat t$, and then use the induction assumption and factor the sums to finish the proof.
Notice that if $M$ and $N$ are filtered $\Lambda \sharp A$-modules, then the group ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A(M,N)$ has the structure of a (left) $\Lambda$-module: $$\lambda.f (m) = \lambda \left( f (\lambda^{-1}m ) \right) \qquad \forall \lambda \in \Lambda, \, \forall f \in {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A(M,N).$$ This action preserves the submodule $\underline {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{\mathcal F_A} \left(M,N \right)$ of morphisms of finite filt-degree, and thus descends to a $\Lambda$-action on ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}A} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}M, {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N \right)$ defined via the same formula. Suppose now that $M$ is a filt f.g. $\Lambda \sharp A$-module with exhaustive filtration. By proposition \[strictresolutionexists\], we can find a strict resolution of $M$ by filt-free, f.g. $\Lambda \sharp A$-modules: $L_{\bullet} {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}M {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}0$, so the maps are $\Lambda$-equivariant. Let $N \in \mathcal F_{\Lambda \sharp A}$. Applying ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A \left( - , N \right)$ to the resolution above gives then the complex $$0 {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A(M,N) {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A \left( L_{\bullet}, N \right)$$ whose homology computes ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Ext}}}_A^* (M,N)$, and moreover the differentials are now $\Lambda$-equivariant, so that they induce a $\Lambda$-action on homology.
Suppose $N$ has a bounded and discrete filtration as a $\Lambda \sharp A$-module. Then these properties are preserved once we consider $N$ as a filtered $A$-module, hence proposition \[Homdiscretefilt\] applies (because the $L_i$’s are filt-free, f.g. as $\Lambda \sharp A$-modules, and hence considered as $A$-modules they stay filt-free and the shifts degrees are the same as those as a $\Lambda \sharp A$-module, in particular they are bounded) and our complex $$0 {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_A \left( L_{\bullet}, N \right)$$ is in fact a flltered complex of $\Lambda$-modules.
When we apply ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}$ we obtain (since the $L_i$’s are filt-free $A$-module and hence lemma \[grHomcommute\] applies) the complex of $\Lambda$-modules $0 {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}\underline {{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}} \left( L_{\bullet}, N \right) $ which is isomorphic to $0 {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}A} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}L_{\bullet}, {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N \right)$ and hence its homology is exactly ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Ext}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}A}^* \left( {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}M, {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N \right)$. Therefore, we obtain a filtered complex spectral sequence of $\Lambda$-modules with the same $E_1$ and $E_{\infty}$-pages as in theorem \[abstractspectral\] but now every object involved has a $\Lambda$-module structure. We proved the following result.
\[equivariantss\] Let $M \in \mathcal F_{\Lambda \sharp A}$ be filt f.g. with an exhaustive filtration, and let $N \in \mathcal F_{\Lambda \sharp A}$ have a bounded, discrete filtration.
Then there exists a cohomological spectral sequence of $\Lambda$-modules with first page $$E_1^{r,s} = {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Ext}}}^{r+s}_{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}A} \left({\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}M, {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}N \right)_r \Rightarrow E_{\infty}^{r,s} = {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Ext}}}_A^{r+s} \left( M, N \right)_r$$ converging to the graded $\Lambda$-module associated to the filtered ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Ext}}}_A^{r+s} \left( M,N \right)$.
Proof of theorem \[groupLiecomparison\]
---------------------------------------
Let’s now specialize to the situation we care about. Let $G$ be a compact $p$-adic analytic group, and let $A = {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[G]]$ be the completed group algebra. We filter it via the powers of the augmentation ideal $I$. As explained by Symonds and Weigel in [@SW], the category of topological ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[G]]$-modules has two important subcategories, that of profinite modules $\mathcal P_A$ and that of discrete modules $\mathcal D_A$. We filter each ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[G]]$-module by the powers of the augmentation ideal $I$: $$F^n M := I^n M.$$ Notice that every trivial module $M$ gets then the bounded and discrete filtration $F^0 M = M \supset F^1 M = 0$ since obviously $g-1$ sends each $M \ni m \mapsto 0$ for all $g \in G$.
As explained in [@SW], section 3.2, we can consider the ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Ext}}}$-functors: $${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Ext}}}: \mathcal P_A \times \mathcal D_A {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}\mathcal D_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}}$$ and in particular the continuous group cohomology of a discrete module $V$ is computed by $$\label{cohomologydef} H^*(G,V) = {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Ext}}}^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[G]]} \left( {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}, V \right).$$ A theorem of Lazard (see the discussion in the introduction of [@SW] as well as in section 3.7 of loc. cit.) says that compact $p$-adic analytic groups are ‘of type $\mathbf {FP}_{\infty}$’ which is to say that the profinite ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[G]]$-module ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$ admits a resolution $$\ldots {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}L_n {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}\ldots {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}L_1 {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}L_0 {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}{\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}0$$ with finite free ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[G]]$-modules $L_i$.
In fact, the discussion in section 3.7 of [@SW] (see in particular after proposition 3.7.1 and theorem 3.7.4) says that for a group $G$ of type $\mathbf{FP}_{\infty}$ we can extend the definition of cohomology as in equation \[cohomologydef\] to coefficient modules in $\mathcal P_A$. Given $V \in \mathcal P_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[G]]}$, its cohomology is defined as the homology of the complex ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Hom}}}_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[G]]} (L_{\bullet}, V)$ where $L_{\bullet} {\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}{\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}0$ is any resolution of ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$ by finite, free ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[G]]$-modules.\
Let us now take $G = N = \mathrm U({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$ to be our integral $p$-adic unipotent group, and let $\Lambda = \mathrm T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$ act on $N$ by conjugation and consequently on the group algebra ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[ N ]]$. This conjugation action clearly preserves the augmentation ideal filtration.
We want to apply our previous setup from subsection \[spectralsection\], and in particular corollary \[equivariantss\], to Symonds and Weigel’s definition for the $N$-cohomology of algebraic modules $V$ (in particular, the trivial module ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$) and get a spectral sequence which computes $H^*(N, V)$. To do this, it remains to check that the $\Lambda \sharp A$-module $M = {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}= {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]] / I$ is filt f.g. with exhaustive filtration, but this is clear, since the $T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$-action by conjugation on ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]$ yields the trivial action on ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]/I$, and hence
specializing corollary \[equivariantss\] to this situation we obtain the following Notice in particular that the trivial $\Lambda \sharp {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]$-module $V= {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$ has bounded and discrete filtration, so the corollary applies to it and we obtain a spectral sequence computing $H^*(N, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}})$.
We have all the ingredients to prove our final goal, which we restate for the convenience of the reader.
First of all, by theorems \[unipotentLieiso\] and \[envelopingalgebraiso\] we have an isomorphism $\mathcal U(\mathfrak n) \cong {\ensuremath{\mathrm{gr}}}{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}[[N]]$ of graded ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-Lie algebras, where the grading on the left is induced by the grading on $\mathfrak n$ given by root heights, and the grading on the right comes from the augmentation ideal filtration.
Since $N$ is a compact, $p$-adic analytic group, we have by theorem \[Lietogroupss\] a convergent spectral sequence of graded $\mathrm T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$-modules $$H^{r+s}_{\mathcal U(\mathfrak n)} ( {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}})_r \Rightarrow H^{r+s} (N, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}})_r,$$ and we want to show that it collapses on the first page. Notice that the $E_1$-page is the Lie algebra cohomology for $\mathfrak n$. Since by corollary \[kostantcor\] $H^n (\mathfrak n, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}})$ is a finite rank, free ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-module, it suffices to show that for each $n$, $H^n (\mathfrak n, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}$ and $H^n( N, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}$ are ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}$-vector spaces of the same dimension, as this will force the abutment of the spectral sequence to coincide with its $E_1$-page.
We want to show that $$\label{rationalisom} H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( \mathfrak n, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}\cong H^*( N, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}.$$
Consider first of the left hand side. Just like in lemma \[Liecohomologybasechange\], we can tensor with ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}$ the complex computing $H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( \mathfrak n, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}\right)$. To apply the universal coefficient theorem (as in corollary 7.56 of [@rotman]) and conclude that $H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} (\mathfrak n, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}\cong H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}}( \mathfrak n_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}}, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})$ it remains to check that the relevant ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Tor}}}$ groups (that is, ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Tor}}}_1^{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} \left( H^*(\mathfrak n, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}), {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}\right)$) are zero, but this is clear as ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}$ is a flat ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-module.
Now we switch our attention to the right side of formula \[rationalisom\]. In section 4.2 of [@hkn] Huber, Kings and Neumann build on work of Lazard ([@lazard]) and prove, in particular, some comparison theorems between continuous group cohomology, analytic group cohomology and Lie algebra cohomology for a certain class of $p$-adic analytic groups. We are interested in theorem 4.3.1 of loc. cit.: since $\mathrm U' / {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$ is a smooth group scheme with connected generic fiber, they describe an isomorphism $$H^*_{la} (N, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}) \stackrel{\sim}{{\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}} H^*_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}}( \mathfrak n_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}}, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})$$ between analytic group cohomology and Lie algebra cohomology, with ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}$-coefficients.
The analytic group cohomology of a pro-$p$, $p$-adic analytic group has first been studied by Lazard in [@lazard], chapter V. It can be thought of as the cohomology of the complex of locally analytic cochains (a subcomplex of the continuous cochains).
Lazard himself proves (theorem 2.3.10 chapter V in loc. cit.) that the embedding of the subcomplex of analytic cochains into the complex of continuous cochains yields, for any finite, torsion-free ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-module (such as ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}$), an isomorphism at the level of cohomology: $$H^*_{la} (N, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}) \stackrel{\sim}{{\ensuremath{\longrightarrow}}} H^*_c (N, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}),$$ where again we remark that the cohomology $H^*_c(N, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}})$ is defined as the homology of the complex of continuous cochains.
On the other hand, Symonds and Weigel in [@SW], section 3.8 give a way to define the same rational continuous cohomology as an ${\ensuremath{\mathrm{Ext}}}$-group, and the two descriptions coincide (as is clear from Symonds and Weigel’ construction of rational cohomology, where they use any projective resolution of ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$ by profinite $N$-modules). Finally, Symonds and Weigel prove in loc. cit. theorem 3.8.2 that $$H^*_c(N, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}) \otimes_{{\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}} {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}\cong H^*_c(N, {\ensuremath{\mathbb Q_p}}),$$ which concludes our proof.
[30]{}
Brown, K.S.; Dror E. *The Artin-Rees property and homology, Israel J. Math., 22 (1975), 93-109*
Bourbaki, Nicolas. *Lie groups and Lie algebras. Chapters 4-6. Translated from the 1968 French original by Andrew Pressley. Elements of Mathematics (Berlin). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2002*
Carter, Roger W. *Simple groups of Lie type. Reprint of the 1972 original. Wiley Classics Library. A Wiley-Interscience Publication. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1989*
Conrad, Brian. *Reductive group schemes, notes for a Luminy summer school - available at <http://math.stanford.edu/~conrad/papers/luminysga3smf.pdf>*
Conrad, Brian *Non-split reductive groups over ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z}}$. Autours des schémas en groupes. Vol. II, 193-253, Panor. Synthèses, 46, Soc. Math. France, Paris, 2015*
Conrad, Brian; Feng, Tony. *Reductive groups over fields - lecture notes - available at <https://www.ams.org/open-math-notes/files/course-material/OMN-201701-110663-1-Course_notes-v3.pdf>*
Conrad, Brian; Gabber, Ofer; Prasad, Gopal. *Pseudo-reductive groups. Second edition. New Mathematical Monographs, 26. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2015*
McConnell, J. C.; Robson, J. C. *Noncommutative Noetherian rings. With the cooperation of L. W. Small. Revised edition. Graduate Studies in Mathematics, 30. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2001*
Friedlander, Eric M.; Parshall, Brian J. *Cohomology of infinitesimal and discrete groups. Math. Ann. 273 (1986), no. 3, 353-374*
Grosse-Klönne, Elmar. *On the universal module of p-adic spherical Hecke algebras. Amer. J. Math. 136 (2014), no. 3, 599-652*
Grünenfelder, Luzius. *On the homology of filtered and graded rings. J. Pure Appl. Algebra 14 (1979), no. 1, 21-37*
Huber, Annette; Kings, Guido; Naumann, Niko. *Some complements to the Lazard isomorphism. Compos. Math. 147 (2011), no. 1, 235-262*
Humphreys, James E. *Reflection groups and Coxeter groups. Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, 29. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990*
Hartley, B. *Topics in the theory of nilpotent groups. Group theory, 61-120, Academic Press, London, 1984*
Hartley, B. *Powers of the augmentation ideal in group rings of infinite nilpotent groups. J. London Math. Soc. (2) 25 (1982), no. 1, 43-61*
Knapp, Anthony W. *Lie groups, Lie algebras, and cohomology. Mathematical Notes, 34. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1988*
Kostant, Bertram. *Lie algebra cohomology and the generalized Borel-Weil theorem. Ann. of Math. (2) 74 1961 329-387*
Lazard, Michel. *Groupes analytiques $p$-adiques. (French) Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math. No. 26 1965 389-603*
Năstăsescu, Constantin; Van Oystaeyen, F. *Graded and filtered rings and modules. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 758. Springer, Berlin, 1979*
Oesterlé, Joseph. *Nombres de Tamagawa et groupes unipotents en caractéristique $p$. (French) \[Tamagawa numbers and unipotent groups in characteristic p\] Invent. Math. 78 (1984), no. 1, 13-88*
Passi, Inder Bir S. *Group rings and their augmentation ideals. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 715. Springer, Berlin, 1979*
Polo, Patrick; Tilouine, Jacques. *Bernstein-Gelfand-Gelfand complexes and cohomology of nilpotent groups over ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z}}_{(p)}$ for representations with $p$-small weights. Cohomology of Siegel varieties. Astérisque No. 280 (2002), 97-135*
Ribes, Luis; Zalesskii, Pavel. *Profinite groups. Second edition. A Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics \[Results in Mathematics and Related Areas. 3rd Series. A Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics\], 40. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2010*
Rotman, Joseph J. *An introduction to homological algebra. Second edition. Universitext. Springer, New York, 2009*
Sjödin, Gunnar. *On filtered modules and their associated graded modules. Math. Scand. 33, (1973), 229-249 (1974)*
Symonds, Peter; Weigel, Thomas. *Cohomology of p-adic analytic groups. New horizons in pro-p groups, 349-410, Progr. Math., 184, Birkhäuser Boston, Boston, MA, 2000*
Vignéras, Marie-France. *Existence of supersingular representations of $p$-adic reductive groups - preprint available at <https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.10142.pdf>*
University of Georgia VIGRE Algebra Group. *On Kostant’s theorem for Lie algebra cohomology. Contemp. Math., 478, Representation theory, 39-60, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2009*
[^1]: in other words, $V_{{\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F} (\lambda) \cong {\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$ with $\mathrm T({\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F)$ acting via $\lambda$.
[^2]: Our notion for Weil restriction of Lie algebras follows that of Oesterle in [@oesterle], proposition A.3.3: of the ${\ensuremath{\mathcal O}}_F$-module $\mathfrak g$ we only remember its structure as a ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-module, and the bracket operation is also seen as a ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-bilinear map.
[^3]: We could have $x_{k_j} = x_{k_{j'}}$.
[^4]: We can drop ’topological’ since $I^n / I^{n+1}$ is a finite, free ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-module and thus we do not need to take the closure of a ${\ensuremath{\mathbb Z_p}}$-span.
[^5]: Explicitly, for a filtered $A$-module $M$, the shift $M^{(h)}$ is the filtered $A$-module defined by $F^n M^{(h)} = F^{n-h}M$.
[^6]: Equivalently, a (filtered) $\Lambda \sharp A$-module is a (filtered) $A$-module $M$ with a $\Lambda$-action (preserving the filtration) such that $\lambda(a.m) = \lambda(a).\lambda(m)$ for all $a \in A$, $\lambda \in \Lambda$ and $m \in M$.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
---
[**Deep supervised learning using local errors** ]{}\
Hesham Mostafa$^1$, Vishwajith Ramesh$^2$, and Gert Cauwenberghs$^{1,2}$\
$^{1}$Institute for Neural Computation,$^{2}$Department of Bioengineering\
UC San Diego, California, USA\
E-mail: [email protected]
Abstract {#abstract .unnumbered}
========
Error backpropagation is a highly effective mechanism for learning high-quality hierarchical features in deep networks. Updating the features or weights in one layer, however, requires waiting for the propagation of error signals from higher layers. Learning using delayed and non-local errors makes it hard to reconcile backpropagation with the learning mechanisms observed in biological neural networks as it requires the neurons to maintain a memory of the input long enough until the higher-layer errors arrive. In this paper, we propose an alternative learning mechanism where errors are generated locally in each layer using fixed, random auxiliary classifiers. Lower layers could thus be trained independently of higher layers and training could either proceed layer by layer, or simultaneously in all layers using local error information. We address biological plausibility concerns such as weight symmetry requirements and show that the proposed learning mechanism based on fixed, broad, and random tuning of each neuron to the classification categories outperforms the biologically-motivated feedback alignment learning technique on the MNIST, CIFAR10, and SVHN datasets, approaching the performance of standard backpropagation. Our approach highlights a potential biological mechanism for the supervised, or task-dependent, learning of feature hierarchies. In addition, we show that it is well suited for learning deep networks in custom hardware where it can drastically reduce memory traffic and data communication overheads.
Introduction
============
Gradient descent training techniques [@Bottou91] have been remarkably successful in training a broad range of network architectures. This success is often attributed to the use of deep architectures with many non-linearity stages [@Ba_Caruna14] where backpropagation is used to calculate the direction of weight updates in deep layers. In convolutional networks in particular, multiple cascaded convolutional layers allow simple, lower-level, features to be successively composed into more complex features, allowing networks to obtain highly complex and relevant features from the top convolutional layers [@Razavian_etal14]. Deep convolutional neural networks trained using backpropagation are thus achieving record performance in a variety of large-scale machine vision tasks [@Krizhevsky_etal12; @Simonyan_Zisserman14; @LeCun_etal15; @He_etal16; @Zagoruyko_Komodakis16; @Huang_etal16]. For deep convolutional networks trained in a supervised setting, the training objective is typically the minimization of classification error at the top network layer. This objective is sometimes augmented by auxiliary objectives defined using the outputs of intermediate classifiers in the network [@Szegedy_etal14; @Lee_etal15]. These auxiliary objectives provide additional sources of error to deeper layers. Training, however, involves error signals that must propagate backwards from the top layer. Standard backpropagation is biologically unrealistic for several reasons: the need to buffer network states until errors arrive from the top layer; weight symmetry in the forward and backward passes; and the need to precisely interleave the forward and backward passes. Several biologically-motivated learning mechanisms have been proposed to explain how circuits in the brain are able to learn complex, hierarchical representations. One broad class of these proposals is based on contrastive learning in energy-based models [@Seung_etal03; @Bengio_Fischer15; @Scellier_Bengio17]. In these models, the network is trained to minimize the discrepancy between its equilibrium points when running freely and when observables clamp the values of some units in the network. Weight symmetry is required, though: each synaptic connection from one neuron to another assumes a matching synaptic connection of identical strength in the reverse direction. In [@Lillicrap_etal16; @Baldi_etal16], weight symmetry is avoided by using an independent set of fixed random weights to backpropagate errors between the network layers. However, like standard backpropagation, the error signals are non-local. Instead of backpropagating errors layer by layer through the random feedback connections, the networks in [@Nokland_etal16; @Neftci_etal17a] directly use a fixed random projection of the top layer error as the error signal in deep layers. Although this permits a single global error signal communicated in common to all layers, is still incurs substantial wait times and memory requirements for the weight updates as a forward pass through the entire network has to be completed before the error signal is available, which requires deep layers to hold their states for the duration of the full forward pass.
We propose a learning approach where weights in any given layer are trained based on local errors that are generated solely based on neural state variables in that layer. These errors are generated directly from the training labels using a classifier with fixed random weights and no hidden layers, and whose input is the neural activations in the layer being trained. Instead of minimizing a global objective function, training thus minimizes many local objective functions. As such this approach compromises one of the core tenets of standard backpropagation: the adjustment of all parameters in concert to minimize a unified objective. Nevertheless, training with local errors still allows a deep network to compose the features learned by lower layers into more complex features in higher layers. This is evidenced below by the improvement in accuracy of the random local classifiers in deeper layers. Training with local errors thus retains the hierarchical composition of features, one of the key strengths of deep networks.
To implement weight updates based on backpropagation in a biologically inspired network, the pre- or post-synaptic neurons need to buffer the past activity of the pre-synaptic neurons and reproduce this past activity in sync with the corresponding errors arriving from top layers in order to update the weights. This is incompatible with biologically motivated synaptic weight update rules that are typically triggered by pre-synaptic events and depend on the relative timing of pre- and post-synaptic spikes and/or state variables in the post-synaptic neuron. Our learning mechanism bypasses biological implausibility arguments against standard backpropagation by generating errors locally in each layer using fixed random projections. Weight updates could thus be carried out while the synaptic currents in post-synaptic neurons (the neurons receiving the local error signal) still retain a memory of recent pre-synaptic activity. Weight symmetry in the forward and backward passes in standard backpropagation learning is another biologically unrealistic aspect. In our case, the weight symmetry requirement arises in the one-step error backpropagation from the output of the local random classifier to the neurons in the layer being trained. Similar to ref. [@Lillicrap_etal16], we experimented with relaxing this symmetry requirement by using a different set of random, fixed weights to map the classifier error to the error at the layer being trained. We analyze the implications of the proposed learning approach for the design of custom hardware devices for learning the parameters of deep networks. In the proposed learning approach, there is no explicit backward pass as errors are locally generated and can be used to directly update the weights. We show that our approach drastically reduces memory traffic compared to standard backpropagation in the typical situation when the network weights and activations can not all fit into the compute device memory. We achieve this reduction even despite an increased number of parameters in the network due to the addition of the random local classifier weights in each layer. These weights, however, are fixed allowing them to be generated on the fly using pseudo-random number generators (PRNGs). Only the negligibly small random seeds of the PRNGs for each layer need to be stored.
We discuss related work in section \[sec:related\_work\]. We describe the proposed learning mechanism in section \[sec:model\] and quantitatively assess the hardware-related computational and memory access benefits compared to standard learning with global objective functions in section \[sec:hw\]. We present the results of applying the proposed learning method to standard supervised learning benchmarks in section \[sec:results\] and compare our learning method’s performance to that of the feedback alignment technique [@Lillicrap_etal16] . We present our conclusions and further discussion on the biological plausibility of the proposed learning mechanism in section \[sec:conclusions\_discussion\].
Related Work {#sec:related_work}
============
Training of deep convolutional networks is currently dominated by approaches where all weights are simultaneously trained to minimize a global objective. This is typically done in a purely supervised setting where the training objective is the classification loss at the top layer. To ameliorate the problem of exploding/vanishing errors in deep layers [@Hochreiter_etal01], auxiliary classifiers are sometimes added to provide additional error information to deep layers [@Szegedy_etal14; @Lee_etal15]. Unlike our training approach, however, training still involves backpropagating errors across the entire network and simultaneous adjustments of all weights. Several learning mechanisms have been traditionally used to pre-train a deep network layer-by-layer using local error signals in order to learn the probability distribution of the input layer activations, or in order to minimize local reconstruction errors [@Hinton_etal06; @Hinton_Salakhutdinov06; @Bengio_etal07; @Vincent_etal08; @Erhan_etal10]. These mechanisms, however, are unsupervised and the networks need to be augmented by a classifier layer, typically added on top of the deepest layer. The network weights are then fine-tuned using standard backpropagation to minimize the error at the classifier layer. Supervised layer-wise training has been pursued in [@Bengio_etal07], with auxiliary classifiers that are co-trained, unlike the random fixed auxiliary classifiers proposed here. The supervised layer-wise training is used only as a pre-training step, and results are reported after full network fine-tuning using backpropagation from the top classifier layer. Some approaches forego the fine-tuning step and keep the network fixed after the unsupervised layer-wise training phase, and only train the top classifier layer or SVM on the features learned [@Lee_etal09; @Ranzato_etal07; @Kavukcuoglu_etal10]. Local learning in [@Ranzato_etal07; @Kavukcuoglu_etal10] involves an iterative procedure for learning sparse codes which is computationally demanding. The network architectures in [@Lee_etal09; @Ranzato_etal07; @Kavukcuoglu_etal10] fail to yield intermediate classification results from the intermediate layers. Moreover, their applicability to datasets that are more complex than MNIST is unclear since labels are not used to guide the learning of feature. In more complex learning scenarios with an abundance of possible features, these networks could very well learn few label-relevant features, thereby compromising the performance of the top classifier.
Instead of layer-wise pre-training, several recent approaches train the whole network using a hybrid objective that contains supervised and unsupervised error terms [@Zhao_etal15]. In some of these network configurations, the unsupervised error terms are local to each layer [@Zhang_etal16]. The supervised error term, however, requires backpropagating errors through the whole network. This requirement is avoided in the training approach in [@Ranzato_Szummer08] used to learn to extract compact feature vectors from documents: training proceeds layer by layer where the error in each layer is a combination of a reconstruction error and a supervised error coming from a local classifier. The local auxiliary decoder and classifier pathways still require training, however. Other approaches also make use of a combination of supervised (label-dependent) and unsupervised error signals to train Boltzmann machines as discriminative models [@Larochelle_Bengio08; @Goodfellow_etal13a]. Learning in [@Goodfellow_etal13a], however, is more computationally demanding than our approach as as it involves several iterations to approach the mean-field equilibrium point of the network, and errors are still backpropagated through multiple layers. In [@Larochelle_Bengio08], multi-layer networks are not considered and only a single layer RBM is used.
In refs [@Lillicrap_etal16; @Nokland_etal16; @Baldi_etal16; @Neftci_etal17a], the backpropagation scheme is modified to use random fixed weights in the backward path. This relaxes one of the biologically unrealistic requirements of backpropagation which is weight symmetry between the forward and backward pathways. Errors are still non-local, however, as they are generated by the top layer. A learning mechanism that is able to generate error signals locally is the synthetic gradients mechanism [@Jaderberg_etal16; @Czarnecki_etal17] in which errors are generated by dedicated error modules in each layer based only on the layer’s activity and the label. The parameters of these dedicated error modules are themselves updated based on errors arriving from higher layers in order to make the error modules better predictors of the true, globally-derived, error signal. Our approach generates errors in a different manner through the use of a local classifier, and each layer receives no error information from the layer above.
Methods {#sec:model}
=======
We train multi-layer networks, with either convolutional or fully connected layers, based on local errors generated by random classifiers. Consider a fully connected $i^{th}$ hidden layer in a network whose activation vector is denoted by ${\bf y}^i\in R^N$ receiving an input ${\bf x}^i \in R^M$: $${\bf y}^i = f({\bf W}^i{\bf x}^i + {\bf b}^i)$$ $${\bf y}{^i}' = f'({\bf W}^i{\bf x}^i + {\bf b}^i)$$ where ${\bf W}^i$ is the $N \times M$ weight matrix of layer $i$ and ${\bf b}^i \in R^N$ is the bias vector, and $f$ is the neuron’s activation function. In all the networks we train, we use Rectified Linear Units (ReLUs) [@Nair_Hinton10], i.e, $f(x)=max(x,0)$, with corresponding derivatives $f'(x)=H(x)$ where $H(\cdot)$ is the Heaviside step function. We pre-define for this hidden layer a fixed random classifier matrix ${\bf M}^i$ which is a $C \times N$ matrix where $C$ is the number of classification categories. The random matrix, ${\bf M}^i$, is used to convert the layer activation vector, ${\bf y}^i$, to a category score vector ${\bf s}^i \in R^C$ where ${\bf s}^i = {\bf M}^i{\bf y}^i$. Since this is a supervised learning setting, the correct input category $t$ is known during training, which allows the layer to generate a scalar loss or error signal, $E(t,{\bf s}^i)$. $E$ could be for example the cross-entropy loss or the square hinge loss. This error is then backpropagated in order to calculate the weight and bias updates, $\Delta {\bf W}^i$ and $\Delta {\bf b}^i$: $$\begin{aligned}
{\bf e_s}^i &= \frac{dE}{d{\bf s}^i} \\
{\bf e_y}^i &= {\bf K^i}{\bf e_s^i} \odot {\bf y}{^i}' \\
\Delta{\bf W}^i &= -\eta {\bf e_y}^i {\times} {\bf x}^i \\
\Delta{\bf b}^i &= -\eta {\bf e_y}^i\end{aligned}$$ where $\odot$ is the element-wise multiplication operator, $\times$ is the outer product operator, and $\eta$ is the learning rate. ${\bf K}^i$ is the $N \times C$ matrix used to backpropagate the classifier error to the layer being trained. If we set ${\bf K}^i = {\bf M}{^i}^T$, then the weight and bias updates are executing exact gradient descent to minimize the random classifier error, $E$. In that case, training of each layer is equivalent to training a network with one hidden layer where only the hidden layer’s input weights and biases are trainable, while the output weights, ${\bf M}^i$ are fixed. The learning scheme is illustrated in Fig. \[fig:local\]. For convolutional layers, the learning scheme remains unchanged. The post-activation feature maps tensor is simply flattened to yield a 1D vector before multiplying by the random classifier matrix ${\bf M}$.
![Supervised learning in a multi-layer network using local errors. Biases are omitted for clarity. Red arrows indicate the error pathways. Hidden layer $i$ is trained using local errors generated by a classifier with random fixed weights ${\bf M}^i$. The errors are randomly projected back using the matrix ${\bf K}^i$, and multiplied element-wise with the layer’s activation derivative to yield the error signal ${\bf e_y}^i$ which is then used to update the weights.[]{data-label="fig:local"}](local_learning_biological){width="50.00000%"}
We also use dropout [@Srivastava_etal14] in this training setting to minimize overfitting. All incoming/outgoing weights to/from a dropped neurons are not updated in the iteration in which the neuron is dropped. In some networks, we use batch normalization [@Ioffe_Szegedy15] before the layer’s non-linearity. The layer’s learnable parameters will then include a scaling factor (one for each neuron in a fully connected layer, or one for each feature map in a convolutional layer) that is also trained using local errors. For a fully connected layer, the input to the local classifier is taken after the dropout mask is applied (if dropout is used). For a convolutional layer, the input to the layer’s local classifier is taken after pooling and after applying the dropout mask. In all experiments, we initialize the fixed random classifier weights, as well as the trainable weights in the main network, from a uniform, zero-mean, distribution whose max/min values depend on the number of neurons in the source and target layers according to the scheme in [@Glorot_Bengio10].
We compare our approach to the feedback alignment training method [@Lillicrap_etal16] in which random fixed weights are used to backpropagate the error layer-by-layer from the top layer. The layer’s activation derivative is still used when backpropagating errors. In the presence of max-pooling layers, errors only backpropagate through the winner(max) neuron in each pooling window. When using feedback alignment training in the presence of dropout, a neuron that is dropped during the forward pass is also dropped during the backward pass. When using convolutional layers, we use fixed random filters that we convolve with the errors of one convolutional layer to yield the errors at the outputs of the previous/lower convolutional layer. We also use batch normalization when training using feedback alignment. The extra scaling parameters introduced by batch normalization are trained using the randomly backpropagated errors arriving at the batch-normalized layer’s output.
All experiments in this paper were carried out using Theano [@Bastien_etal12; @Bergstra_etal10], and all parameters were optimized using ADAM [@Kingma_Ba14].
Hardware Implications of Learning Using Local Errors {#sec:hw}
====================================================
[0.62]{} ![Memory traffic and number of MAC operations for different training methods. Arrows between compute device and external memory indicate memory traffic while green arrows indicate data buffered and reused by the compute device. Each computation stage is executed a number of times given by the enclosing repeat block. () Standard backpropagation learning. () Training all layers simultaneously using local errors. Note that there is no backward pass as weights are updated during the forward pass.[]{data-label="fig:traffic"}](traffic_horizontal "fig:"){width="\textwidth"} \[fig:traffic\_a\]
[0.42]{} ![Memory traffic and number of MAC operations for different training methods. Arrows between compute device and external memory indicate memory traffic while green arrows indicate data buffered and reused by the compute device. Each computation stage is executed a number of times given by the enclosing repeat block. () Standard backpropagation learning. () Training all layers simultaneously using local errors. Note that there is no backward pass as weights are updated during the forward pass.[]{data-label="fig:traffic"}](traffic_allnetwork_horizontal "fig:"){width="\textwidth"} \[fig:traffic\_b\]
Standard learning techniques based on backpropagating errors through the whole network require the hardware executing the learning algorithm to store the activation values and activation derivatives of all network layers in order to calculate weight updates and backpropagate errors once errors are available from the top layer. This imposes several communication and memory access overheads if learning is executed on hardware whose memory can not accommodate all the network weights and activations. For large scale convolutional networks, this practically includes all CPU and GPU devices where on-chip memory is limited to few tens of MBytes, while state of the art deep convolutional networks typically require several hundred MBytes to several GBytes in order to store the network weights and mini-batch activations [@Rhu_etal16]. Data thus has to be continuously shuttled between the compute device and external memory. This is the case even in custom accelerators developed to accelerate just the inference (feed-forward) phase [@Himavathi_etal07; @Cavigelli_etal15; @Chen_etal16; @Han_etal16; @Ardakani_etal16; @Aimar_etal17; @Jouppi_etal17], where a complete forward pass through a large-scale convolutional network can not be executed completely on the accelerator without having to access external memory to store intermediate activations and to load weights.
Improvements in memory bandwidth significantly lag improvements in computing elements speed [@Wulf_McKee95]. Reducing memory traffic in a compute intensive task such as learning deep networks thus improves performance as it relaxes the requirements on the memory bandwidth and latency needed to keep the compute elements occupied, allowing either the compute elements to run at higher frequencies or the external memory to run at lower frequencies. Moreover, energy needed to drive off-chip traffic from/to external memory as well as memory read/write energy often contribute significantly to the overall energy consumption [@Vogelsang10; @Lefurgy_etal03]. Reducing memory traffic can thus have significant impact on the overall energy consumption of the learning hardware. In this section, we analyze the savings in memory traffic volume obtained using the learning approach based on local errors that we propose in this paper.
Consider a neural network with $L$ layers. $P^i$ and $A^i$ are the parameters and the mini-batch activations of layer $i$, respectively. $\lvert P^i\rvert$ and $\lvert A^i\rvert$ are the number of elements in $P^i$ and $A^i$. A neuron in layer $i$ has a fanout of $R^i$, i.e, a neuron in layer $i$ projects to $R^i$ neurons in layer $i+1$. In convolutional layers, we ignore any border effects which might cause the neurons at the borders of the feature maps to project to fewer neurons than neurons away from the borders. We divide the training data set into $N_{b}$ mini-batches and train the network for $N_{e}$ epochs. Each weight and each neuron activation takes up one memory word (which we assume is 32 bits).
Figure \[fig:traffic\_a\] illustrates the data traffic and the number of MAC operations needed during standard backpropagation training. The data traffic in Fig. \[fig:traffic\_a\] assumes the compute device has enough on-board memory to buffer the output activations of one layer in order to use these activations to calculate the next layer’s activation. We also assume the compute device does not need the parameters of any layer to be streamed in more than once during each forward pass and during each backward pass. These assumptions would hold true if the accelerator has at least $\max_i (\lvert P^i\rvert + \lvert A^i\rvert)$ words of on-board memory. During the forward pass, the activations of all layers have to be streamed out to external memory so they can be used in the backward pass. The number of MAC operations needed to calculate the activation of layer $i$ is $R^{i-1}\lvert A^{i-1} \rvert$. During the backward pass, the compute device buffers the back-propagated errors of one layer and uses them to calculate the errors at the preceding layer. $R^{i}\lvert A^{i} \rvert$ MAC operations are needed to calculate the weight updates for $P^{i+1}$. An additional $R^{i}\lvert A^{i} \rvert$ MAC operations are needed to backpropagate the errors from layer $i+1$ to layer $i$. We ignore the special case of the input layer where errors do not need to be backpropagated. We also ignore the MAC operations needed to calculate the error at the top layer. Figure \[fig:traffic\_b\] illustrates the case when learning is done using errors generated by random local classifiers. As in standard backpropagation, $R^{i-1}\lvert A^{i-1} \rvert$ MAC operations are needed to calculate the activations of layer $i$. To calculate the local classifier output, $C \lvert A^i \rvert$ MAC operations are needed where $C$ is the number of classification classes. Note that the random classifier weights can be generated on the fly using a PRNG, and thus only require the PRNG seed (whose size can be 32 bits for 32-bit weights) to be stored. To backpropagate the local classifier error to obtain the error at layer $i$, an additional $C \lvert A^i \rvert$ MAC operations are needed and $R^{i-1}\lvert A^{i-1} \rvert$ MAC operations are needed to update the parameters of layer $i$, $P^i$, based on the layer’s error.
Table \[table:traffic\_macs\] summarizes the number of MAC operations and the memory read/write volume required by the two training methods. Learning using local errors has a decisive advantage when it comes to memory traffic as it requires drastically less read and write operations compared to standard backpropagation. The reduction in the number of MAC operations is less unequivocal as it depends on the number of classification classes, $C$, and the fanout of the neurons in the network, $R^i$. Learning using local error reduces the MAC operations count if $L\times C < 0.5\sum_i R^i$. This condition is easily satisfied when the number of classes is small and it was satisfied by all the networks presented in this paper.
Training method Memory read(words) Memory write (words) MAC operations
----------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------
Standard backpropagation $N_{e}N_{b} \sum\limits_i (2\lvert P^i \rvert + \lvert A^i \rvert )$ $N_{e}N_{b} \sum\limits_i (\lvert P^i \rvert + \lvert A^i \rvert)$ $N_{e}N_{b} \sum\limits_i 3R^{i}\lvert A^i \rvert$
Learning using local errors $N_e N_b \sum\limits_i \lvert P^i \rvert $ $N_e N_b \sum\limits_i \lvert P^i \rvert$ $N_eN_b\sum\limits_i(2R^i + 2C)\lvert A^i \rvert$
: Memory traffic and number of MAC operations for different learning methods[]{data-label="table:traffic_macs"}
Results {#sec:results}
=======
MNIST
-----
We first validate the performance of our training approach on the MNIST hand-written digit recognition task. We used the standard split of 50,000/10,000/10,000 examples for training/validation/testing respectively. The validation set was added to the training set after choosing the hyper-parameters. We use a network with 3 fully connected hidden layers with $1000$ neurons per layer and train the weights in the entire network using local errors. As a baseline, we also train a 2-hidden layers network and a 3-hidden layers network using standard backpropagation where each hidden layer also has $1000$ neurons. Dropout was used in all networks to reduce overfitting. We first used fixed symmetric random weights in the forward and backward pathways in the local error loops, i.e, ${\bf K}^i = {\bf M}{^i}^T$ in all layers. The results are shown in Fig. \[fig:mnist\_symmetric\]. The local classifier errors improve for the second and third hidden layers compared to the first hidden layer implying that the network is able to make use of depth to obtain better accuracy. The local classifier errors in the second and third layers are similar implying that the network is unable to make use of the increased depth beyond two hidden layers for this simple dataset. This observation is also valid for standard backpropagation where accuracy does not improve when going from two hidden layers to three hidden layers. When training using local errors, we also ran experiments where the local classifier weights were trainable parameters. This had no effect on accuracy as shown in Table \[tab:mnist\].
[0.48]{} ![() MNIST test set errors obtained from three networks: a 3-layer network trained using local errors and symmetric local feedback weights (${\bf K}^i = {\bf M}{^i}^T$ ) where the errors for the three random local classifiers are shown, a network with two hidden layers trained using standard backpropagation, and a network with three hidden layers trained using standard backpropagation. The networks were trained for 100 epochs. Each line is the average of 20 training trials. () Same as () except that in the network trained using local errors, sign-concordant local feedback weights with independent and random magnitudes were used. []{data-label="fig:mnist_results"}](mnist_symmetric "fig:"){width="\textwidth"} \[fig:mnist\_symmetric\]
[0.48]{} ![() MNIST test set errors obtained from three networks: a 3-layer network trained using local errors and symmetric local feedback weights (${\bf K}^i = {\bf M}{^i}^T$ ) where the errors for the three random local classifiers are shown, a network with two hidden layers trained using standard backpropagation, and a network with three hidden layers trained using standard backpropagation. The networks were trained for 100 epochs. Each line is the average of 20 training trials. () Same as () except that in the network trained using local errors, sign-concordant local feedback weights with independent and random magnitudes were used. []{data-label="fig:mnist_results"}](mnist_signconcordant "fig:"){width="\textwidth"} \[fig:mnist\_concordant\]
[lp[35mm]{}p[35mm]{}p[35mm]{}]{} & Local error learning (symmetric feedback weights) & Local error learning (sign-concordant feedback weights) & Local error learning (trainable local classifier)\
Test error & & &\
\
& Learning using feedback alignment & 2-layer network trained using backprop & 3-layer network trained using backprop\
Test error & $1.70 \pm 0.087 \%$ & $1.26 \pm 0.068 \%$ & $1.27 \pm 0.050 \%$\
\[tab:mnist\]
Next, to lessen concern of biological implausibility of exact symmetry in feedforward and feedback weights, we relaxed the weight symmetry requirement in the local error loops and initialized the error feedback weights ${\bf K}^i$ randomly and independently of ${\bf M}{^i}$, except we then modified the sign of the weights in ${\bf K}^i$ so that $sign({\bf K}^i) = sign({\bf M}{^i}^T)$. The signs of the feedback weights in the local error loops thus match the signs of the feedforward weights (both are fixed and have independent magnitudes). This is the ’sign-concordant feedback weights’ case shown in Fig. \[fig:mnist\_concordant\]. Performance deteriorates slightly in this case compared to symmetric feedforward and feedback local classifier weights. When we relax the symmetry requirement further and choose ${\bf K}^i$ to be random and completely independent of ${\bf M}{^i}$, the network failed to learn and error rates stayed at near-chance level. We also experimented with training based on feedback alignment where errors from the top layer are backpropagated using random fixed weights. The network’s performance using feedback alignment is worse than learning using local errors (using either symmetric or sign-concordant weights) as shown in Table \[tab:mnist\].
It is important to note that in feedback alignment, the feedforward weights eventually ’align’ with the random weights used to backpropagate errors [@Lillicrap_etal16] enabling the network to learn. When learning using random fixed local classifiers, and if we choose random error feedback weights, the classifier weights are fixed and thus can not align with the random weights used in the one-step backpropagation. Reliable error information, however, can still reach the layer being trained if the signs of the random backpropagation weights, ${\bf K}^i$, match the signs of the fixed local classifier weights ${\bf M}^i$. This is in-line with previous investigations into the importance of weight symmetry in backpropagation that argue for the importance of sign-concordance between forward and backward weights [@Liao_etal16].
CIFAR10
-------
We trained a convolutional network with three convolutional layers followed by two fully connected layers on the CIFAR10 dataset. We used a similar network as ref. [@Srivastava_etal14]. The convolutional layers used a $5\times 5$ kernel, a stride of $1$, and had $96$, $128$, and $256$ feature maps going from the bottom upwards. Max-pooling with a pooling window of $3 \times 3$ and stride $2$ was applied after each convolutional layer. The two fully connected layers on top had $2,048$ neurons each. All layers were batch-normalized and dropout was applied after the input layer, after each max-pooling layer, and after each fully connected layer.
The 32$\times$32$\times$3 CIFAR10 color images were pre-processed using global contrast normalization followed by ZCA whitening. The training set of 50,000 images was used for training/validation and we report errors on the 10,000 images test set. Unlike the MNIST dataset, standard backpropagation significantly outperforms training using local errors as shown in Fig. \[fig:cifar10\_results\] and Table \[tab:cifar10\]. Performance of local error learning deteriorates slightly when using sign-concordant local feedback weights instead of symmetric local feedback weights. Performance does not improve for the local classifier in the second fully connected layer compared to the classifier in the first fully connected layer. We trained a variant of the network using only one fully connected layer using standard backpropagation. As shown in Table \[tab:cifar10\], the improvement in performance of the network trained using standard backpropagation is minimal when going from one to two fully connected layers. This implies that the second fully connected layer is largely superfluous and local error learning is thus unable to capitalize on it. Unlike for the MNIST dataset, allowing the local classifier parameters to be trainable improves performance significantly. As was the case for the MNIST dataset, training using feedback alignment leads to significantly worse performance than learning using local errors.
[0.48]{} ![() CIFAR10 test set errors obtained from two convolutional networks having the architecture described in the main text: one network was trained using local errors and symmetric local feedback weights (${\bf K}^i = {\bf M}{^i}^T$ ), where the errors for the random local classifiers in all layers are shown; the other network with identical architecture was trained using standard backpropagation. () Same as () except that in the network trained using local errors, sign-concordant local feedback weights with independent and random magnitudes were used. []{data-label="fig:cifar10_results"}](cifar10_symmetric "fig:"){width="\textwidth"} \[fig:cifar10\_symmetric\]
[0.48]{} ![() CIFAR10 test set errors obtained from two convolutional networks having the architecture described in the main text: one network was trained using local errors and symmetric local feedback weights (${\bf K}^i = {\bf M}{^i}^T$ ), where the errors for the random local classifiers in all layers are shown; the other network with identical architecture was trained using standard backpropagation. () Same as () except that in the network trained using local errors, sign-concordant local feedback weights with independent and random magnitudes were used. []{data-label="fig:cifar10_results"}](cifar10_signconcordant "fig:"){width="\textwidth"} \[fig:cifar10\_concordant\]
[lp[40mm]{}p[40mm]{}p[40mm]{}]{} & Local error learning (symmetric feedback weights) & Local error learning (sign-concordant feedback weights) & Local error learning (trainable local classifier)\
Test error & & &\
\
& Learning using feedback alignment & Learning using standard backpropagation (two FC layers) & Learning using standard backpropagation (one FC layer)\
Test error & $20.87 \pm 0.34 \%$ & $12.47 \pm 0.25 \%$ & $12.72 \pm 0.21 \%$\
\[tab:cifar10\]
Our feedback alignment results are better than those previously reported in refs. [@Baldi_etal16; @Liao_etal16; @Nokland_etal16]. This is due to our use of a bigger network that is well-regularized using dropout. Using a well-regularized network is particularly crucial when investigating alternatives to standard backpropagation as poorly-regularized learning can make a worse learning algorithm seem better, simply because it better regularizes the learning problem compared to a superior algorithm that overfits on the training data. Strong regularization is also a potential reason why we see that exact gradient descent (standard backpropagation) is clearly superior, unlike previous investigations that report better performance when using various approximations to standard backpropagation [@Liao_etal16], where this better performance can be due to the better regularization introduced by the approximate learning algorithms.
SVHN
----
We trained an identical network to the one used for the CIFAR10 dataset on the SVHN dataset. The SVHN dataset is a dataset of 32$\times$32$\times$3 color images. We used the training/validation/testing split of 598388/6000/26032 images respectively that was previously used in refs. [@Srivastava_etal14; @Goodfellow_etal13; @Sermanet_etal12]. The validation set was added to the training set after choosing the hyper-parameters (learning rate and dropout probabilities). The images were preprocessed using the local contrast normalization technique from ref. [@Jarrett_etal09].
[0.48]{} ![() SVHN test set errors obtained from two convolutional networks: one network was trained using local errors and symmetric local feedback weights (${\bf K}^i = {{\bf M}^i}^T$) where the errors for the random local classifiers in all layers are shown. The other network with identical architecture was trained using standard backpropagation . () Same as () except that in the network trained using local errors, sign-concordant local feedback weights with independent and random magnitudes were used. []{data-label="fig:svhn_results"}](svhn_symmetric "fig:"){width="\textwidth"} \[fig:svhn\_symmetric\]
[0.48]{} ![() SVHN test set errors obtained from two convolutional networks: one network was trained using local errors and symmetric local feedback weights (${\bf K}^i = {{\bf M}^i}^T$) where the errors for the random local classifiers in all layers are shown. The other network with identical architecture was trained using standard backpropagation . () Same as () except that in the network trained using local errors, sign-concordant local feedback weights with independent and random magnitudes were used. []{data-label="fig:svhn_results"}](svhn_signconcordant "fig:"){width="\textwidth"} \[fig:svhn\_concordant\]
Figure \[fig:svhn\_results\] shows the test error curves for the case of the symmetric local feedback weights and the case of the sign-concordant local feedback weights. The test error trends in Fig. \[fig:svhn\_results\] and Table \[tab:svhn\] are similar to those observed for CIFAR10. The performance of standard backpropagation is clearly superior, followed by learning using local errors generated by trainable local classifiers. Learning using local errors generated by fixed random classifiers lags behind (both when using symmetric feedback weights or sign-concordant feedback weights) but it still outperforms learning using feedback alignment.
[lp[40mm]{}p[40mm]{}p[40mm]{}]{} & Local error learning (symmetric feedback weights) & Local error learning (sign-concordant feedback weights) & Local error learning (trainable local classifier)\
Test error & & &\
\
& Learning using feedback alignment & Learning using standard backpropagation &\
Test error & $3.74 \pm 0.077 \%$ & $2.39 \pm 0.037 \%$ &\
\[tab:svhn\]
Conclusions and Discussion {#sec:conclusions_discussion}
==========================
Weight symmetry between the forward and backward passes and delayed error generation are two of the most biologically unrealistic aspects of backpropagation. Recent investigations have shown that the weight symmetry requirement can be relaxed allowing learning to proceed with random feedback weights [@Lillicrap_etal16; @Baldi_etal16; @Nokland_etal16; @Neftci_etal17a]. These investigations, however, do not address the problem of local learning and require the network to maintain its state until errors arrive from higher layers. Local errors have often been used to augment the top layer errors [@Szegedy_etal14; @Lee_etal15]. However, until now, relatively little work has been done on supervised learning using exclusively local errors, and none that we know of investigated local error generation using fixed random classifiers.
Our results show that learning using local errors generated using random classifiers, while falling short of the performance of standard backpropagation, significantly outperforms learning using feedback alignment techniques [@Lillicrap_etal16; @Baldi_etal16]. This holds true even when relaxing the weight symmetry requirement in the local feedback loop and using random fixed feedback weights that are sign-aligned with the random fixed classifier weights in the local learning loop. Maintaining sign-alignment is problematic in the feedback alignment technique as the sign of the feedback weights have to dynamically track the sign of the feedforward weights during training [@Liao_etal16] which introduces a dynamic dependency between the two sets of weights. In our case, since both sets of weights are fixed, this dependency need only be enforced initially.
Our CIFAR10 and SVHN results indicate that locally generated errors allow a convolutional layer to learn good features that are then used by the subsequent layer to learn even more informative features as evidenced by the increased accuracy of the local classifiers in higher layers. In the end, however, our approach solves many small optimization problems where each problem involves only the weights of one layer. We therefore lose one of the core advantages of standard backpropagation learning using a global objective function: the high probability of finding a good minimum in the parameter space when the dimensionality of this parameter space is large, i.e, when it includes all the network parameters [@Choromanska_etal15; @Im_etal16]. It was thus expected that classification performance will suffer compared to learning using standard backpropagation and a global objective function.
Single cell measurements in monkey area IT indicate broad tuning to a range of categories [@Kiani_etal07; @Sigala_Logothetis02]. This broad category tuning is realized in the proposed training scheme through the random local classifier weights that define how a neuron contributes to the score of each classification category. During training, the actual tuning properties of each neuron change to be in-line with the pre-defined fixed tuning defined by the random classifier weights, as this is the only way to minimize the local classifier error. Our error generation mechanism has several biologically attractive aspects:
1. It involves only two synaptic projections allowing errors to be generated quickly and weight updates to be carried out before input-induced changes in the states of the neurons have decayed. This avoids the common and unrealistic input buffering requirement encountered in standard backpropagation and feedback alignment techniques.
2. Error generation involves random projections that do not have to be learned. This makes the error generation loop particularly simple and removes any potential problematic interactions between learning the auxiliary classifier weights and learning the main network weights.
3. Strict weight symmetry is not required in the error pathway, only sign-alignment between two sets of fixed random weights is needed.
The use of fixed random local classifier weights allows us to sidestep one of the main hardware-related issues of using auxiliary local classifiers: the need to store the local classifier weights. Especially in large convolutional layers, storing the local classifier weights could be prohibitively expensive in terms of memory resources. Since the local classifier weights need to be accessed in a fixed order during each training iteration in order to calculate the classifier outputs, they can be cheaply, quickly, and reproducibly generated on the fly using a PRNG and a small seed. We have shown that this approach allows us to obtain a learning mechanism that drastically reduces memory traffic compared to standard backpropagation. During inference, the random classifier weights in each layer (which are compactly stored in a small seed) can be used to generate a classification decision during the evaluation of each layer. Thus, if needed, a series of classification decisions can be obtained, one from each layer, at a small computational cost and virtually no memory cost. The decisions from bottom layers, even though less accurate than the decisions from higher layers, can be used in situations where response time is critical. This allows the network to be dynamically truncated where higher layers are not evaluated and the final decision taken from intermediate layers. This feature of the proposed networks enables a dynamical trade-off between accuracy and energy consumption/computational load where only as many layers as allowed by the energy budget, or response time constraint, are evaluated.
[10]{}
L[é]{}on Bottou. Stochastic gradient learning in neural networks. , 91(8), 1991.
Jimmy Ba and Rich Caruana. Do deep nets really need to be deep? In [*Advances in neural information processing systems*]{}, pages 2654–2662, 2014.
A.S. Razavian, Hossein Azizpour, Josephine Sullivan, and Stefan Carlsson. Cnn features off-the-shelf: an astounding baseline for recognition. In [*Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition workshops*]{}, pages 806–813, 2014.
Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Geoffrey E Hinton. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. In [*Advances in neural information processing systems*]{}, pages 1097–1105, 2012.
Karen Simonyan and Andrew Zisserman. Very deep convolutional networks for large-scale image recognition. , 2014.
Yann LeCun, Yoshua Bengio, and Geoffrey Hinton. Deep learning. , 521(7553):436–444, 2015.
Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun. Deep residual learning for image recognition. In [*Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition*]{}, pages 770–778, 2016.
Sergey Zagoruyko and Nikos Komodakis. Wide residual networks. , 2016.
Gao Huang, Zhuang Liu, K.Q. Weinberger, and Laurens van der Maaten. Densely connected convolutional networks. , 2016.
C. [Szegedy]{}, W. [Liu]{}, Y. [Jia]{}, P. [Sermanet]{}, S. [Reed]{}, D. [Anguelov]{}, D. [Erhan]{}, V. [Vanhoucke]{}, and A. [Rabinovich]{}. . , September 2014.
Chen-Yu Lee, Saining Xie, Patrick Gallagher, Zhengyou Zhang, and Zhuowen Tu. Deeply-supervised nets. In [*Artificial Intelligence and Statistics*]{}, pages 562–570, 2015.
Xiaohui Xie and S.H. Seung. Equivalence of backpropagation and contrastive hebbian learning in a layered network. , 15(2):441–454, 2003.
Yoshua Bengio and Asja Fischer. Early inference in energy-based models approximates back-propagation. , 2015.
Benjamin Scellier and Yoshua Bengio. Equilibrium propagation: Bridging the gap between energy-based models and backpropagation. , 11, 2017.
T.P. Lillicrap, Daniel Cownden, D.B. Tweed, and C.J. Akerman. Random synaptic feedback weights support error backpropagation for deep learning. , 7, 2016.
Pierre Baldi, Peter Sadowski, and Zhiqin Lu. Learning in the machine: Random backpropagation and the learning channel. , 2016.
Arild N[ø]{}kland. Direct feedback alignment provides learning in deep neural networks. In [*Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems*]{}, pages 1037–1045, 2016.
E.O. Neftci, Charles Augustine, Somnath Paul, and Georgios Detorakis. Event-driven random back-propagation: Enabling neuromorphic deep learning machines. , 11, 2017.
S. Hochreiter, Y. Bengio, P. Frasconi, and J. Schmidhuber. Gradient flow in recurrent nets: the difficulty of learning long-term dependencies, 2001.
G.E. Hinton, S. Osindero, and Y.W. Teh. A fast learning algorithm for deep belief nets. , 18(7):1527–1554, 2006.
G.E. Hinton and R.R. Salakhutdinov. Reducing the dimensionality of data with neural networks. , 313(5786):504–507, 2006.
Yoshua Bengio, Pascal Lamblin, Dan Popovici, and Hugo Larochelle. Greedy layer-wise training of deep networks. In [*Advances in neural information processing systems*]{}, pages 153–160, 2007.
Pascal Vincent, Hugo Larochelle, Yoshua Bengio, and Pierre-Antoine Manzagol. Extracting and composing robust features with denoising autoencoders. In [*Proceedings of the 25th international conference on Machine learning*]{}, pages 1096–1103. ACM, 2008.
D. Erhan, Y. Bengio, A. Courville, P.A. Manzagol, P. Vincent, and S. Bengio. Why does unsupervised pre-training help deep learning? , 11:625–660, 2010.
Honglak Lee, Roger Grosse, Rajesh Ranganath, and Andrew Y. Ng. Convolutional deep belief networks for scalable unsupervised learning of hierarchical representations. In [*Proceedings of the 26th Annual International Conference on Machine Learning*]{}, ICML ’09, pages 609–616, New York, NY, USA, 2009. ACM.
Marc’Aurelio Ranzato, F.J. Huang, Y-Lan Boureau, and Yann LeCun. Unsupervised learning of invariant feature hierarchies with applications to object recognition. In [*Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2007. CVPR’07. IEEE Conference on*]{}, pages 1–8. IEEE, 2007.
Koray Kavukcuoglu, Marc’Aurelio Ranzato, and Yann LeCun. Fast inference in sparse coding algorithms with applications to object recognition. , 2010.
J.J. Zhao, Michael Mathieu, Ross Goroshin, and Yann LeCun. Stacked what-where auto-encoders. , 2015.
Yuting Zhang, Kibok Lee, and Honglak Lee. Augmenting supervised neural networks with unsupervised objectives for large-scale image classification. In [*International Conference on Machine Learning*]{}, pages 612–621, 2016.
Marc’Aurelio Ranzato and Martin Szummer. Semi-supervised learning of compact document representations with deep networks. In [*Proceedings of the 25th international conference on Machine learning*]{}, pages 792–799. ACM, 2008.
Hugo Larochelle and Yoshua Bengio. Classification using discriminative restricted boltzmann machines. In [*Proceedings of the 25th international conference on Machine learning*]{}, pages 536–543. ACM, 2008.
Ian Goodfellow, Mehdi Mirza, Aaron Courville, and Yoshua Bengio. Multi-prediction deep boltzmann machines. In [*Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems*]{}, pages 548–556, 2013.
Max Jaderberg, W.M. Czarnecki, Simon Osindero, Oriol Vinyals, Alex Graves, and Koray Kavukcuoglu. Decoupled neural interfaces using synthetic gradients. , 2016.
W.M. Czarnecki, Grzegorz [Ś]{}wirszcz, Max Jaderberg, Simon Osindero, Oriol Vinyals, and Koray Kavukcuoglu. Understanding synthetic gradients and decoupled neural interfaces. , 2017.
Vinod Nair and G.E. Hinton. Rectified linear units improve restricted [Boltzmann]{} machines. In [*Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML-10)*]{}, pages 807–814, 2010.
Nitish Srivastava, Geoffrey Hinton, Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Ruslan Salakhutdinov. Dropout: A simple way to prevent neural networks from overfitting. , 15(1):1929–1958, 2014.
Sergey Ioffe and Christian Szegedy. Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift. In [*International Conference on Machine Learning*]{}, pages 448–456, 2015.
Xavier Glorot and Yoshua Bengio. Understanding the difficulty of training deep feedforward neural networks. In [*Aistats*]{}, volume 9, pages 249–256, 2010.
Fr[é]{}d[é]{}ric Bastien, Pascal Lamblin, Razvan Pascanu, James Bergstra, Ian Goodfellow, Arnaud Bergeron, Nicolas Bouchard, David Warde-Farley, and Yoshua Bengio. Theano: new features and speed improvements. , 2012.
James Bergstra, Olivier Breuleux, Fr[é]{}d[é]{}ric Bastien, Pascal Lamblin, Razvan Pascanu, Guillaume Desjardins, Joseph Turian, David Warde-Farley, and Yoshua Bengio. Theano: a [CPU]{} and [GPU]{} math expression compiler. In [*Proceedings of the Python for scientific computing conference (SciPy)*]{}, volume 4, page 3. Austin, TX, 2010.
Diederik Kingma and Jimmy Ba. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. , 2014.
Minsoo Rhu, Natalia Gimelshein, Jason Clemons, Arslan Zulfiqar, and S.W. Keckler. vdnn: Virtualized deep neural networks for scalable, memory-efficient neural network design. In [*Microarchitecture (MICRO), 2016 49th Annual IEEE/ACM International Symposium on*]{}, pages 1–13. IEEE, 2016.
S. Himavathi, D. Anitha, and A. Muthuramalingam. Feedforward neural network implementation in [FPGA]{} using layer multiplexing for effective resource utilization. , 18(3):880–888, 2007.
Lukas Cavigelli, David Gschwend, Christoph Mayer, Samuel Willi, Beat Muheim, and Luca Benini. Origami: A convolutional network accelerator. In [*Proc. 25th Great Lakes Symposium on VLSI*]{}, pages 199–204. ACM, 2015.
Yu-Hsin Chen, Tushar Krishna, Joel Emer, and Vivienne Sze. : An energy-efficient reconfigurable accelerator for deep convolutional neural networks. In [*2016 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference (ISSCC)*]{}, pages 262–263. IEEE, 2016.
Song Han, Xingyu Liu, Huizi Mao, Jing Pu, Ardavan Pedram, Mark A. Horowitz, and William J. Dally. : Efficient inference engine on compressed deep neural network. In [*Proc. 43rd International Symposium on Computer Architecture*]{}, ISCA ’16, pages 243–254. IEEE Press, 2016.
Arash Ardakani, Fran[ç]{}ois Leduc-Primeau, Naoya Onizawa, Takahiro Hanyu, and W.J. Gross. implementation of deep neural networks using integral stochastic computing. In [*Turbo Codes and Iterative Information Processing (ISTC), 2016 9th International Symposium on*]{}, pages 216–220. IEEE, 2016.
Alessandro Aimar, Hesham Mostafa, Enrico Calabrese, Antonio Rios-Navarro, Ricardo Tapiador-Morales, Iulia-Alexandra Lungu, Moritz B. Milde, Federico Corradi, Alejandro Linares-Barranco, Shih-Chii Liu, and Tobi Delbruck. Nullhop: A flexible convolutional neural network accelerator based on sparse representations of feature maps. , 2017.
N.P. Jouppi, Cliff Young, Nishant Patil, David Patterson, Gaurav Agrawal, Raminder Bajwa, Sarah Bates, Suresh Bhatia, Nan Boden, Al Borchers, et al. In-datacenter performance analysis of a tensor processing unit. , 2017.
W.A. Wulf and S.A. McKee. Hitting the memory wall: implications of the obvious. , 23(1):20–24, 1995.
Thomas Vogelsang. Understanding the energy consumption of dynamic random access memories. In [*Proceedings of the 2010 43rd Annual IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Microarchitecture*]{}, pages 363–374. IEEE Computer Society, 2010.
Charles Lefurgy, Karthick Rajamani, Freeman Rawson, Wes Felter, Michael Kistler, and T.W. Keller. Energy management for commercial servers. , 36(12):39–48, 2003.
Qianli Liao, J.Z. Leibo, and T.A. Poggio. How important is weight symmetry in backpropagation? In [*AAAI*]{}, pages 1837–1844, 2016.
I.J. Goodfellow, David Warde-Farley, Mehdi Mirza, A.C. Courville, and Yoshua Bengio. Maxout networks. , 28:1319–1327, 2013.
Pierre Sermanet, Soumith Chintala, , and Yann LeCun. Convolutional neural networks applied to house numbers digit classification. In [*Pattern Recognition (ICPR), 2012 21st International Conference on*]{}, pages 3288–3291. IEEE, 2012.
Kevin Jarrett, Koray Kavukcuoglu, Yann LeCun, et al. What is the best multi-stage architecture for object recognition? In [*Computer Vision, 2009 IEEE 12th International Conference on*]{}, pages 2146–2153. IEEE, 2009.
Anna Choromanska, Mikael Henaff, Michael Mathieu, G.B. Arous, and Yann LeCun. The loss surfaces of multilayer networks. In [*Artificial Intelligence and Statistics*]{}, pages 192–204, 2015.
D.J. Im, Michael Tao, and Kristin Branson. An empirical analysis of deep network loss surfaces. , 2016.
Roozbeh Kiani, Hossein Esteky, Koorosh Mirpour, and Keiji Tanaka. Object category structure in response patterns of neuronal population in monkey inferior temporal cortex. , 97(6):4296–4309, 2007.
Natasha Sigala and N.K. Logothetis. Visual categorization shapes feature selectivity in the primate temporal cortex. , 415(6869):318–320, 2002.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
bibliography:
- 'ms.bib'
title: EXPLOITING SYNCHRONIZED LYRICS AND VOCAL FEATURES FOR MUSIC EMOTION DETECTION
---
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The statistics of Poincaré recurrence times in Hamiltonian systems typically shows a power-law decay with chaotic trajectories sticking to some phase-space regions for long times. For higher-dimensional systems the mechanism of this power-law trapping is still unknown. We investigate trapped orbits of a generic [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">4d</span>]{} symplectic map in phase space and frequency space and find that, in contrast to [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">2d</span>]{} maps, the trapping is (i) not due to a hierarchy in phase space. Instead, it occurs at the surface of the regular region, (ii) outside of the Arnold web. The chaotic dynamics in this sticky region is (iii) dominated by resonance channels which reach far into the chaotic region: We observe (iii.a) clear signatures of some kind of partial transport barriers and conjecture (iii.b) a stochastic process with an effective drift along resonance channels. These two processes lay the basis for a future understanding of the mechanism of power-law trapping in higher-dimensional systems.'
author:
- Steffen Lange
- Arnd Bäcker
- Roland Ketzmerick
title: |
What is the mechanism of power-law distributed Poincaré recurrences\
in higher-dimensional systems?
---
Chaotic transport in Hamiltonian systems is of great importance in a wide variety of applications, e.g., for predicting the stability of celestial motion and satellites [@MurHol2001; @Cin2002; @DaqRosAleDelValRos2016], controlling the beams of particle accelerators [@DumLas1993; @VraIslBou1997; @RobSteLasNad2000; @Pap2014], and to describe the dynamics of atoms and molecules [@SchBuc2001; @TodKomKonBerRic2005; @GekMaiBarUze2006; @PasChaUze2008; @WaaSchWig2008; @ManKes2014]. Generic Hamiltonian systems are not fully chaotic but have a mixed phase space which also contains regular tori. Close to these tori the chaotic transport is slowed down considerably. This intermittent behavior is characterized by the (cumulative) Poincaré recurrence statistics $P(t)$, the probability that a chaotic orbit has not returned to an initial region within time $t$. While for fully chaotic systems $P(t)$ usually decays exponentially [@BauBer1990; @HirSauVai1999], for mixed systems the decay is much slower following a power law $P(t)\sim
t^{-\gamma}$ [@ChiShe1983; @Kar1983]. This so-called power-law trapping or stickiness entails dramatic consequences for the transport properties in many systems, e.g., comets in the solar system [@She2010b], reactant lifetime in transition state theory [@EzrWaaWig2009], <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">DNA</span> [@MazShe2015], intramolecular energy redistribution [@SetKes2012], and microwave ionization of Rydberg atoms [@BucDelZakManArnWal1995; @SchBuc2001; @BenCasMasShe2000].
Power-law trapping is well understood for Hamiltonian systems with two degrees of freedom [@KayMeiPer1984b; @MeiOtt1985; @RomWig1990; @Zas2002; @WeiHufKet2003; @CriKet2008; @AltTel2008; @CedAga2013; @AluFisMei2014; @Mei2015]: In this case the regular tori are barriers in phase space such that chaotic orbits cannot cross them. In their vicinity so-called partial transport barriers of the same dimension exist which can be crossed by chaotic orbits, but with a small rate. A hierarchy of these partial barriers governs the dynamics and causes the power-law trapping.
![\[fig:power-law-trapping\] Statistics of Poincaré recurrences $P(t)$ for the map with initial region $q_1<0.1$ showing a power-law decay $P(t)\sim t^{-1.6}$. For $t>10^4$ the statistics (blue) is decomposed into orbits trapped at the dominant sticky region (red) and the remainder (gray). The inset shows the [[<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">3d</span>]{} phase-space slice]{} with $\vec{n}=(0,1,0,0)$, $D=0$ with a trapped orbit (blue points) and regular tori (red and gray rings). For a rotating view of the inset see the supplemental material [@supplementalvideos]. ](fig1.pdf)
Power-law trapping is also observed in higher-dimensional systems [@DinBouOtt1990; @AltKan2007; @ShoLiKomTod2007b; @She2010; @SilManBeiAlt2015], see Fig. \[fig:power-law-trapping\] for an illustration. However, its origin is unknown as the mechanism for two degrees of freedom cannot be generalized: The distinctive feature of higher-dimensional systems is that the regular tori have an insufficient dimension to be barriers in phase space (i.e. the $f$-dimensional tori have at least two dimensions less than the $(2f-1)$-dimensional energy surface for $f\geq3$ degrees of freedom). Consequentially, any chaotic orbit can get arbitrarily close to any regular torus by transport along resonance channels of the so-called Arnold web [@Arn1964; @Chi1979; @Loc1999]. While the diffusion along a channel is sometimes found [@WooLicLie1990; @Las1993; @GuzLegFro2005] and often assumed [@GuzLeg2013; @EftHar2013] to be normal, its detailed understanding is still missing [@Loc1999; @EftHar2013; @MesBazCinGio2014]. Generalizations of partial barriers to higher-dimensional systems exist [@MarDavEzr1987; @Wig1990; @MacMei1992; @ShoLiKomTod2007b] but their relevance for the chaotic transport is unclear. The phenomenon of power-law trapping can be explained in weakly coupled systems for intermediate time-scales [@AltKan2007; @SilManBeiAlt2015]. Still, the generic mechanism of power-law trapping in higher-dimensional systems remains an open question.
In this paper we investigate the mechanism of power-law trapping in a generic [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">4d</span>]{} symplectic map, which corresponds to the lowest dimensional Hamiltonian system for which regular tori are no barriers in phase space. We find that the trapping is (i) not due to a hierarchy in phase space, in contrast to [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">2d</span>]{} maps. Moreover, it occurs at the surface of the regular region, (ii) outside of the Arnold web. We find that the chaotic dynamics in this sticky region is (iii) dominated by resonance channels, which extend out of the Arnold web far into the chaotic region: We demonstrate (iii.a) clear signatures of some kind of partial transport barriers for the transport across channels. We conjecture that (iii.b) a stochastic process with an effective drift models the transport along a channel. Determining which of these two processes is dominant should allow for unraveling the mechanism of power-law trapping in higher-dimensional Hamiltonian systems.
[*System and Poincaré recurrence statistics.*]{}— To study the power-law trapping for [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">4d</span>]{} maps, we consider two coupled standard maps [@Fro1972], $(p_1, p_2, q_1, q_2) \mapsto (p_1', p_2', q_1',
q_2')$, $$\label{eq:map}
q_i' = q_i + p_i \qquad p_i' = p_i - \frac{\partial
V_i}{\partial q_i}(q_i') - \frac{\partial
V_{12}}{\partial q_i}(q_1',q_2')$$ with potentials $V_i = K_i/(4\pi^2) \cos(2\pi q_i)$ and coupling $V_{12} = \xi_{12}/(4\pi^2) \cos(2\pi (q_1+q_2))$. Choosing the nonlinearity parameters $K_1 = 2.25$, $K_2 = 3.0$ and a large coupling parameter $\xi_{12}=1.0$, Eq. represents a generic [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">4d</span>]{} symplectic map far from integrability [@RicLanBaeKet2014]. There is an elliptic–elliptic fixed point at $(p_1, p_2, q_1, q_2)=(0,0,0.5,0.5)$ which is surrounded by regular tori. For a [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">4d</span>]{} map such regular tori are two-dimensional and are organized around families of elliptic [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">1d</span>]{} tori which form a hierarchy [@LanRicOnkBaeKet2014]. These regular structures are embedded in a large chaotic region. We obtain the statistics of Poincaré recurrences $P(t)$ for the map in a phase space $p_{1, 2} \in [-0.5, 0.5)$ and $q_{1, 2} \in [0, 1)$ with periodic boundaries and the initial region $q_1<0.1$, which contains only chaotic dynamics. The resulting statistics $P(t)$ in Fig. \[fig:power-law-trapping\] (solid blue line) exhibits a power-law decay over several orders of magnitude. Chaotic orbits with large recurrence times $t$ stick to the vicinity of different regions of regular tori. As an illustration the [[<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">3d</span>]{} phase-space slice]{} (explained below) in the inset in Fig. \[fig:power-law-trapping\] shows regular tori (gray) and a chaotic orbit (blue) which sticks to a region of regular tori marked in red. It turns out that this sticky region is dominantly responsible for the power-law decay for $10^5<t<10^8$: The decomposition of $P(t)$ for $t>10^4$ demonstrates that the fraction of orbits sticking to this region (red line) is much bigger than the rest (gray line). Thus, for the rest of the paper we focus on chaotic orbits trapped in this dominant sticky region.
![\[fig:freq-space-trapping\] Dominant sticky region in (a) [[<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">3d</span>]{} phase-space slice]{} ($\vec{n}=(0.632,0.611,0.314,0.359)$, $D=0.322$) and (b), (c) frequency space with regular tori (gray (a) rings and (b), (c) points) and elliptic [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">1d</span>]{} tori (orange). In (a), (b) a single trapped orbit is shown with the time $t \in [0, 1.7 \cdot 10^7)$ encoded in color (blue to red). In (c) the density $\rho(\nu_1,\nu_2)$ of frequencies, see (ii), is shown with resonance lines (red). White corresponds to $\rho=0$, turquois to black to $\rho \in [4\cdot 10^{-7}, 2\cdot 10^{-3}]$. For a rotating view of (a) see the supplemental material [@supplementalvideos]. ](fig2.pdf)
[*Visualization in phase space and frequency space.*]{}— In order to analyze the mechanism of power-law trapping, we study the trapped orbits in phase space, using [[[<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">3d</span>]{} phase-space slice]{}s]{} [@RicLanBaeKet2014], and frequency space. This is illustrated in Figs. \[fig:freq-space-trapping\](a) and (b), respectively, for a typical chaotic orbit (same as in the inset of Fig. \[fig:power-law-trapping\]) trapped in the dominant sticky region: For a [[<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">3d</span>]{} phase-space slice]{} only points $\vec{u}=(p_1, p_2, q_1, q_2)$ within a thin [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">3d</span>]{} slice are displayed in the remaining three dimensions. The slice is defined by $|\vec{u}\cdot\vec{n}-D|<10^{-4}$ with normal vector $\vec{n}$ and distance $D$ to the origin given in the captions of Fig. \[fig:power-law-trapping\] and Fig. \[fig:freq-space-trapping\]. Phase-space objects typically appear in such a slice with a dimension reduced by one. For instance the regular [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">2d</span>]{} tori appear as rings (gray) in Fig. \[fig:freq-space-trapping\](a) and the elliptic [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">1d</span>]{} tori appear as points (orange). Since elliptic [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">1d</span>]{} tori occur in one-parameter families around which the regular tori are organized [@LanRicOnkBaeKet2014], the orange points form a line in the center of the gray rings.
In order to relate trapped orbits to resonances, we complement the [[<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">3d</span>]{} phase-space slice]{} with a frequency analysis [@Las1990; @BarBazGioScaTod1996; @RicLanBaeKet2014], see Fig. \[fig:freq-space-trapping\](b): For this, each [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">2d</span>]{} torus is associated with its two fundamental frequencies $(\nu_1, \nu_2) \in
[0, 1)^2$, i.e. a point in frequency space. The frequencies $(\nu_1,
\nu_2)$ describe the angular dynamics on the torus and are computed from $\Delta t=4096$ iterations of an orbit on the torus. In the frequency space in Fig. \[fig:freq-space-trapping\](b) regular tori (gray points) are organized above the family of elliptic [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">1d</span>]{} tori (orange points). The region of the regular tori is interrupted by channels around resonance lines $m_1:m_2:n$, on which the frequencies fulfill $m_1 \cdot \nu_1 + m_2 \cdot \nu_2 = n$ with integers $m_1,
m_2, n$. These so-called *resonance channels* are accessible to chaotic dynamics. Their network within the region of regular tori is referred to as *Arnold web*. A chaotic orbit can be displayed in frequency space by decomposing the orbit into segments of length $\Delta t$ and numerically assigning frequencies to each segment [@MarDavEzr1987; @Las1993].
[*(i) Trapping not due to hierarchy.*]{}— A typical trapped orbit is shown in Figs. \[fig:freq-space-trapping\](a) and (b) with its points colored according to iteration time: The orbit enters the sticky region (blue), is trapped (bright blue to orange), and leaves the region (red). The [[<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">3d</span>]{} phase-space slice]{} and the frequency space demonstrate that the chaotic orbit is not trapped deep in the hierarchy: In Fig. \[fig:freq-space-trapping\](a) the trapped orbit is spread over the surface of the regular structure without clustering on smaller scales. In contrast, trapped orbits in [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">2d</span>]{} maps spend more and more time on finer and finer phase-space scales due to the hierarchy of partial barriers. Furthermore, in Fig. \[fig:freq-space-trapping\](b) the orbit extends over several resonances, whereas an orbit being trapped in the deeper levels of the island-around-island hierarchy of a [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">4d</span>]{} map would have frequencies on a single resonance line or at a junction of resonances [@LanRicOnkBaeKet2014]. We estimate that the trapped orbits spend on average just $1 \%$ of their time deeper in the hierarchy, e.g. near those regular tori which appear on resonance lines in Fig. \[fig:freq-space-trapping\](b).
[*(ii) Trapping outside of Arnold web.*]{}— We analyze all trapped orbits with $10^5<t<10^9$ using their density $\rho(\nu_1, \nu_2)$ in frequency space, see Fig. \[fig:freq-space-trapping\](c). The density is computed from $61600$ trapped orbits on a grid with resolution $\Delta \nu=5\cdot 10^{-6}$ and shown in logarithmic scale. The density is zero in the resonance channels of the Arnold web. This means that on the considered time scale the power-law trapping occurs outside of the Arnold web.
[*(iii) Relevance of resonance channels.*]{}— Remarkably, the density in Fig. \[fig:freq-space-trapping\](c) exhibits pronounced peaks along resonance lines, some of which are indicated by red dashed lines in the background. These resonance lines extend out of the Arnold web into the chaotic region. For a chaotic orbit to exhibit resonant frequencies it has to be confined around a resonance line at least for the time interval $\Delta t$ of the frequency analysis. This would be the case within resonance channels in the Arnold web, where they are surrounded by regular tori. The high densities in Fig. \[fig:freq-space-trapping\](c) demonstrate that these resonance channels still dominate transport outside the Arnold web, where they are no longer surrounded by regular tori. Consequently, the chaotic transport in the sticky region can locally be decomposed into transport across and along resonance channels.
In Fig. \[fig:time-frequency-4D\] this decomposition is demonstrated for a trapped orbit by using convenient local coordinates $(\nu_1,
\tilde{\nu}_2)$. The boundary of Fig. \[fig:time-frequency-4D\](a) is shown as black box in Fig. \[fig:freq-space-trapping\](a). The transport across and along resonance channels is captured by $\nu_1(t)$ in Fig. \[fig:time-frequency-4D\](b) and $\tilde{\nu}_2(t)$ in Fig. \[fig:time-frequency-4D\](c), respectively, as discussed below. Note that, while most trapped orbits extend much more along $\nu_1$ than the example orbit, locally we always observe the characteristics of Fig. \[fig:time-frequency-4D\].
![\[fig:time-frequency-4D\] Transport across and along resonance channels for a single trapped orbit $t\in[0, 6.3\cdot
10^7)$ displayed in local coordinates $(\nu_1, \tilde{\nu}_2)$ with $\tilde{\nu}_2=\nu_2+k\cdot (\nu_1-\nu_1^0)$, $k=1.94$, $\nu_1^0=0.294$. The boundary of (a) is indicated as a black box in Fig. \[fig:freq-space-trapping\](b). Different frequency ranges in $\nu_1$ are colored red, green and blue. In (b), (c) the time dependence of $\nu_1$ (across) and $\tilde{\nu}_2$ (along) is shown (points outside of (a) in black).](fig3.pdf)
[*(iii.a) Signatures of partial barriers.*]{}— The transport across resonance channels is captured in Fig. \[fig:time-frequency-4D\](b). The frequency $\nu_1(t)$ fluctuates within some frequency range over long time intervals with sudden transitions to other ranges. In [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">2d</span>]{} maps such behavior is caused by partial barriers [@Lan2016]. Thus, Fig. \[fig:time-frequency-4D\](b) shows clear signatures of partial barriers separating one or more resonance channels in a generic [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">4d</span>]{} map.
The origin of these partial barriers is a difficult open problem: Partial barriers can be formed by the stable and unstable manifolds of the family of hyperbolic [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">1d</span>]{} tori, which is present in any resonance channel [@OnkLanKetBae2016] and studied in the context of normally hyperbolic invariant manifolds [@Wig1990]. Instead, we conjecture that the partial barriers are formed by some families of cantori, as they occur in Fig. \[fig:time-frequency-4D\](a) in between resonance channels. The existence of individual cantori in higher dimensions has been shown in Ref. [@MacMei1992]. The quantification of the flux across such a partial barrier in higher-dimensional systems is conceptually problematic: As the transport along the partial barrier is slow, only its local, and not its global, flux is relevant for the dynamics of trapped orbits. Note that in a special [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">4d</span>]{} map, for which the relevant resonance channels are parallel to the surface of the regular region, the transport across resonance channels is the origin of the power-law trapping [@Lan2016].
[*(iii.b) Stochastic process with effective drift.*]{}— The transport along a resonance channel is captured in Fig. \[fig:time-frequency-4D\](c). We conjecture that it can be modeled by a one-dimensional stochastic process with an effective drift: Such a drift was previously suggested due to the curvature of the regular tori [@KruKetKan2012; @CasKal2015:p]. We propose that there is a much stronger and more general effective drift $v$ due to the increase of the transversal [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">3d</span>]{} volume $A$ along the resonance channel: Assuming a fast transversal diffusion one can project to a one-dimensional process along the channel with a phase-space coordinate $x$. According to the Fick-Jacob equation (Eq. (2.6) in Ref. [@KalPer2005]) this gives rise to a drift $$\label{eq:fick-jacob}
v(x) = \frac{\partial_xA(x)}{A(x)} D(x)$$ with the local diffusion coefficient $D(x)$. The increase of the volume $A(x)$ along a channel is already visible in the frequency space in Fig. \[fig:freq-space-trapping\](b) by the increasing widths of resonance channels going towards the chaotic region. Unfortunately, there is only weak numerical indication for such a drift so far, as the slow transport along a channel is very difficult to measure locally due to the lack of a sufficiently accurate one-dimensional coordinate $x$ [@Lan2016].
The transport along a resonance channel with an effective drift could be one mechanism of the power-law trapping: Assuming a power-law increase of the transversal volume along the channel $A(x) \sim
x^\alpha$ and using $D(x) \sim A(x)$ [@WooLicLie1990] the drift is $v(x) = \delta x^{\alpha-1}$ with some factor $\delta$, according to Eq. . For a process $x\in[0,x_{\text{abs}})$ with an absorbing barrier at $x_{\text{abs}}$ one can derive a power-law decay of the survival time distribution $P(t\gg 1) = t^{-\gamma}$ with $\gamma = \frac{\delta-1}{\alpha-2}$, $\alpha>2$, $\delta>1$, generalizing Ref. [@MotMouGreKan2005] to $\delta \neq \alpha$.
[*Outlook.*]{}— In this paper we advance towards understanding the mechanism of power-law trapping in generic [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">4d</span>]{} symplectic maps. The generality of the results is supported by similar observations we have made for coupled twist maps [@Lan2016] and a [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">3d</span>]{} billiard [@Fir2014]. It remains to be shown how the two local transport directions (across and along) of all the intersecting resonance channels determine the global transport. For this, (iii.a) the origin of the observed partial barriers should be clarified, i.e. whether they are families of cantori, and (iii.b) the drift and diffusion along channels should be quantified. Apart from the power-law trapping, the effective drift is crucial to understand the generic chaotic transport in the Arnold web. Since all higher-dimensional systems share the crucial property that regular tori are no barriers in phase space, the results obtained for [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">4d</span>]{} maps should be generalizable to even higher-dimensional systems.
We are grateful for discussions with J. D. Meiss, S. Keshavamurthy, J. Laskar, E. G. Altmann, M. Richter, M. Toda, H. Kantz, and R. Klages. Furthermore, we acknowledge support by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft under grant KE 537/6–1. All [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">3d</span>]{} visualizations were created using <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Mayavi</span> [@RamVar2011].
[100]{} \[1\][`#1`]{} \[2\]\[\][[\#2](#2)]{}
N. Murray and M. Holman, [The role of chaotic resonances in the [Solar System]{}]{}, Nature **410**, 773 (2001).
P. M. [Cincotta]{}, [[[Arnold]{} diffusion: an overview through dynamical astronomy]{}]{}, New Astron. Rev. **46**, 13 (2002).
J. Daquin, A. J. Rosengren, E. M. Alessi, F. Deleflie, G. B. Valsecchi, and A. Rossi, [The dynamical structure of the [MEO]{} region: long-term stability, chaos, and transport]{}, Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astr. **124**, 335 (2016).
H. S. Dumas and J. Laskar, [Global dynamics and long-time stability in [Hamiltonian]{} systems via numerical frequency analysis]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. **70**, 2975 (1993).
M. N. Vrahatis, H. Isliker, and T. C. Bountis, [Structure and breakdown of invariant tori in a [4-D]{} mapping model of accelerator dynamics]{}, Int. J. Bifurcat. Chaos **7**, 2707 (1997).
D. Robin, C. Steier, J. Laskar, and L. Nadolski, [Global dynamics of the advanced light source revealed through experimental frequency map analysis]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. **85**, 558 (2000).
Y. [Papaphilippou]{}, [Detecting chaos in particle accelerators through the frequency map analysis method]{}, Chaos **24**, 024412 (2014).
P. Schlagheck and A. Buchleitner, [Algebraic decay of the survival probability in chaotic helium]{}, Phys. Rev. A **63**, 024701 (2001).
M. Toda, T. Komatsuzaki, T. Konishi, R. S. Berry, and S. A. Rice (editors) *Geometric Structures of Phase Space in Multidimensional Chaos: Applications to Chemical Reaction Dynamics in Complex Systems*, volume 130 of *Advances in Chemical Physics*, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey (2005).
S. Gekle, J. Main, T. Bartsch, and T. Uzer, [Extracting multidimensional phase space topology from periodic orbits]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. **97**, 104101 (2006).
R. Pa škauskas, C. Chandre, and T. Uzer, [Dynamical bottlenecks to intramolecular energy flow]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. **100**, 083001 (2008).
H. Waalkens, R. Schubert, and S. Wiggins, [Wigner’s dynamical transition state theory in phase space: classical and quantum]{}, Nonlinearity **21**, R1 (2008).
P. Manikandan and S. Keshavamurthy, [Dynamical traps lead to the slowing down of intramolecular vibrational energy flow]{}, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA **111**, 14354 (2014).
W. Bauer and G. F. Bertsch, [Decay of ordered and chaotic systems]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. **65**, 2213 (1990).
M. Hirata, B. Saussol, and S. Vaienti, [Statistics of return times: A general framework and new applications]{}, Commun. Math. Phys. **206**, 33 (1999).
B. V. Chirikov and D. L. Shepelyansky, in *Proceedings of the IXth International Conference on Nonlinear Oscillations*, Kiev, 1981; \[Naukova Dumka 2, 420 (1984)\]; (English translation: [Statistics of [P]{}oincaré recurrences and the structure of the stochastic layer of a nonlinear resonance]{}, Princeton University Report No. PPPL-TRANS-133, 1983).
C. F. F. Karney, [Long-time correlations in the stochastic regime]{}, Physica D **8**, 360 (1983).
I. I. Shevchenko, [[H]{}amiltonian intermittency and [L]{}évy flights in the three-body problem]{}, Phys. Rev. E **81**, 066216 (2010).
G. S. Ezra, H. Waalkens, and S. Wiggins, [Microcanonical rates, gap times, and phase space dividing surfaces]{}, J. Chem. Phys. **130**, 164118 (2009).
A. K. Mazur and D. Shepelyansky, [Algebraic statistics of [P]{}oincaré recurrences in a [DNA]{} molecule]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. **115**, 188104 (2015).
A. Sethi and S. Keshavamurthy, [Driven coupled morse oscillators: visualizing the phase space and characterizing the transport]{}, Mol. Phys. **110**, 717 (2012).
A. Buchleitner, D. Delande, J. Zakrzewski, R. N. Mantegna, M. Arndt, and H. Walther, [Multiple time scales in the microwave ionization of [R]{}ydberg atoms]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. **75**, 3818 (1995).
G. Benenti, G. Casati, G. Maspero, and D. L. Shepelyansky, [Quantum [P]{}oincaré recurrences for a hydrogen atom in a microwave field]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. **84**, 4088 (2000).
R. S. MacKay, J. D. Meiss, and I. C. Percival, [[Transport in [H]{}amiltonian systems]{}]{}, Physica D **13**, 55 (1984).
J. D. Meiss and E. Ott, [Markov-tree model of intrinsic transport in [H]{}amiltonian systems]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. **55**, 2741 (1985).
V. Rom-Kedar and S. Wiggins, [Transport in two-dimensional maps]{}, Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. **109**, 239 (1990).
G. M. Zaslavsky, [Chaos, fractional kinetics, and anomalous transport]{}, Phys. Rep. **371**, 461 (2002).
M. Weiss, L. Hufnagel, and R. Ketzmerick, [Can simple renormalization theories describe the trapping of chaotic trajectories in mixed systems?]{}, Phys. Rev. E **67**, 046209 (2003).
G. Cristadoro and R. Ketzmerick, [Universality of algebraic decays in [H]{}amiltonian systems]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. **100**, 184101 (2008).
E. G. Altmann and T. T[é]{}l, [Poincaré recurrences from the perspective of transient chaos]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. **100**, 174101 (2008).
R. Ceder and O. Agam, [Fluctuations in the relaxation dynamics of mixed chaotic systems]{}, Phys. Rev. E **87**, 012918 (2013).
O. Alus, S. Fishman, and J. D. Meiss, [Statistics of the island-around-island hierarchy in [H]{}amiltonian phase space]{}, Phys. Rev. E **90**, 062923 (2014).
J. D. Meiss, [Thirty years of turnstiles and transport]{}, Chaos **25**, 097602 (2015).
See Supplemental Material at <http://www.comp-phys.tu-dresden.de/supp/> for videos with rotating camera position.
M. Ding, T. Bountis, and E. Ott, [Algebraic escape in higher dimensional [Hamiltonian]{} systems]{}, Phys. Lett. A **151**, 395 (1990).
E. G. Altmann and H. Kantz, [Hypothesis of strong chaos and anomalous diffusion in coupled symplectic maps]{}, Europhys. Lett. **78**, 10008 (2007).
A. Shojiguchi, C.-B. Li, T. Komatsuzaki, and M. Toda, [Fractional behavior in multidimensional [Hamiltonian]{} systems describing reactions]{}, Phys. Rev. E **76**, 056205 (2007), erratum ibid. [**77**]{}, 019902 (2008).
D. L. Shepelyansky, [Poincaré recurrences in [Hamiltonian]{} systems with a few degrees of freedom]{}, Phys. Rev. E **82**, 055202(R) (2010).
R. M. da Silva, C. Manchein, M. W. Beims, and E. G. Altmann, [Characterizing weak chaos using time series of [Lyapunov]{} exponents]{}, Phys. Rev. E **91**, 062907 (2015).
V. I. Arnol’d, [Instability of dynamical systems with several degrees of freedom]{}, Sov. Math. Dokl. **5**, 581 (1964).
B. V. [Chirikov]{}, [[A universal instability of many-dimensional oscillator systems]{}]{}, Phys. Rep. **52**, 263 (1979).
P. Lochak, [Arnold diffusion; [A]{} compendium of remarks and questions]{}, in C. Sim[ó]{} (editor) “[H]{}amiltonian [S]{}ystems with [T]{}hree or [M]{}ore [D]{}egrees of [F]{}reedom”, volume 533 of *NATO ASI Series: C - Mathematical and Physical Sciences*, 168, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1999).
B. P. Wood, A. J. Lichtenberg, and M. A. Lieberman, [Arnold diffusion in weakly coupled standard maps]{}, Phys. Rev. A **42**, 5885 (1990).
J. Laskar, [Frequency analysis for multi-dimensional systems. [G]{}lobal dynamics and diffusion]{}, Physica D **67**, 257 (1993).
M. Guzzo, E. Lega, and C. Froeschlé, [First numerical evidence of global [Arnold]{} diffusion in quasi–integrable systems]{}, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Sys. Ser. B **5**, 687 (2005).
M. Guzzo and E. Lega, [The numerical detection of the [A]{}rnold web and its use for long-term diffusion studies in conservative and weakly dissipative systems]{}, Chaos **23**, 023124 (2013).
C. Efthymiopoulos and M. Harsoula, [The speed of [Arnold]{} diffusion]{}, Physica D **251**, 19 (2013).
M. F. Mestre, A. Bazzani, P. M. Cincotta, and C. M. Giordano, [Stochastic approach to diffusion inside the chaotic layer of a resonance]{}, Phys. Rev. E **89**, 012911 (2014).
C. C. Martens, M. J. Davis, and G. S. Ezra, [[Local frequency analysis of chaotic motion in multidimensional systems: energy transport and bottlenecks in planar OCS]{}]{}, Chem. Phys. Lett. **142**, 519 (1987).
S. Wiggins, [On the geometry of transport in phase space [I]{}. [T]{}ransport in $k$-degree-of-freedom [H]{}amiltonian systems, $2 \leq k < \infty$]{}, Physica D **44**, 471 (1990).
R. S. MacKay and J. D. Meiss, [Cantori for symplectic maps near the anti-integrable limit]{}, Nonlinearity **5**, 149 (1992).
C. [Froeschlé]{}, [Numerical study of a four-dimensional mapping]{}, Astron. & Astrophys. **16**, 172 (1972).
M. Richter, S. Lange, A. Bäcker, and R. Ketzmerick, [Visualization and comparison of classical structures and quantum states of four-dimensional maps]{}, Phys. Rev. E **89**, 022902 (2014).
S. Lange, M. Richter, F. Onken, A. Bäcker, and R. Ketzmerick, [Global structure of regular tori in a generic [4D]{} symplectic map]{}, Chaos **24**, 024409 (2014).
J. Laskar, [The chaotic motion of the solar system: A numerical estimate of the size of the chaotic zones]{}, Icarus **88**, 266 (1990).
R. Bartolini, A. Bazzani, M. Giovannozzi, W. Scandale, and E. Todesco, [[[T]{}une evaluation in simulations and experiments]{}]{}, Part. Accel. **52**, 147 (1996).
S. Lange, *Chaotic transport and trapping close to regular structures in 4D symplectic maps*, [Ph.D.]{} thesis, Technische Universität Dresden, Fachrichtung Physik (2016).
F. Onken, S. Lange, R. Ketzmerick, and A. Bäcker, [Bifurcations of families of [1D]{}-tori in [4D]{} symplectic maps]{}, Chaos **26**, 063124 (2016).
A. Kruscha, R. Ketzmerick, and H. Kantz, [Biased diffusion inside regular islands under random symplectic perturbations]{}, Phys. Rev. E **85**, 066210 (2012).
O. Castej[ó]{}n and V. Kaloshin, [Random iteration of maps on a cylinder and diffusive behavior]{}, arXiv:1501.03319 \[math.DS\] (2015).
P. Kalinay and J. K. Percus, [Projection of two-dimensional diffusion in a narrow channel onto the longitudinal dimension]{}, J. Chem. Phys. **122**, 204701 (2005).
A. E. Motter, A. P. S. de Moura, C. Grebogi, and H. Kantz, [Effective dynamics in [H]{}amiltonian systems with mixed phase space]{}, Phys. Rev. E **71**, 036215 (2005).
M. Firmbach, *3D Billards: Dynamik im gemischten Phasenraum und Potenzgesetz des Hängenbleibens*, Bachelor thesis, Technische Universität Dresden, Fachrichtung Physik (2014).
P. Ramachandran and G. Varoquaux, [[Mayavi]{}: [3D]{} visualization of scientific data]{}, Comput. Sci. Eng. **13**, 40 (2011).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- 'Chengxin Wang[^1]'
- 'Shaofeng Cai[ ^fnsymbol[1]{}^]{}'
- Gary Tan
bibliography:
- 'egbib.bib'
title: 'GraphTCN: Spatio-Temporal Interaction Modeling for Human Trajectory Prediction'
---
[^1]: equal contribution
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
**New Procedure to Generate Multipliers in Complex**
**Neumann Problem and Effective Kohn Algorithm**
*Dedicated to the Memory of Professor Lu Qikeng*
Yum-Tong Siu
The purpose of this note is threefold. (i) To explain the effective Kohn algorithm for multipliers in the complex Neumann problem and its difference with the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm, especially in the context of an example of Catlin-D’Angelo concerning the ineffectivness of the latter. (ii) To extend the techniques of multiplier ideal sheaves for the complex Neumann problem to general systems of partial differential equations. (iii) To present a new procedure of generation of multipliers in the complex Neumann problem as a special case of the multiplier ideal sheaves techniques for general systems of partial differential equation.
For [*a priori*]{} estimates in the theory of partial differential equations some of the standard techniques are the following. (i) Using integration by parts to get $L^2$ estimates of derivatives in certain directions, for example, $L^2$ estimates of all first-order partial derivatives of a function with compact support from applying integration by parts to its inner product with its Laplacian. (ii) Using Lie bracket of two vector fields to conclude, from given derivative estimates of fractional orders along each of the two vectors, the derivative estimates of lower fractional order along their Lie bracket, for example, Hörmander’s work on the sum of squares of vector fields \[Hörmander1967\].
The technique of multiplier ideal sheaves introduced by Kohn for the complex Neumann problem is a new method to conclude, from $L^2$ estimates of derivatives along certain [*complex-valued*]{} vector fields, the derivative estimates of lower fractional orders in all directions by introducing the notion of multipliers. In a system of partial differential equations where the estimate is for a vector-valued test function with components $\psi_\nu$, for given complex-valued vector fields $Y_j$, when the estimates for several linear combinations $\sum_{j,\nu}\rho_{j,\nu}Y_j\psi_\nu$ with some given smooth functions $\rho_{j,\nu}$ are known, the multipliers are the smooth coefficients $a_\nu$ of a linear combination $\sum_\nu a_\nu\psi_\nu$ such that there is an estimate of the Sobolev $L^2$ norm of $\sum_\nu a_\nu\varphi_\nu$ of some positive fractional order. The goal is to derive differential relations among the multipliers to obtain some geometric condition to solve the regularity problem for the given system of partial differential equations, by the method of using the differential relations and some initial multipliers to conclude that the function which is identically $1$ is a scalar multiplier.
For Kohn’s original setting of a bounded weakly pseudoconvex domain $\Omega$ in ${\mathbb C}^n$ the vector fields $Y_j$ are the vector fields $L_1,\cdots,L_{n-1}$ of type $(1,0)$ tangential to the boundary $\partial\Omega$ of $\Omega$ together with their complex conjugates $\bar L_1,\cdots,\bar L_{n-1}$. The test function is a $(0,1)$-form in the domains of $\bar\partial$ and $\bar\partial^*$ whose $n-1$ tangential components are $\varphi_{\overline 1},\cdots,\varphi_{\overline{n-1}}$. The given linear combinations $\sum_{j,\nu}\rho_{j,\nu}Y_j\psi_\nu$ are the $(n-1)^2+1$ linear combinations $\bar L_j\varphi_\nu$ (for $1\leq j,\nu\leq n-1$) and $\sum_{\nu=1}^{n-1}L_\nu\varphi_\nu$.
The structure of this note is as follows. We start out with the background and motivation for the technique of multiplier ideal sheaves. We then discuss the two Kohn algorithm of generating multiplies. One is the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm. The other is the effective Kohn algorithm. We explain the algebraic geometric techniques in the effective Kohn algorithm, with special attention paid to the effectiveness of the orders of subellipticity in each step. The effective Kohn algorithm is then applied to Catlin-D’Angelo’s example to highlight the difference in effectiveness between the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm and the effective Kohn algorithm. We present the generalization of the technique of multipliers to general systems of partial differential equations. Finally we apply the generalized techniques to the complex Neumann problem to obtain a new procedure to generate vector multipliers from matrix multipliers for special domains.
The notations ${\mathbb N}$, ${\mathbb R}$, and ${\mathbb C}$ mean respectively all positive integers, all real numbers, and all complex numbers. The notations ${\mathcal O}_{{\mathbb C}^n,P}$ and ${\mathfrak m}_{{\mathbb C}^n,P}$ mean respectively all holomorphic germs on ${\mathbb C}^n$ at $P$ and the maximum ideal of the local ring ${\mathcal O}_{{\mathbb C}^n,P}$. Unless specified otherwise, $\left\|\cdot\right\|$ denotes the $L^2$ norm and $\left(\cdot,\,\cdot\right)$ denotes the $L^2$ inner product. The notation $\left\|\cdot\right\|_{L^2(U)}$ is also used to more clearly specify that it is the $L^2$ norm over $U$. The notation $\left(\cdot,\,\cdot\right)_{L^2(U)}$ is also used to more clearly specify that it is the $L^2$ inner product over $U$. The notation $L^2_k$ means the Sobolev norm defined by using the $L^2$ norm of derivatives up to order $k$. The notations $\partial_j$ and $\bar\partial_j$ mean respectively $\frac{\partial}{\partial z_j}$ and $\frac{\partial}{\partial\bar z_j}$, where $z_1,\cdots,z_n$ are the coordinates of ${\mathbb C}^n$.
.3in[Table of Contents]{}
§1. Background and Motivation for Multiplier Ideal Sheaves
§2. Generation of Multipliers in Kohn’s Algorithm
§3. Orders of Subellpiticity in Algebraic Geometric Techniques for 3-Dimensional Special Domain
§4. Effective Kohn Algorithm Applied to Catlin-D’Angelo’s Example
§5. Multipliers in More General Setting
§6. New Procedure to Generate Vector Multiplier from Matrix Multiplier in Complex Neumann Problem of Special Domain
.5in[**§1.**]{} [Background and Motivation for Multiplier Ideal Sheaves]{}
In regularity problems of local or global systems of partial differential equations, multiplier ideal sheaves describe the location and the extent of the failure of [*a priori*]{} estimates. There are two ways to introduce such multiplier ideal sheaves. The first way is from the continuity method of solving partial differential equations (which are usually nonlinear partial differential equations defined on compact Riemannian manifolds) where a multiplier ideal sheaf arises as the limit of rescaling of local coordinate charts to make possible the use of Ascoli-Arzela techniques for convergence. The second way is just to directly introduce multiplier ideal sheaves as factors required in the integral norms to make [*a priori*]{} estimates hold for the regularity problem. We very briefly describe both.
(1.1) [*Multiplier Ideal Sheaves from Limit of Rescaling of Local Coordinate Charts.*]{} One method to solve nonlinear partial differential equations is to use the [*continuity method*]{} which uses a family of partial differential equations parametrized by $t\in[0,1]$ so that
- $t=1$ is the given partial differential equations,
- $t=0$ can be solved (which means solvability of partial differential equation at initial parameter), and
- from the solution for $t=t_0<1$ it is possible to solve for $t<t_0+\varepsilon$ for some $\varepsilon>0$ (which means that the [*openness*]{} property is assumed).
The difficulty is to prove the [*closedness*]{} property that for $0<t^*\leq 1$ solutions $s_\nu$ for the parameter value $t=t_\nu$ for $t_\nu\nearrow t^*$ can be used to construct a solution $s$ for the parameter value $t=t^*$.
The natural approach is to obtain $s$ by taking the limit of $s_{\nu_k}$ for some subsequence $\{\nu_k\}$ of the sequence $\{\nu\}$. Usually the boundedness in some weak norm for $s_\nu$, for example, $L^2$, can be derived from the setup of the given partial differential equation. The method of Ascoli-Arzela calls for boundedness in some stronger norm for $s_\nu$, for example, $L_1^2$ defined by the first-order derivatives being $L^2$.
In the setting of a manifold the derivative involved in $L^2_1$ depends on the choice of local coordinates so that $L^2_1$ is determined up to equivalence (of sandwiching between its products with two constants). One can always cheat by using different rescaling of local coordinates for each $s_\nu$, but one has to pay the price that at the end the variable rescaling of local coordinates results in a factor (or [*multiplier*]{}) which is the limit of the Jacobian determinant in coordinate change in the integral for $L^2$.
The limit $s$ of $s_{\nu_k}$ from the Ascoli-Arzela argument is $L^2$ only after the insertion of the multiplier in its $L^2$ integral. This can be interpreted as transforming the requirement in the the method of Ascoli-Arzela for two norms $L^2$ and $L_1^2$ (with difference in orders of differentiation in their definitions) to two norms which are the $L^2$ norm and the multiplier-modified $L_1^2$ norm. Multipliers form an ideal sheaf, called the [*multiplier ideal sheaf*]{}. Global conditions, such as topological conditions, can be used to conclude that the multiplier ideal sheaf must be the full structure sheaf, giving the solvability of the partial differential equation from global conditions. Examples are (i) the existence of Hermitian-Einstein metrics for stable holomorphic vector bundles over compact algebraic (or Kähler) manifolds, where the method of limit of rescaling of local coordinates was first applied by Donaldson in \[Donaldson1985\] for the surface case and (ii) the existence of Kähler-Einstein metrics for certain Fano manifolds, where the method of multiplier ideal sheaves as defined by taking limit of metrics of the anti-canonical line bundle was first applied by Nadel in \[Nadel1990\].
We now look at the second way of introducing multiplier ideal sheaves, which is best described by using, as an example, the problem of the regularity of the Kohn solution for the complex Neumann problem on a bounded weakly pseudoconvex domain in ${\mathbb C}^n$ with smooth boundary.
(1.2) [*Regularity Problem of Kohn Solution for Complex Neumann Problem on Weakly Pseudoconvex Domain.*]{} Let $\Omega$ be a bounded weakly pseudoconvex domain in ${\mathbb C}^n$ with smooth boundary $\partial\Omega$. It means that there is a smooth function $r$ defined on some open neighborhood $W$ of $\partial\Omega$ in ${\mathbb C}^n$ such that
\(i) $\Omega\cap W=\left\{\,z\in W\,\big|\,r<0\,\right\}$,
\(ii) $dr$ is nowhere zero on $\partial\Omega$, and
\(iii) the $(1,1)$-form $\sqrt{-1}\,\partial\bar\partial r$ on $W$ assumes nonnegative value when evaluated at $(\xi,\bar\xi)$ for $\xi\in T^{(1,0)}_{\partial\Omega}$, where $T^{(1,0)}_{\partial\Omega}$ is the bundle of all tangent vectors $\xi$ of ${\mathbb C}^n$ of type $(1,0)$ at points of $\partial\Omega$ which are tangential to $\partial\Omega$ (in the sense that $\xi(r)=0$).
For notational simplicity we will consider only the complex Neumann problem in the case of $(0,1)$-forms (instead of $(0,p)$-form for $1\leq p\leq n$). For a $\bar\partial$-closed $(0,1)$-form $f$ on $\Omega$ which are smooth on the closure $\bar\Omega$ of $\Omega$, the [*Kohn solution*]{} $u$ for the $\bar\partial$-equation $\bar\partial u=f$ on $\Omega$ means the unique smooth function $u$ on $\Omega$ such that $\bar\partial u=f$ on $\Omega$ and $u$ is perpendicular to all $L^2$ holomorphic functions on $\Omega$ with respect to the usual Euclidean volume form of ${\mathbb C}^n$.
The regularity problem of the Kohn solution for the complex Neumann problem on a bounded weakly pseudoconvex domain with smooth boundary is to study under what additional assumption on $\Omega$ the Kohn solution $u$ is always smooth on $\bar\Omega$ when the given $(0,1)$-form $f$ is smooth on $\bar\Omega$.
(1.3) [*Regularity from Subelliptic Estimate.*]{} The [*subelliptic estimate*]{} of order $\varepsilon>0$ is said to hold at a point $P$ of $\partial\Omega$ if there exist an open neighborhood $U$ of $P$ in ${\mathbb C}^n$ and positive numbers $\varepsilon$ and $C$ satisfying $$\||\varphi|\|_\varepsilon^2\leq C\left(\|\bar\partial\varphi\|^2+\|\bar\partial^*
\varphi\|^2+\|\varphi\|^2\right)$$ for all smooth $(0,1)$-forms $\varphi$ on $U\cap\bar\Omega$ with compact support which belong to the domain of the [*actual*]{} adjoint $\bar\partial^*$ of $\bar\partial$ (with respect to the usual $L^2$ inner product), where
\(i) $\||\cdot|\|_\varepsilon$ is the Sobolev $L^2$ norm on $\Omega$ involving derivatives up to order $\varepsilon$ in the boundary tangential directions of $\Omega$, and (ii) $\|\cdot\|$ is the usual $L^2$ norm on $\Omega$ without involving any derivatives.
See \[Kohn1979, p.92, (3.4)\] for a detailed definition of the Sobolev norm $\||\cdot|\|_\varepsilon$. In this note we will also use the notation $\Lambda^s$ introduced in \[Kohn1979, p.92, (3.3)\] which is the pseudo-differential operator corresponding to the $\left(\frac{s}{2}\right)$-th power of $1$ plus the Laplacian in tangential coordinates of the boundary of $\Omega$.
We would like to comment on the reason for the use of the Sobolev norm $\||\cdot|\|_\varepsilon$ in whose definition only derivatives along the tangent directions of $\partial\Omega$ is used. The condition for a smooth $(0,1)$-form $g$ on $\bar\Omega$ to belong to the domain of the [*actual*]{} adjoint $\bar\partial^*$ of $\bar\partial$ (instead of the [*formal*]{} adjoint of $\bar\partial$) is that the components of $g$ normal to $\partial\Omega$ vanish at all points of $\partial\Omega$ (which, in other words, means that the pointwise inner product of $g$ and $\bar\partial r$ vanishes at every point of $\partial\Omega$). When $g$ is in the domain of $\bar\partial^*$, the derivative of $g$ along tangent directions of $\partial\Omega$ still belongs to the domain of $\bar\partial^*$, but if $g$ is differentiated in the normal direction of $\partial\Omega$, the result in general will no longer belong to the domain of $\bar\partial^*$. That is the reason why we would like to avoid using differentiation along the normal directions of $\bar\partial$ in the Sobolev norm of order $\varepsilon$ adopted in the definition of the subelliptic estimate.
Sobolev norms involving derivatives are used to enable us to conclude the order of differentiability of the solution $u$ of the $\bar\partial$-equation $\bar\partial u=f$ from the order of differentiability of the right-hand side $f$ of the equation. Though we do not include the differentiation in the normal direction of $\partial\Omega$ in the Sobolev norm used, from the order of differentiability of the solution $u$ along the [*tangent directions*]{} of $\partial\Omega$ we can still conclude the order of differentiability of $u$ along the normal direction of $\partial\Omega$ because the equation $\bar\partial u=f$ itself provides us directly the differentiability of $u$ along the [*real normal*]{} direction of $\partial\Omega$ from the differentiability of $u$ along the $(0,1)$ component of the [*complex normal*]{} direction of $\partial\Omega$.
It was proved by Kohn-Nirenberg in 1965 \[Kohn-Nirenberg1965, p.458, Theorem 4\] that if for some $\varepsilon>0$ the subelliptic estimate of order $\varepsilon$ holds at every point of $\partial\Omega$, then the smoothness on $\bar\Omega$ of the Kohn solution $u$ of $\bar\partial u=f$ follows from the smoothness of the $\bar\partial$-closed $(0,1)$-form $f$ on $\bar\Omega$.
(1.4) [*Multipliers to Measure Location and Extent of Failure of A Priori Estimates*]{}. A smooth function germ $F$ at a point $P$ of $\partial\Omega$ (defined on some open neighborhood $U_F$ of $P$ in ${\mathbb C}^n$ is called a [*scalar multiplier*]{} if for some positive number $\varepsilon_F>0$ and some positive constant $C_{{}_F}$ the subelliptic estimate $$\||F\varphi|\|_{\varepsilon_{{}_F}}^2\leq C_{{}_F}\left(\|\bar\partial
\varphi\|^2+\|\bar\partial^*\varphi\|^2+\|\varphi\|^2\right)\leqno{(1.4.1)}$$ of order $\varepsilon_F$, [*modified*]{} by the factor $F$, holds for for all smooth $(0,1)$-forms $\varphi$ on $U_F\cap\bar\Omega$ with compact support which belong to the domain of the [*actual*]{} adjoint $\bar\partial^*$ of $\bar\partial$. We say that the [*order of subellipticity*]{} for the scalar multiplier $F$ is $\geq\varepsilon$. We are only interested in an effective lower bound for the order of subellipticity $\varepsilon_F$ and will not study the supremum of all possible such $\varepsilon_F$.
The collection of smooth function germs at $P$ which are scalar multipliers at $P$ forms an ideal. This ideal is called the [*multiplier ideal*]{} at $P$ and is denoted by $I_P$. The precise definition of the multiplier ideal makes precise the intuitive motivation that the direction and the order of vanishing of the multiplier ideal measures the location and extent of the failure of the [*a priori*]{} subelliptic estimate.
The test function $\varphi$ which is multiplied by the scalar multiplier $F$ to yield the modified subelliptic estimate (1.4.1) is not a scalar and is a $(0,1)$-form with $n$ components (of which the normal component is $0$). It is possible to get more information by using [*vector multipliers*]{} instead of just scalar multipliers. A smooth germ of $(1,0)$-form $\theta$ at a point of $\partial\Omega$ (defined on some open neighborhood $U_\theta$ of $P$ in ${\mathbb C}^n$) is called a [*vector multiplier*]{} if for some positive number $\varepsilon_\theta>0$ and some positive constant $C_{{}_\theta}$ the subelliptic estimate $$\||\theta\cdot\varphi|\|_{\varepsilon_{{}_\theta}}^2\leq C_{{}_\theta}\left(\|\bar\partial
\varphi\|^2+\|\bar\partial^*\varphi\|^2+\|\varphi\|^2\right)$$ of order $\varepsilon_\theta$, [*modified*]{} by the dot product with $\theta$, holds for for all smooth $(0,1)$-forms $\varphi$ on $U_\theta\cap\bar\Omega$ with compact support which belong to the domain of the [*actual*]{} adjoint $\bar\partial^*$ of $\bar\partial$. Here the dot product $\theta\cdot\varphi$ means the pointwise inner product $\left<g,\,\bar\theta\right>$ of the two $(0,1)$-forms $\bar\theta$ and $g$ with respect to the usual Euclidean Hermitian inner product of ${\mathbb C}^n$. In other words, if $\theta=\sum_{j=1}^n\theta_j dz_j$ and $\varphi=\sum_{j=1}^n\varphi_{\bar j}d\bar z_j$ (where $z_1,\cdots,z_n$ are the global coordinates of ${\mathbb C}^n$), then $\theta\cdot \varphi=\sum_{j=1}^n\theta_j \varphi_{\bar j}$. The convention to introduce a vector multiplier $\theta$ as a $(1,0)$-form and the dot product $\theta\cdot\varphi$, instead of introducing a $(0,1)$-form $\psi$ and the pointwise inner product $\left<\varphi,\,\psi\right>$, is chosen so that, in the case of a special domain described in (2.8.1) below, one needs only consider scalar multipliers and vector multipliers which are holomorphic (see (2.9.3) below).
We say that the [*order of subellipticity*]{} for the vector multiplier $\theta$ is $\geq\varepsilon_{{}_\theta}$. Again we are only interested in an effective lower bound for the order of subellipticity $\varepsilon_{{}_\theta}$ and will not study the supremum of all possible such $\varepsilon_{{}_\theta}$.
The collection of smooth germs of $(1,0)$-forms at $P$ which are vector multipliers at $P$ forms a module over the algebra of all smooth function germs at $P$. This module is called the [*module of vector multipliers*]{} at $P$ and is denoted by $A_P$.
[**§2.**]{} [Generation of Multipliers in Kohn’s Algorithm]{}
It is easy to define multipliers to describe the location and the extent of failure of subelliptic estimates, but it is difficulty to use multipliers to find easily verifiable conditions on the weakly pseudoconvex domain $\Omega$ to obtain subelliptic estimates and thereby the smoothness of the Kohn solution $u$ on $\bar\Omega$ from the smoothness of the right-hand side $f$ on $\bar\Omega$. The most important part of the theory of multipliers for the complex Neumann problem is the generation of scalar and vector multipliers by Kohn’s algorithm which makes it possible to study subelliptic estimates from the geometric condition (known as [*finite type*]{}) of the finiteness of the maximum normalized order of contact between the boundary $\partial\Omega$ of $\Omega$ and a local holomorphic curve $f:\Delta\to{\mathbb C}^n$ (where $\Delta$ is the open unit disk in ${\mathbb C}$). Here the normalized order of contact means that the vanishing order of the pullback by $f$ of the defining function $r$ of $\partial\Omega$ divided by the vanishing order of $f$. The precise definition of finite type condition and its history will be given later in (2.3) below.
(2.1) [*Kohn’s Algorithm to Generate Scalar and Vector Multipliers.*]{} The following three procedures constitute the Kohn algorithm of generating scalar and vector multipliers at a boundary point $P$ of $\partial\Omega$.
(A)
- The function $r$ belongs to the ideal of multipliers $I_P$ at $P$. Its order of subellipticity for the scalar multiplier $r$ is $\geq 1$.
- For any germ of smooth vector field $\xi=\sum_{k=1}^n a_k\frac{\partial}{\partial z_k}$ at $P$ of type $(1,0)$ which is tangential to $\partial\Omega$, the $(1,0)$-form $$(\partial\bar\partial r){\mathbin{\raisebox{\depth}{\scalebox{1}[-1]{$\lnot$}}}}\bar\xi=\sum_{j,k=1}^n\overline{\xi_k}\frac{\partial^2 r}{\partial z_j\partial\bar z_k}\,dz_j$$ (which is the interior product of the $(1,1)$-form $\partial\bar\partial r$ and the $(0,1)$-vector field $\bar\xi$) belongs to the module $A_P$ of vector multipliers at $P$. The order of subellipticity for the vector multiplier $\partial\bar\partial_j r$ is $\geq\frac{1}{2}$ for $1\leq j\leq n-1$ at points $P$ where $\partial r$ is normalized to be $dz_n$. (See \[Kohn1979, p.97, (4.29)\]).
(B)
- If $f\in I_P$, then $\partial f\in A_P$. The order $\varepsilon_{{}_{\partial f}}$ of subellipticity for the vector multiplier $\partial f$ is $\geq\frac{\varepsilon_f}{2}$ if the order of subellipticity of $f$ is $\geq\varepsilon_f$. (See \[Kohn1979, p.99, (4.42)\].)
- If $\theta_1,\cdots,\theta_{n-1}\in
A_P$ and $$\theta_1\wedge\cdots\wedge\theta_{n-1}\wedge\partial r= f_{\theta_1,\cdots,\theta_{n-1}}\,dz_1\wedge\cdots\wedge dz_n,$$ then $f_{\theta_1,\cdots,\theta_{n-1}}\in I_P$. In other words, for vector multipliers $\theta_1,\cdots,\theta_{n-1}$ the coefficient of $dz_1\wedge\cdots\wedge dz_n$ in $\theta_1\wedge\cdots\wedge\theta_{n-1}\wedge\partial r$ is a scalar multiplier. Moreover, if the order of subellipticity of each $\theta_j$ (for $1\leq j\leq n-1$) is $\geq\varepsilon$, then the order of subellipticity of $f_{\theta_1,\cdots,\theta_{n-1}}$ is $\geq\varepsilon$. We denote the scalar multiplier $f_{\theta_1,\cdots,\theta_{n-1}}$ by $\det_{n-1}(\theta_1,\cdots,\theta_{n-1})$.
(C)
- If $g\in I_P$ and $\left|f\right|^m\leq\left|g\right|$ for some $m\in{\mathbb N}$, then $f\in I_P$. The order of subellipticity for the scalar multiplier $f$ is $\geq\frac{\varepsilon}{m}$ if the order of subellipticity of $g$ is $\geq\varepsilon$. (See \[Kohn1979, p.98, Lemma 4.34\].)
For the purpose of discussing the effectiveness of Kohn’s algorithm later, we introduce now two terms concerning the radicals of ideals. For an ideal $J$ of smooth function germs at $P$, we call the ideal of all smooth functions $f$ such that $|f|^m\leq|g|$ for some $m\in{\mathbb N}$ and for some $g\in J$ the [*full real radical*]{} of $J$. If $q\in{\mathbb N}$ is given, we call the ideal of all smooth functions $f$ such that $|f|^q\leq|g|$ for some $g\in J$ the [*real radical of root order $q$*]{}.
.2in (2.2) [*Key Features of Kohn’s Algorithm.*]{} The subelliptic estimate holds at a point $P$ of $\partial\Omega$ when there is a scalar multiplier which is nonzero at $P$. Kohn’s algorithm seeks to reduce the vanishing order of scalar multipliers by differentiation and by root-taking. The procedure of differentiation described in (B) in (2.1) above would only allow certain differential operators to lower the vanishing order of multipliers, namely only $(1,0)$-differentiation is allowed and only the determinants of coefficients of $(1,0)$-differentials of scalar multipliers (from Cramer’s rule) can be used to produce new scalar multipliers. The procedure of root-taking described in (C) in (2.1) above identifies a smooth function germ as a scalar multiplier when a positive integral power of its absolute-value is dominated by the absolute-value of some known scalar multiplier.
(2.3) [*Condition of Finite Type.*]{} The [*type*]{} $m$ at a point $P$ of the boundary of weakly pseudoconvex $\Omega$ is the supremum of the normalized touching order $$\frac{{\rm ord}_0\left(r\circ f\right)}{{\rm ord}_0f},$$ to $\partial\Omega$, of all local holomorphic curves $f:\Delta\to{\mathbb C}^n$ with $\varphi(0)=P$, where $\Delta$ is the open unit $1$-disk and ${\rm ord}_0$ is the vanishing order at the origin $0$. The notion of finite type was first introduced by Kohn in 1972 \[Kohn1972, p.525, Def.2.3\] for the case of $n=2$ where the formulation is in terms of the nonvanishing of $\partial r$ on the iterated Lie brackets of tangential vector fields to $\partial\Omega$ of types $(1,0)$ and $(0,1)$. It was extended to the case of a general $n$ by D’Angelo in \[D’Angelo1979, p.59\] in terms of finite algebraic obstructions to the existence of a nontrivial holomorphic complex curve germ in ${\mathbb C}^n$ tangential to $\partial\Omega$ and then in the formulation in terms of normalized touching order in \[D’Angelo1982 , p.625, Definition 2.16 and Definition 2.18\].
(2.4) [*Kohn’s Conjecture.*]{} The goal of the theory of multipliers for the complex Neumann problem is to prove by using the procedures of generating new multipliers to prove that the function identically $1$ is generated as a multiplier so that for a bounded weakly pseudoconvex domain $\Omega$ with finite type $m$ the subelliptic estimate for some positive order $\varepsilon>0$ holds and as a consequence the Kohn solution $u$ of the $\bar\partial$-equation $\bar\partial u=f$ on $\Omega$ with the right-hand side $f$ smooth on $\bar\Omega$ is also smooth on $\bar\Omega$. Moreover, there is effectiveness in the use of the procedures to generate new multipliers so that $\varepsilon$ is some explicit function of the type $m$ of the domain $\Omega$ and its complex dimension $n$.
(2.5) [*Full-Real-Radical Kohn Algorithm.*]{} If the question of effectiveness is to be set aside, the following algorithm can be used for the generation of new multipliers in $I_P$.
\(i) We start with the initial member $r$ of $I_P$ and denote by $I_P^{(0)}$ the ideal generated by this initial scalar multiplier $r$. Likewise, we start out with the initial members $(\partial\bar\partial r){\mathbin{\raisebox{\depth}{\scalebox{1}[-1]{$\lnot$}}}}\bar\xi$ of $A_P$ for all choices of smooth $(1,0)$-vector fields $\xi$ tangential to $\partial\Omega$ and denote by $A_P^{(0)}$ the module generated by these initial vector multipliers.
\(ii) We use induction on the nonnegative integer $\nu$ to define $I_P^{(\nu)}$ and $A_P^{(\nu)}$ as follows. We add to $I_P^{(\nu)}$ all the multipliers $\det_{n-1}(\theta_1,\cdots,\theta_{n-1})$ for $\theta_1,\cdots,\theta_{n-1}$ in $A_P^{(\nu)}$ to form an ideal which we denote by $\hat I_P^{(\nu)}$. For the induction step from $\nu$ to $\nu+1$ we define $I_P^{(\nu+1)}$ as the [*full real radical*]{} of the ideal $\hat I_P^{(\nu)}$. We add to $A_P^{(\nu)}$ all the vector multipliers $\partial F$ for $F\in I_P^{(\nu+1)}$ to form $A_P^{(\nu+1)}$.
We then hope that if the pseudoconvex domain $\Omega$ is of finite type $m$, the above construction of $I_P^{(\nu)}$ and $A_P^{(\nu)}$ by induction on $\nu$ will result in $I_P^{(\nu_m)}$ containing the function $1$ for some $\nu_m$ which effectively depends on $m$ and $n$. In other words, the algorithm [*terminates*]{}. In particular, the subelliptic estimate of some positive order $\varepsilon>0$ holds. However, since there is no control on the order of the root-taking used in going from the ideal $\hat I_P^{(\nu)}$ to its [*full real radical*]{} $I_P^{(\nu+1)}$ there is no way for us to conclude that the order $\varepsilon$ of the subellipticity proved depends effectively on $m$ and $n$. For the purpose of our discussion we call this algorithm of using induction on $\nu$ to construct $I_P^{(\nu)}$ with the goal of ending up with $1\in I_P^{(\nu_m)}$ the [*full-real-radical Kohn algorithm*]{}.
(2.6) [*Effective Kohn Algorithm.*]{} In order to end up with an effective order $\varepsilon$ of subellipticity, it will turn out that one needs to modify the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm to use the following [*effective Kohn algorithm*]{}.
\(i) The starting point for the effective Kohn algorithm is the same as for the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm. Again we start with the initial member $r$ of $I_P$ and denote by $I_P^{(0)}$ the ideal generated by this initial scalar multiplier $r$. Likewise, we start out with the initial members $(\partial\bar\partial r){\mathbin{\raisebox{\depth}{\scalebox{1}[-1]{$\lnot$}}}}\bar\xi$ of $A_P$ for all choices of smooth $(1,0)$-vector fields $\xi$ tangential to $\partial\Omega$ and denote by $A_P^{(0)}$ the module generated by these initial vector multipliers.
\(ii) What is different with the effective Kohn algorithm is that we introduce a positive integer $q_\nu$ for every nonnegative integer index $\nu$ so that we take the real radical of root order $q_\nu$ instead of the full real radical in the step of going from $\nu-1$ to $\nu$. First we set $q_0=1$ and set $I_P^{(0,1)}=I_P^{(0)}$. This is motivated by the fact that the full real radical of $I_P^{(0)}$ is $I_P^{(0)}$ again because $dr$ is nowhere zero on $\partial\Omega$. We use induction on the nonnegative integer $\nu$ to define a sequence of positive integers $q_\nu$ and then $I_P^{(\nu,q_\nu)}$ and $A_P^{(\nu,q_\nu)}$ as follows. We add to $I_P^{(\nu,q_\nu)}$ all the multipliers $\det_{n-1}(\theta_1,\cdots,\theta_{n-1})$ for $\theta_1,\cdots,\theta_{n-1}$ in $A_P^{(\nu,q_\nu)}$ and then use the resulting collection of multipliers to form an ideal which we denote by $\hat I_P^{(\nu,q_\nu)}$. For the induction step from $\nu$ to $\nu+1$ we define $I_P^{(\nu+1,q_{\nu+1})}$ as the [*real radical*]{} of root order $q_{\nu+1}$ of the ideal $\hat I_P^{(\nu,q_\nu)}$. We add to $A_P^{(\nu,q_\nu)}$ all the vector multipliers $\partial F$ for $F\in I_P^{(\nu+1,q_{\nu+1})}$ and then use the resulting collection of vector multipliers to form a module which is $A_P^{(\nu+1,q_{\nu+1})}$ for the next step of going from $\nu$ to $\nu+1$ in the construction by induction on $\nu$.
We then hope that if the pseudoconvex domain $\Omega$ is of finite type $m$, the above construction of $I_P^{(\nu,q_\nu)}$ and $A_P^{(\nu,q_\nu)}$ by induction on $\nu$ will result in $I_P^{(\nu_m,q_{\nu_m})}$ containing the function $1$ for some $\nu_m$ which effectively depends on $m$ and $n$. Moreover, we hope that each $q_\nu$ for $0\leq\nu\leq\nu_m$ depends also effectively on $m$ and $n$ so that the subelliptic estimate of some positive order $\varepsilon>0$ holds with $\varepsilon$ depending effectively on $m$ and $n$.
Note that $I_P^{(\nu,\mu)}$ and $A_P^{(\nu,\mu)}$ are defined only when $\mu=q_\nu$. Instead of using the notations $I_P^{(\nu,q_\nu)}$ and $A_P^{(\nu,q_\nu)}$ we could have used the notations which depend only on $\nu$, for example, $\tilde I_P^{(\nu)}$ and $\tilde A_P^{(\nu)}$. We prefer the clumsier notations $I_P^{(\nu,q_\nu)}$ and $A_P^{(\nu,q_\nu)}$ to highlight the effective choice of $q_\nu$.
In the effective Kohn algorithm described above, no procedure is given to determine the sequence $q_\nu$. The sequence $q_\nu$ is obtained by a rather complicated algebraic geometric argument. Since the purpose is to achieve $1\in I_P^{(\nu_m,q_{\nu_m})}$, it suffices to describe explicitly how to use algebraic geometric techniques to determine the procedures of differentiation and root-taking of order $\leq q_\nu$ to construct scalar multipliers and vector multipliers from some initial scalar multipliers and vector multipliers to achieve $1\in I_P^{(\nu_m,q_{\nu_m})}$.
Kohn’s papers \[Kohn1977, Kohn1979\] discussed relations between subelliptic estimates, finite type property, and the termination of the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm for smooth weakly pseudoconvex domains. The relations can be summarized in the following Kohn conjecture, formulated separately for the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm and the effective Kohn algorithm.
(2.7) [*Conjecture on Full-Real-Radical Kohn Algorithm.*]{} For a bounded weakly pseudoconvex domain $\Omega$ in ${\mathbb C}^n$ with smooth boundary and of finite type $m$ and for a point $P$ of the boundary of $\Omega$, in the ascending chain of multiplier ideals $I_P^{(\nu)}$ for $\nu\in{\mathbb N}\cup\{0\}$ there exists some $\nu^*\in{\mathbb N}$ such that $I_P^{(\nu^*)}$ contains the constant function $1$. In other words, the chain of multiplier ideals $I_P^{(\nu)}$ for $\nu\in{\mathbb N}\cup\{0\}$ terminates at $\nu=\nu^*$.
If the positive integer $\nu^*$ depends effectively on $m$ and $n$, then we say that the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm terminates effectively.
(2.8) [*Conjecture on Effective Kohn Algorithm.*]{} For a bounded weakly pseudoconvex domain $\Omega$ in ${\mathbb C}^n$ with smooth boundary and of finite type $m$ and for a point $P$ of the boundary of $\Omega$, there exist $\tilde\nu\in{\mathbb N}$ and a sequence of positive numbers $q_1,\cdots,q_{\tilde\nu}$ such that in the ascending chain of multiplier ideals $I_P^{(\nu,q_\nu)}$ for $0\leq\nu\leq\tilde\nu$, the multiplier ideal $I_P^{(\tilde\nu,q_{\tilde\nu})}$ contains the constant function $1$. Moreover, the positive integer $\tilde \nu$ and the sequence of positive integers $q_1,\cdots,q_{\tilde\nu}$ depend effectively on $m$ and $n$.
For the conjecture on the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm, when the boundary $\partial\Omega$ of the bounded weakly pseudoconvex domain $\Omega$ is assumed real-analytic, the finite type condition becomes a conclusion instead of an assumption. Kohn first showed that if the the chain of multiplier ideals $I_P^{(\nu)}$ for $\nu\in{\mathbb N}\cup\{0\}$ does not terminate, then the boundary $\partial\Omega$ contains a local real-analytic subvariety of holomorphic dimension $\geq 1$ (\[Kohn1977, p.2215, Lemma 20\] and \[Kohn1979, p.113, Proposition 6.20\]). Then Diederich-Fornaess proved that the real-analytic boundary of a bounded weakly pseudoconvex domain cannot contain a local real-analytic subvariety of holomorphic dimension $\geq 1$ (\[Diederich-Fornaess1978, p.373, Lemma 2\] and \[Diederich-Fornaess1978, p.374, Theorem 3\]). This result of Kohn and Diederich-Fornaess holds not only for the case of $(0,1)$-forms but for the general case of $(0,q)$-forms for $1\leq q\leq n$. Since their method of proof is by contradiction, there is no effectiveness in the termination of the chain of multiplier ideals $I_P^{(\nu)}$.
(2.8.1) For the conjecture on Kohn’s effective algorithm, the paper \[Siu2010\] introduces algebraic geometric techniques to study the problem by looking first at the special case of $\Omega$ being a special domain. For notational convenience we now consider a domain $\Omega$ in ${\mathbb C}^{n+1}$ instead of ${\mathbb C}^n$. A [*special domain*]{} $\Omega$ in ${\mathbb C}^{n+1}$ (with coordinates $w,z_1,\cdots,z_n$) is a bounded domain given by $${\rm
Re\,}w+\sum_{j=1}^N\left|F_j\left(z_1,\cdots,z_n\right)\right|^2<0,\leqno{(2.8.1.1)}$$ where $F_j\left(z_1,\cdots,z_n\right)$ which is defined on some open neighborhood of $\bar\Omega$ in ${\mathbb C}^{n+1}$ depends only on the variables $z_1,\cdots,z_n$ and is holomorphic in $z_1,\cdots,z_n$ for each $1\leq j\leq N$. In \[Siu2010\] the verification of the conjecture on Kohn’s effective algorithm for the case of $n=2$ (which means for special domains of complex dimension $3$) was given in detail, with only indications for the case of special domains of general complex dimension. A rough outline was given there for the extension of the method of algebraic geometric techniques first to the general real-analytic case and then the general smooth case. We carry out here the effective Kohn algorithm, which was introduced in \[Siu2010\], in a way which keeps track of the order of subellipticity in each step, in the context of comparing the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm and the effective Kohn algorithm.
In the chain of multiplier ideals $I_P^{(\nu)}$ in the conjecture for the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm, if for every $\nu$ there is an effective positive integer $p_\nu$ ([*i.e.,*]{} dependent only on $m$ and $n$) such that $\left(I_P^{(\nu+1)}\right)^{p_\nu}\subset I_P^{(\nu)}$, then we can use $p_\nu=q_\nu$ and the proof of the conjecture on Kohn’s effective algorithm is simply reduced to the conjecture on the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm with effective termination. Unfortunately, there are simple examples, even for special domains of complex dimension $3$, with no effective $p_\nu$. This means that the conjecture for effective Kohn algorithm is different from the conjecture for the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm with effective termination. A simple example of this kind was given by Catlin and D’Angelo in \[Catlin-D’Angelo2010\], which we will discuss in §4 below.
(2.9) [*Algebraic Geometric Techniques in Effective Kohn Algorithm.*]{} We now explain how the algebraic geometric techniques precisely work to provide naturally the positive integer $q_\nu$ to make the process effective. The reason for considering special domains in ${\mathbb C}^{n+1}$ is that instead of ideals of smooth function germs on ${\mathbb C}^{n+1}$ we need only consider ideals of holomorphic function germs on ${\mathbb C}^n$. That is the reason why for notational convenience we suddenly consider domains in ${\mathbb C}^{n+1}$ instead of domains in ${\mathbb C}^n$. We focus on the case where each $F_j$ vanish at the origin of ${\mathbb C}^n$ (for $1\leq j\leq N$) so that the origin belongs to the boundary of $\Omega$. We are concerned only with the problem of the subelliptic estimate at the origin.
The new notion of pre-multipliers needs to be introduced. A holomorphic function germ $f(z_1,\cdots,z_n)$ on ${\mathbb C}^n$ at the origin is a [*pre-multiplier*]{} if its differential $df$ is a vector multiplier at the origin. We now verify that the holomorphic function germs $F_1,\cdots,F_N$ are pre-multipliers and the order of subellipticity of each $dF_j$ is $\geq\frac{1}{4}$.
(2.9.1) [*Levi Form and Initial Vector Multiplier for Special Domain.*]{} First, for a special domain we write down explicit expressions for a tangent vector, its Levi form, and a smooth test $(1,0)$-form in the domain of the actual adjoint $\bar\partial^*$ of $\bar\partial$. Since the defining function for the special domain $\Omega$ is $$r={\rm
Re\,}w+\sum_{j=1}^N\left|F_j\left(z_1,\cdots,z_n\right)\right|^2,$$ it follows that $$\partial r=\frac{1}{2}\,dw+\sum_{j=1}^N \overline{F_j}\,dF_j$$ and all the $(1,0)$-vector tangential to $\partial\Omega$ at the origin are of the form $$b\frac{\partial}{\partial w}+\sum_{k=1}^n a_j\frac{\partial}{\partial z_k}$$ for $b,a_1,\cdots,a_n\in{\mathbb C}$ with $$b=-2\sum_{1\leq j\leq N,\,1\leq k\leq n}a_k\,\overline{F_j}\,\frac{\partial F_j}{\partial z_k}.$$ The value of the Levi-form $\partial\bar\partial r=\sum_{j=1}^N dF_j\wedge\overline{dF_j}$ at $\eta\wedge\bar\eta$ for the element $$\eta=-2\left(\sum_{1\leq j\leq N,\,1\leq k\leq n}a_k\,\overline{F_j}\,\frac{\partial F_j}{\partial z_k}\right)\frac{\partial}{\partial w}+\sum_{k=1}^n a_j\frac{\partial}{\partial z_k}$$ of $T^{(1,0)}_{\partial\Omega}$ is equal to $$\sum_{1\leq j\leq N,\,1\leq k\leq n}\left|a_k\,\frac{\partial F_j}{\partial z_k}\right|^2,$$ which means that a special domain is always weakly pseudoconvex and is strict pseudoconvex at a boundary point if and only if $dF_{j_1},\cdots,dF_{j_n}$ are ${\mathbb C}$-linearly independent at that point for some $1\leq j_1<\cdots<j_n\leq N$. For the element $$\xi=-2\left(\sum_{j=1}^N\overline{F_j}\,\frac{\partial F_j}{\partial z_\mu}\right)\frac{\partial}{\partial w}+\frac{\partial}{\partial z_\mu}$$ of $T^{(1,0)}_{\partial\Omega}$ (for some fixed $1\leq\mu\leq n$) the $(1,0)$-form $$(\partial\bar\partial r){\mathbin{\raisebox{\depth}{\scalebox{1}[-1]{$\lnot$}}}}\bar\xi=\sum_{\nu=1}^n\left(\sum_{j=1}^N(\partial_{\nu}F_j)\overline{(\partial_\mu F_j)}\right)dz_\nu$$ is a vector multiplier.
For an open neighborhood $U$ of a point of $\partial\Omega$ in ${\mathbb C}^n$, if $\varphi=\sum_{\nu=1}^n\varphi_{\bar\nu}d\bar z_\nu+\hat\varphi d\bar w$ is a smooth test $(0,1)$-form on $U\cap\bar\Omega$ with compact support which belongs to the domain of the [*actual*]{} adjoint $\bar\partial^*$ of $\bar\partial$, then the normal component of $\varphi$ vanishes on $U\cap\partial\Omega$, which means that $$\begin{aligned}
(\partial r)\cdot\varphi&=\left(\frac{1}{2}\,dw+\sum_{j=1}^N \overline{F_j}\,dF_j\right)\cdot\left(\sum_{\nu=1}^n\varphi_{\bar\nu}d\bar z_\nu+\hat\varphi d\bar w\right)\cr
&=\frac{1}{2}\,\hat\varphi+\sum_{j=1}^N\sum_{\nu=1}^n\overline{F_j}\left(\partial_\nu F_j\right)\varphi_{\bar\nu}\cr
\end{aligned}$$ vanishes on $U\cap\partial\Omega$, or $$\hat\varphi=-2\sum_{j=1}^N\sum_{\nu=1}^n\overline{F_j}\left(\partial_\nu F_j\right)\varphi_{\bar\nu}$$ on $U\cap\partial\Omega$.
It will turn out that in the case of a special domain the use of multipliers and vector multipliers can be limited to those which are holomorphic in $z_1,\cdots,z_n$ and are independent of $w$ and as a consequence in the study of the subelliptic estimate for a special domain the component $\hat\varphi$ of a test $(0,1)$-form $\varphi$ actually plays no role. (See (2.9.3) below.)
(2.9.2) [*Initial Pre-Multiplier for Special Domain.*]{} To verify that $dF_j$ is a vector multiplier with order of subellipticity $\geq\frac{1}{4}$, we take an open neighborhood $U$ of $0$ on ${\mathbb C}^{n+1}$ on which the holomorphic functions $F_1,\cdots,F_N$ of $(z_1,\cdots,z_n)\in{\mathbb C}^n$ are defined. For $0<\varepsilon\leq\frac{1}{2}$ and any smooth $(0,1)$-form $\varphi=\sum_{\nu=1}^n\varphi_{\bar\nu}d\bar z_\nu+\hat\varphi d\bar w$ on $U\cap\bar\Omega$ with compact support which belongs to the domain of the [*actual*]{} adjoint $\bar\partial^*$ of $\bar\partial$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
&\sum_{j=1}^N\left\|\left|\sum_{\nu=1}^n(\partial_\nu F_j)\varphi_{\bar\nu}\right|\right\|_\varepsilon^2
\cr
&=\sum_{j=1}^N\sum_{\nu,\mu=1}^n\left(\Lambda^\varepsilon\left((\partial_\nu F_j)\varphi_{\bar\nu}\right),\,\Lambda^\varepsilon\left((\partial_\mu F_j)\varphi_{\bar\mu}\right)\right)
\cr
&=\sum_{j=1}^N\sum_{\nu,\mu=1}^n\left(\overline{(\partial_\mu F_j)}
\Lambda^{2\varepsilon}\left((\partial_\nu F_j)\varphi_{\bar\nu}\right),\,\varphi_{\bar\mu}\right)
\cr
&=\sum_{j=1}^N\sum_{\nu,\mu=1}^n\left(\Lambda^{2\varepsilon}\left(\overline{(\partial_\mu F_j)}
(\partial_\nu F_j)\varphi_{\bar\nu}\right),\,\varphi_{\bar\mu}\right)+\sum_{j=1}^N\sum_{\nu,\mu=1}^n\left(\left[\overline{(\partial_\mu F_j)},\Lambda^{2\varepsilon}\right]\left(
(\partial_\nu F_j)\varphi_{\bar\nu}\right),\,\varphi_{\bar\mu}\right)
\cr
&=\sum_{\mu=1}^n\left(\Lambda^{2\varepsilon}\left(\sum_{\mu=1}^n\left(\left(\sum_{j=1}^N\overline{(\partial_\mu F_j)}
(\partial_\mu F_j)\right)\varphi_{\bar\nu}\right)\right),\,\varphi_{\bar\mu}\right)\cr
&\quad+\sum_{j=1}^N\sum_{\nu,\mu=1}^n\left(\left[\overline{(\partial_\mu F_j)},\Lambda^{2\varepsilon}\right]\left(
(\partial_\nu F_j)\varphi_{\bar\nu}\right),\,\varphi_{\bar\mu}\right)
\cr
&\leq\left(\sum_{\mu=1}^n\left\|\left|\sum_{\nu=1}^n\left(\sum_{j=1}^N(\partial_\nu F_j)\overline{(\partial_\mu F_j)}\right)\varphi_{\bar\nu}\right|\right\|_{2\varepsilon}^2\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\left\|\varphi\right\|+C_1\left\|\varphi\right\|^2\cr
&\leq C_2\left(\|\bar\partial
\varphi\|^2+\|\bar\partial^*\varphi\|^2+\|\varphi\|^2\right)\cr
\end{aligned}$$ where $C_1$ and $C_2$ are positive constants independent of $\varphi$ (but depend on $U$ and $\varepsilon$), because $$\sum_{\nu=1}^n\left(\sum_{j=1}^N(\partial_{\nu}F_j)\overline{(\partial_\mu F_j)}\right)dz_\nu$$ is a vector multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{2}$ for $1\leq\nu\leq n$. This finishes the verification that each $dF_j=\sum_{\nu=1}^n(\partial_\nu F_j)dz_j$ is a vector multiplier whose order of subellitpicity is $\geq\frac{1}{4}$.
(2.9.3) [*Holomorphic Multipliers for Special Domain.*]{} We start out with pre-multipliers $F_1,\cdots,F_N$ and the vector multipliers $dF_1,\cdots,dF_N$ which are holomorphic $1$-forms in the variables $z_1,\cdots,z_n$ obtained from them. For the special domain $\Omega$ we will only work with vector multipliers which are holomorphic $1$-forms in the variables $z_1,\cdots,z_n$. When we have $n$ such vector multipliers $G^{(j)}=\sum_{\nu=1}^n G^{(j)}(z_1,\cdots,z_n)dz_j$ of order of subellipticity $\geq\varepsilon_\nu$ for $1\leq\nu\leq n$, when we apply the procedure (B)(ii) in (2.1) above to generate new multipliers, from $$\partial r=\frac{1}{2}\,dw+\sum_{j=1}^N \overline{F_j}\,dF_j$$ we get $$G^{(1)}\wedge\cdots\wedge G^{(n)}\wedge\partial r=\frac{1}{2}\det\left(G^{(\nu)}_j\right)_{1\leq\nu,j\leq n}dz_1\wedge\cdots\wedge dz_n\wedge dw$$ to conclude that the holomorphic function $$\det\left(G^{(\nu)}_j\right)_{1\leq\nu,j\leq n}$$ of the variables $z_1,\cdots,z_n$ is a scalar multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\min(\varepsilon_1,\cdots,\varepsilon_n)$. So for the special domain $\Omega$, when we start out only with vector multipliers $dF_1,\cdots,dF_N$ (whose orders of subellipticity are all $\geq\frac{1}{4}$) and use only the procedures in B(i)(ii) and C described in (2.1) above to generate new scalar and vector multipliers, we need only work with scalar and vector multipliers which are holomorphic functions or holomorphic $1$-forms in the variables $z_1,\cdots,z_n$.
We now translate the algorithm from the language of analysis to the language of algebraic geometry. The procedures in the algorithm now read as follows.
(2.9.4) [*Algebraic Geometric Formulation of Kohn Algorithm for Special Domain.*]{} The multiplicity $q$ of the ideal generated by $F_1,\cdots,F_N$ given by $$\dim_{\mathbb C}\left({\mathcal O}_{{\mathbb C}^n,0}\left/\sum_{j=1}^N
{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbb C}^n,0} F_j\right.\right)$$ is related to the type $m$ of the special domain $\Omega$ at the origin by $2m\leq q\leq(n+2)2m$. See \[Siu2010, Lemma(I.3) and Lemma(I.4)\]. In particular, the special domain is of finite type at $0$ if and only if $0$ is an isolated point of the common zero-set of $F_1,\cdots,F_N$. Assume that the multiplicity $q$ of the ideal generated by $F_1,\cdots,F_N$ is finite. The $N$ pre-multipliers $F_1,\cdots,F_N$ (with order of subellipticity of each $dF_j$ at least $\frac{1}{4}$) are all that we start out with. For a special domain of complex dimension $n+1$ there are only the following two procedures from Kohn’s algorithm.
\(i) If holomorphic function germs $g_1,\cdots,g_n$ at $0$ on ${\mathbb C}^n$ are pre-multipliers (which automatically include all multipliers), then the coefficient of $dz_1\wedge\cdots\wedge dz_n$ in $dg_1\wedge\cdots\wedge dg_n$ is a multiplier. In other words, the Jacobian determinant $$\frac{\partial(g_1,\cdots,g_n)}{\partial(z_1,\cdots,z_n)}$$ of the holomorphic functions $g_1,\cdots,g_n$ with respect to the variables $z_1,\cdots,z_n$ is a multiplier. If the order of subellipticity of each $g_1,\cdots,g_n$ is $\geq\eta$, then the order of subellipticity of their Jacobian determinant is $\geq\frac{\eta}{2}$.
\(ii) If $g$ and $f$ are holomorphic function germs at $0$ on ${\mathbb C}^n$ with $f^m=g$ for some positive integer $m$ and if $g$ is a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\eta$, then $f$ is also a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{\eta}{m}$.
Note that the set of all multipliers forms an ideal in the ring of all holomorphic function germs and the set of all vector-multipliers form a module over the ring of all holomorphic function germs, but in general the set of all pre-multipliers does [*not*]{} form a module over the ring of all holomorphic functions, because though the differential $dF$ of a pre-multiplier $F$ is a multiplier, yet for any holomorphic function germ $g$ the differential $d(gF)$ is equal to $gdF+Fdg$ and the term $Fdg$, unlike the term $gdF$, is in general [*not*]{} a vector-multiplier.
We now discuss the algebraic geometric formulations of the steps in both the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm and the effective Kohn algorithm. We will describe first the steps in the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm. Then we will describe the effective Kohn algorithm but only in the case when the special domain is of complex dimension $3$.
(2.10) [*Steps in Full-Real-Radical Kohn Algorithm.*]{} We start out with the ${\mathbb C}$-vector space $V_0$ of initial pre-multipliers generated by $F_1,\cdots,F_N$. Let $J_0$ be the ideal generated by all the Jacobian determinants of any $n$ elements $g_1,\cdots,g_n$ of $V_0$. Let $I_0$ be the radical of $J_0$.
Inductively we construct the ${\mathbb C}$-vector space $V_\nu$, the ideal $J_\nu$, and the ideal $I_\nu$ for any nonnegative integer $\nu$ as follows. For the step of going from $\nu$ to $\nu+1$, we let $V_{\nu+1}$ be the ${\mathbb C}$-vector space generated by elements of $V_\nu$ and all elements of the ideal $I_\nu$. Let $J_{\nu+1}$ be the ideal generated by all the Jacobian determinants of any $n$ elements of $V_{\nu+1}$. Let $I_{\nu+1}$ be the radical of the ideal of $J_{\nu+1}$. This finishes the construction by induction.
Let $p_\nu$ be the smallest positive integer such that $I_\nu^{p_\nu}$ is contained in $J_\nu$. Note that each element of $I_\nu$ is a multiplier, but each element of $V_\nu$ is only a pre-multiplier.
The full-real-radical Kohn algorithm for $F_1,\cdots,F_N$ [*terminates*]{} if there exists some nonnegative $\tilde\nu$ such that $I_{\tilde\nu}$ is the unit ideal, which means the entire ring of all holomorphic function germs. In that case we choose $\tilde\nu$ to be the smallest such nonnegative integer.
We say that the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm for $F_1,\cdots,F_N$ terminates [*effectively*]{} if $\tilde\nu$ and each $p_\nu$ for $0\leq\nu\leq\tilde\nu$ are bounded by explicit functions of $n$ and $q$.
The order of subellipticity for the multiplier $1$ is at least $$\frac{1}{2^{\tilde\nu+2}\prod_{\nu=0}^{\tilde\nu}p_\nu}.$$ This order of subellipticity from the termination of the original Kohn algorithm is effective only when $\tilde\nu$ is effective and each $p_\nu$ is effective for each $0\leq\nu\leq\tilde\nu$.
(2.11) [*Ideal Containing an Effective Power of its Radical in Effective Kohn Algorithm.*]{} The key difference between the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm (which in general is not effective) by the effective Kohn algorithm is to replace the taking of the radical $I_\nu$ of the ideal $J_\nu$ by an appropriately chosen sub-ideal $\tilde I_\nu$ of $I_\nu$ with the property that an effective power $(\tilde I_\nu)^{s_\nu}$ of $\tilde I_\nu$ is contained in $J_\nu$. The choice of the sub-ideal $\tilde I_\nu$ of $I_\nu$ and the positive integer $s_\nu$ involves rather complicated algebraic geometric techniques. In order to facilitate the explicit comparison of the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm with the effective Kohn algorithm in a concrete example (such as the example of Catlin-D’Angelo \[Catlin-D’Angelo2010\]), in the description of the steps in the effective Kohn algorithm for special domains we will confine ourselves to special domains of complex dimension $3$, which means the case of $n=2$.
[**§3.**]{} [Orders of Subellpiticity in Algebraic Geometric Techniques for 3-Dimensional Special Domain]{}
We now describe the steps in effective Kohn algorithm for special domains of complex dimension 3. Again we start with holomorphic function germs $F_1,\cdots,F_N$ at $0$ on ${\mathbb C}^2$ (which define the special domain in ${\mathbb C}^3$ and which generates an ideal in ${\mathcal O}_{{\mathbb C}^2,0}$ of multiplicity $\leq q$).
(3.1) [*Step One.*]{} We take two generic ${\mathbb C}$-linear combinations $\hat F_1, \hat F_2$ of $F_1,\cdots,F_N$ of vanishing order $\leq q$ at $0$ such that the Jacobian determinant $$h_2^*:=\frac{\partial(\hat F_1,\hat F_2)}{\partial(z_1,z_2)}$$ has vanishing order $\leq q$ at $0$ as a holomorphic function germ at $0$ on ${\mathbb C}^2$. An order of subellipticity of $h_2^*$ as a multiplier at the origin is at least $\frac{1}{4}$. Let $$h_2^*=\left(h_{2,1}^*\right)^{k_1}\cdots\left(h_{2,\ell_2}^*\right)^{k_{\ell_2}}$$ be the factorization into irreducible holomorphic function germs $h_{2,1}^*,\cdots,h_{2,\ell_2}^*$ with $k_1\geq k_2\geq\cdots\geq k_{\ell_2}\geq 1$. Since the vanishing order of $h_2^*$ is $\leq q$, we have $k_1+\cdots+k_{\ell_2}\leq q$ and, in particular, $k_1\leq q$. The holomorphic function germ $$\left(h_{2,1}^*\cdots h_{2,\ell_2}^*\right)^{k_1}$$ contains $h_2^*$ as a factor and is therefore a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{4}$. Let $$\hat h_2=h_{2,1}^*\cdots h_{2,\ell_2}^*.$$ Since the $k_1$-th power of $\hat h_2$ is a multiplier, it follows from $k_1\leq q$ that $\hat h_2$ is a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{4q}$. The construction of $\hat h_2$ from $h_2^*$ is to make sure that the divisor of $\hat h_2$ is reduced (which means that its multiplicity at any of its regular points is $1$, though it is possibly reducible with many branches). Up to this point the only goal accomplished is to produce a [*reduced*]{} holomorphic function germ $\hat h_2$ at $0$, with vanishing order $\leq q$ at $0$, which is a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{4q}$. This step of construction of $\hat h_2$ from $h_2^*$ is included only for the sake of convenience and is not actually absolutely necessary.
(3.2) [*Step Two.*]{} Take a generic ${\mathbb C}$-linear combination $h_1$ of $F_1,\cdots,F_N$ and a generic ${\mathbb C}$-linear coordinate system $w_1,w_2$ of ${\mathbb C}^2$ such that the following three conditions (i), (ii) and (iii) are satisfied. Here generic means that $h_1=\sum_{j=1}^N a_jF_j$ and $w_k=\sum_{\ell=1}^2 g_{k\ell}z_\ell$ with the element $(a_j, g_{k\ell})_{1\leq j\leq N,\,1\leq k,\ell\leq 2}$ of ${\mathbb C}^{N+1}$ chosen outside some proper subvariety ${\mathcal Z}$ of ${\mathbb C}^{N+4}$. The proper subvariety ${\mathcal Z}$ of ${\mathbb C}^{N+4}$ can be obtained as the union of three proper subvarieties of ${\mathbb C}^{N+4}$, one for each of the three conditions (i), (ii) and (iii).
\(i) The origin $0$ of ${\mathbb C}^2$ is an isolated zero of $w_1$ and the holomorphic function germs $h_1$.
\(ii) The multiplicity at $0$ of the ideal generated by $h_1$ and $\hat h_2$ is $\leq q^2$.
\(iii) The multiplicity at $0$ of the ideal generated by $\hat h_2$ and $\left(\frac{\partial h_1}{\partial w_1}\right)_{w_2={\rm const}}$ is $\leq 3q^2$.
The reason why a generic ${\mathbb C}$-linear combination $h_1$ of $F_1,\cdots,F_N$ satisfies Condition (ii) is that the multiplicity of the ideal generated by $F_1,\cdots,F_N$ at the origin is $\leq q$. The number $q^2$ in Condition (iii) is the product of the multiplicity $q$ of $\hat h_1$ at $0$ and the multiplicity $q$ of the ideal generated by $F_1,\cdots,F_N$ at $0$.
A choice of a generic ${\mathbb C}$-linear combination $h_1$ of $F_1,\cdots,F_N$ and a generic ${\mathbb C}$-linear coordinate system $w_1,w_2$ of ${\mathbb C}^2$ satisfying Condition (iii) is obtained from the following statement.
(3.2.1) For each holomorphic function germ $f$ on ${\mathbb C}^n$ at $0$ which vanishes at $0$, the function germ $f^{n+1}$ on ${\mathbb C}^n$ at $0$ belongs to the ideal generated by $\frac{\partial f}{\partial z_j}$ for $1\leq j\leq n$ (where $z_1,\cdots,z_n$ are the coordinates of ${\mathbb C}^n$).
The statement (3.2.1) is a consequence of Skoda’s result on ideal generation \[Skoda1972\] (see \[Siu2010, p.1232, Propositioni(A.2)\]) and can be considered as a generalization, to general holomorphic function germs, of Euler’s formula expressing a homogeneous polynomials in terms of its first-order partial derivatives. We apply the statement to $f=h_1$ to conclude that $(h_1)^3$ belongs to the ideal generated by $\frac{\partial h_1}{\partial z_1},\,\frac{\partial h_1}{\partial z_2}$. Condition (ii) implies that a generic ${\mathbb C}$-linear combination $H=\sum_{k=1}^2 c_k\,\frac{\partial h_1}{\partial z_k}$ satisfies the condition that the multiplicity at $0$ of the ideal generated by $H$ and $\hat h_2$ is $\leq 3q^2$. We can choose a generic ${\mathbb C}$-linear coordinate system $w_1,w_2$ of ${\mathbb C}^2$ such that $H=\left(\frac{\partial h_1}{\partial w_1}\right)_{w_2={\rm const}}$.
We are now ready to construct more multipliers from the choice of $h_1$ and $w_1,w_2$. Since $h_1$ vanishes at $0$, it follows Condition (iii) that there exist holomorphic function germs $\alpha,\beta$ at $0$ on ${\mathbb C}^2$ such that $$(h_1)^{3q^2}=\alpha\hat h_2+\beta\left(\frac{\partial h_1}{\partial w_1}\right)_{w_2={\rm const}}.$$ Though $h_1$ which is a ${\mathbb C}$-linear combination $F_1,\cdots,F_N$ of pre-multipliers $F_1,\cdots,F_N$ may not be a multiplier, the long key argument given below is to show that actually $h_1$ is a multiplier. We need the following statement concerning Weierstrass polynomials.
(3.2.2) [*Weierstrass Polynomial for Image Curve Under Branched-Cover Map.*]{} Let $\zeta_1$ and $\zeta_2$ be holomorphic function germs at $0$ on ${\mathbb C}^2$ vanishing at $0$ such that the origin $0$ of ${\mathbb C}^2$ is an isolated point of the common zero-set of $\zeta_1$ and $\zeta_2$. Let $H$ be a holomorphic function germ at $0$ on ${\mathbb C}^2$ vanishing at $0$ such that the origin $0$ of ${\mathbb C}^2$ is an isolated point of the common zero-set of $H$ and $\zeta_1$. Let $\ell$ be a positive integer. If $\zeta_2^\ell$ belongs to the ideal generated by $H$ and $\zeta_1$, then some holomorphic function germ on ${\mathbb C}^2$ at $0$ of the form of a Weierstrass polynomial $$\zeta_2^\ell+\sum_{j=0}^{\ell-1}\theta_j(\zeta_1)\zeta_2^j$$ (with $\zeta_1,\zeta_2$ as variables) contains $H$ as a factor, where $\theta_j$ is a holomorphic function germ on ${\mathbb C}$ at $0$ which vanishes at $0$ for $0\leq j\leq\ell-1$.
For the proof of the statement (3.2.2) on Weierstrass polynomials, first we observe that for the special case where $\zeta_1,\zeta_2$ are the coordinate functions $z_1,z_2$ of ${\mathbb C}^2$ and the restriction of $H$ to $\{z_1=0\}$ is equal to $z_2^\ell$ as holomorphic function germ on ${\mathbb C}$ with $z_2$ as coordinate, the statement is simply the usual factorization of a holomorphic function germ $H$ as a product of a nowhere zero holomorphic function germ and a Weierstrass polynomial of degree $\ell$ in the variable $z_2$. For the proof of the general case, we consider the germ at $0$ of the holomorphic map $\pi:{\mathbb C}^2\to{\mathbb C}^2$ defined by $(z_1,z_2)\to(\zeta_1,\zeta_2)$. Since the origin $0$ of ${\mathbb C}^2$ is an isolated point of the common zero-set of $\zeta_1$ and $\zeta_2$, the map $\pi$ is an analytic branched cover (as the germ of a holomorphic map). Let $C$ be the divisor of $H$ and $\tilde C$ be the image of $C$ under $\pi$ (with multiplicities counted) and let $\tilde H$ be a holomorphic function germ on ${\mathbb C}^2$ at $0$ whose divisor is $\tilde C$. Since the origin is an isolated point of the common zero-set of $H$ and $\zeta_1$ and since $\zeta_2^\ell$ belongs to the ideal generated by $\zeta_1$ and $H$, it follows that the restriction of $\tilde H$ to $\{\zeta_1=0\}$ is equal to $\zeta_2^{\tilde\ell}$ as holomorphic function germ on ${\mathbb C}$ with $\zeta_2$ as coordinate for some positive integer $\tilde\ell\leq\ell$. The general case now follows from applying the special case when $H$ is replaced by $\zeta_2^{\tilde\ell-\ell}\tilde H$ and the coordinates $z_1,z_2$ are replaced by $\zeta_1,\zeta_2$.
(3.3) [*Step Three.*]{} Because of Condition (ii) in (3.2), we can now apply the second part of the statement (3.2.2) on Weierstrass polynomials to the case of $H=\hat h_2$ and $\zeta_1=h_1$ and $\zeta_2=w_2$ to get a holomorphic function germ $h_2$ of the form $$w_2^{q^2}+\sum_{j=0}^{q^2-1}\theta_j(h_1)w_2^j$$ which contains $\hat h_2$ as a factor. (The property of $\hat h_2$ being a reduced holomorphic function germ means that in applying the above statement on Weierstrass polynomial, the divisor $C$ in the proof of the statement (3.2.2) on Weierstrass polynomials is reduced and we do not have to worry about multiplicities of its branches, but this point, though offering some convenience, is not essential.) Since $h_2$ contains as a factor the multiplier $\hat h_2$ whose order of multiplicity is $\geq\frac{1}{4q}$, it follows $h_2$ is a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{4q}$. Let $h_{2,0}=h_2$ and for $1\leq\nu\leq q^2$ let $$h_{2,\nu}=q^2(q^2-1)\cdot(q^2-\nu+1)w_2^{q^2-\nu}+\sum_{j=0}^{q^2-1}j(j-1)\cdots(j-\nu+1)\theta_j(h_1)w_2^{j-\nu},$$ which is obtained by differentiating $\nu$-times the function $h_2$ with respect to $w_2$ with $h_1$ fixed when $h_2$ is regarded as a function of $h_1$ and $w_2$. Then $$dh_{2,\nu}=\eta_\nu dh_1+h_{2,\nu+1}dw_2\quad{\rm for}\ \ 0\leq\nu\leq q^2-1$$ for a holomorphic function germ $\eta_\nu$ which is the partial derivative of $h_{2,\nu}$ with respect to $h_1$ with $w_2$ fixed when $h_{2,\nu}$ is regarded as a function of $h_1$ and $w_2$. Let $$\tilde h_{2,1}=\left(\frac{\partial h_1}{\partial w_1}\right)_{w_2={\rm const}}
h_{2,1}.$$ From $$\begin{aligned}dh_1\wedge dh_2&=dh_1\wedge\left(\eta_0 dh_1+h_{2,1}dw_2\right)\cr
&=dh_1\wedge\,h_{2,1}dw_2\cr
&=\left(\left(\frac{\partial h_1}{\partial w_1}\right)_{w_2={\rm const}}dw_1+
\left(\frac{\partial h_1}{\partial w_2}\right)_{w_1={\rm const}}dw_2\right)\wedge\,h_{2,1} dw_2\cr
&=\tilde h_{2,1} dw_1\wedge dw_2,\cr
\end{aligned}$$ it follows that $\tilde h_{2,1}$ is a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{8q}$.
Since $\hat h_2 h_{2,1}$, being a multiple of the multiplier $\hat h_2$, is itself a multiplier, it follows that the linear combination $$\alpha \hat h_2 h_{2,1}+\beta\tilde h_{2,1}=\alpha\hat h_2 h_{2,1}+\beta\left(\frac{\partial h_1}{\partial w_1}\right)_{w_2={\rm const}}
h_{2,1}=(h_1)^{3q^2}h_{2,1}$$ of the two multipliers $\hat h_2 h_{2,1}$ and $\tilde h_{2,1}$ with coefficients, which are holomorphic function germs at $0$ on ${\mathbb C}^2$, is a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{8q}$.
(3.4) [*Recursive Argument in Step Three.*]{} Now we repeat the above argument with $h_{2,\nu}$ replacing $\hat h_2$ in the following way to conclude by induction on $\nu$ that $(h_1)^{3q^2\nu}h_{2,\nu}$ is a multiplier with order of subellipticity $\geq\frac{1}{2^{\nu+2}q}$ for $1\leq\nu\leq q^2$.
The case of $\nu=1$ was just proved. Suppose we have proved the step up to some $\nu<q^2$ and we would like to prove the next step of $\nu+1$. From $$\begin{aligned}&dh_1\wedge d\left((h_1)^{3q^2\nu}h_{2,\nu}\right)\cr&=dh_1\wedge
\left(\left((3q^2\nu-1)(h_1)^{3q^2\nu-1}h_{2,\nu}+(h_1)^{3q^2\nu}\eta_\nu\right)dh_1+(h_1)^{3q^2\nu}h_{2,\nu+1}dw_2\right)\cr
&=dh_1\wedge
(h_1)^{3q^2\nu}h_{2,\nu+1}dw_2\cr
&=\left(\left(\frac{\partial h_1}{\partial w_1}\right)_{w_2={\rm const}}dw_1+
\left(\frac{\partial h_1}{\partial w_2}\right)_{w_1={\rm const}}dw_2\right)\wedge
(h_1)^{3q^2\nu}h_{2,\nu+1}dw_2\cr
&=\left(\frac{\partial h_1}{\partial w_1}\right)_{w_2={\rm const}}
(h_1)^{3q^2\nu}h_{2,\nu+1}dw_1\wedge dw_2\cr
\end{aligned}$$ it follows that $\left(\frac{\partial h_1}{\partial w_1}\right)_{w_2={\rm const}}
(h_1)^{3q^2\nu}h_{2,\nu+1}$ is a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{2^{\nu+3}q}$.
Since $\hat h_2(h_1)^{3q^2\nu}h_{2,\nu+1}$, being a multiple of the multiplier $\hat h_2$, is itself a multiplier, it follows that the linear combination $$\begin{aligned}&\alpha \hat h_2(h_1)^{3q^2\nu}h_{2,\nu+1}+\beta\left(\frac{\partial h_1}{\partial w_1}\right)_{w_2={\rm const}}
(h_1)^{3q^2\nu}h_{2,\nu+1}\cr
&=\left(\alpha\hat h_2+\beta\left(\frac{\partial h_1}{\partial w_1}\right)_{w_2={\rm const}}\right)
(h_1)^{3q^2\nu}h_{2,\nu+1}\cr
&=(h_1)^{3q^2(\nu+1)}h_{2,\nu+1}\cr
\end{aligned}$$ of the two multipliers $\hat h_2(h_1)^{3q^2\nu}h_{2,\nu+1}$ and $\beta\left(\frac{\partial h_1}{\partial w_1}\right)_{w_2={\rm const}}
(h_1)^{3q^2\nu}h_{2,\nu+1}$ with coefficients, which are holomorphic function germs at $0$ on ${\mathbb C}^2$, is a multiplier with order of subellipticity $\geq\frac{1}{2^{\nu+3}q}$. This finishes the proof by induction on $\nu$ that $(h_1)^{3q^2\nu}h_{2,\nu}$ is a multiplier with order of subellipticity $\geq\frac{1}{2^{\nu+2}q}$ for $1\leq\nu\leq q^2$. Since $h_{2,q^2}$ is equal to $(q^2)!$, it follows that $(h_1)^{3q^4}$ is a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{2^{q^2+2}q}$. By the real radical property of multipliers we conclude that $h_1$ is a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{3q^5 2^{q^2+2}}$.
Since by Condition (ii) of (3.2) the ideal generated by $h_1$ and $\hat h_2$ contains the $q^2$-th power of the maximum ideal ${\mathfrak m}_{{\mathbb C}^2,0}$ of ${\mathbb C}^2$ at $0$, it follows that $w_1$ and $w_2$ are multipliers whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{3q^7 2^{q^2+2}}$. By taking the Jacobian determinant of $w_1$ and $w_2$, we end up with $1$ being a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\frac{1}{3q^7 2^{q^2+3}}$.
(3.5) [*Remark.*]{} For use in (4.3) below we would like to remark that the above arguments work in the same way when the holomorphic function germ $h_2$ is chosen to be $$(h_1)^r\left(w_2^{q^2}+\sum_{j=0}^{q^2-1}\theta_j(h_1)w_2^j\right)$$ instead of $$w_2^{q^2}+\sum_{j=0}^{q^2-1}\theta_j(h_1)w_2^j$$ if $r$ is effective in the sense that $r$ is bounded by an explicit function of $q$. Of course, the effective lower bound of the order of subellipticity of the constant function $1$ as a multiplier needs to be correspondingly modified to be $\frac{1}{3q^7 2^{q^2+r+3}}$.
[**§4.**]{} [Effective Kohn Algorithm Applied to Catlin-D’Angelo’s Example]{}
We now apply the algebraic geometric techniques in the effective Kohn algorithm to the example of Catlin-D’Angelo given in \[Catlin-D’Angelo2010\] for which the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm is ineffective.
(4.1) [*Catlin-D’Angelo’s Example of Ineffectiveness of Full-Real-Radical Kohn Algorithm.*]{} Let $K >M\geq 2$ and $N\geq 3$. The special domain $\Omega$ $${\rm Re}\,w+|F_1(z_1,z_2)|^2+|F_2(z_1,z_2)|^2<0$$ in ${\mathbb C}^3$ is defined by the two holomorphic functions $F_1(z_1,z_2)=z_1^M$ and $F_2=z_2^N+z_2z_1^K$ on ${\mathbb C}^2$. The origin of ${\mathbb C}^3$ is the boundary point of $\Omega$ whose scalar and vector multipliers we consider. The following is reproduced from pp.81-82 of \[Catlin-D’Angelo2010\] in the notations and terminology used in this note. By Weierstrass division (applied to the Weierstrass polynomial which is the product $F_2$ and a nowhere holomorphic function germ), modulo $F_2$ every element of ${\mathcal O}_{{\mathbb C}^2,0}$ is equal to $$\sum_{j=0}^{N-1}a_j(z_1)z_2^j$$ for some holomorphic function germs $a_0,\cdots,a_{N-1}$ on ${\mathbb C}^2$ at $0$. Modulo $F_1$ we can write $$a_j(z_1)=\sum_{k=0}^{M-1}b_{jk}z_1^k$$ for $0\leq j\leq N-1$, where $b_{jk}\in{\mathbb C}$ for $0\leq j\leq N-1,\,0\leq k\leq M-1$. Hence the multiplicity $q$ given by $$\dim_{\mathbb C}\left({\mathcal O}_{{\mathbb C}^2,0}\left/\sum_{j=1}^2
{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbb C}^2,0} F_j\right.\right)$$ is $\leq MN$.
The full-real-radical Kohn algorithm proceeds as follows in this example. Let $g$ be the Jacobian determinant $$\frac{\partial(F_1,F_2)}{\partial(z_1,z_2)}=\det\left(\begin{matrix}z_1^{M-1}&0\cr
Kz_2z_1^{K-1}&Nz_2^{N-1}+z_1^K\cr
\end{matrix}\right)=Nz_1^{M-1}z_2^{N-1}+z_1^{K+M-1}$$ of $F_1,F_2$ with respect to $z_1,z_2$. We use the notations in (2.10). The ideal $J_0$ is the principal ideal with the irreducible function germ $g$ as the generator and its radical $I_0$ is the same as $J_0$. The ideal $J_1$ is $${\mathcal O}_{{\mathbb C}^2,0}g+\sum_{j=1}^2{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbb C}^2,0}\frac{\partial(F_j,g)}{\partial(z_1,z_2)},$$ where $$\frac{\partial(F_1,g)}{\partial(z_1,z_2)}=\det\left(\begin{matrix}z_1^{M-1}&0\cr
\frac{\partial g}{\partial z_1}&N(N-1)z_1^{M-1}z_2^{N-2}\cr
\end{matrix}\right)=N(N-1)z_1^{2M-2}z_2^{N-2}.$$ Since $g^2$ modulo $\frac{\partial(F_1,g)}{\partial(z_1,z_2)}$ is equal to $z_1^{2(K+M-1)}$, it follows from $K+M-1\geq 1$ that the holomorphic function germ $z_1$ at $0$ belongs to the radical $I_1$ of $J_1$. From $N\geq 3$ we conclude that modulo $(z_2)^2$ the three holomorphic function germs $g, F_1, F_2$ become respectively $z_1^{K+M-1}$, $z_1^M$, $z_2z_1^K$. Hence the ideal $J_1$ generated by the three Jacobian determinants formed from pairs out of $g, F_1, F_2$ is contained in the ideal generated by $z_1^{M+K-2}$ and $z_2$. This means that $z_1^m$ cannot be in $J_1$ for $m<M+K-2$, otherwise $z_1^m$ belongs to the ideal generated by $z_1^{M+K-2}$ and $z_2$, which is a contradiction. Since the holomorphic function germ $z_1$ belongs to $I_1$, this means that the smallest positive integer $p_1$ satisfying $(I_1)^{p_1}\subset J_1$ must be $\geq M+K-2\geq K$. Thus, the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm is not effective, because $K$ is arbitrary and there cannot be any function of $NM$ which bounds $K$.
(4.2) [*Remark.*]{} In (4.1) when we carry out the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm for Catlin-D’Angelo’s example, we stopped after showing the algorithm to be ineffective. For later comparison, we now carry out the remaining steps of the algorithm until we produce the constant function $1$ as a multiplier. We have seen that $z_1$ belongs to $I_1$. Since all three holomorphic function germs $g$, $\frac{\partial g}{\partial z_1}$ and $\frac{\partial g}{\partial z_2}$ contain $z_1$ as a factor, it follows that $J_1$ is contained in the principal ideal generated by $z_1$ and $I_1$ must be equal to the principal ideal generated by $z_1$. The function germ $z_2^N=F_2-z_2z_1^K$ is a pre-multiplier in $V_2$. The Jacobian determinant $\frac{\partial(z_1,z_2^N)}{\partial(z_1,z_2)}=Nz_2^{N-1}$ belongs to $J_2$. Hence $z_2$ belongs $I_2$ and we can conclude that $I_2$ is the maximum ideal ${\mathfrak m}_{{\mathbb C}^2,0}$ of ${\mathbb C}^2$ at $0$. By taking the Jacobian determinant of the elements $z_1, z_2$ of $I_2$, we conclude that $1$ is a multiplier. To get to the multiplier $1$ from $F_1,F_2$, we have to perform differentiation $4$ times in the construction of Jacobian determinants.
(4.3) [*Effective Kohn Algorithm for Catlin-D’Angelo’s Example.*]{} We now carry out concretely the steps in the effective Kohn algorithm for Catlin-D’Angelo’s example to illustrate the difference between the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm and the effective Kohn algorithm.
The key point in the effective Kohn algorithm is to construct a Weierstrass polynomial $h_2$ in one coordinate $w_2$ such that (i) $h_2$ contains as a factor a multiplier $\hat h_2$ which is obtained in a procedure involving the Jacobian determinant of two ${\mathbb C}$-linear combinations of the defining holomorphic functions $F_1,\cdots,F_N$ of the special domain and (ii) the coefficients of $h_2$ are holomorphic function germs of some ${\mathbb C}$-linear combination $h_1$ of $F_1,\cdots,F_N$. Then by using induction on $\nu$ we show, with effectiveness, that the Jacobian determinant of $h_1$ and the function $(h_1)^{m_\nu}\left(\frac{\partial^\nu h_2}{\partial w_2^\nu}\right)_{h_1={\rm constant}}$ is a multiplier (for some effective positive integer $m_\nu$), resulting finally in the conclusion that $h_1$ is a multiplier. In the key argument the Weierstrass polynomial $h_2$ can be replaced by the product of an effective power of $h_1$ and a Weierstrass polynomial (see Remark (3.4)).
In the example of Catlin-D’Angelo where the defining functions for the special domain in ${\mathbb C}^3$ are the two holomorphic functions $F_1(z_1,z_2)=z_1^M$ and $F_2=z_2^N+z_2z_1^K$ on ${\mathbb C}^2$, we can use $h_1=F_1$ and use $$\frac{z_1}{N}\frac{\partial(F_1,F_2)}{\partial(z_1,z_2)}=z_1^M z_2^{N-1}+\frac{1}{N}\,z_1^{K+M}$$ as $h_2$ which is the product of $h_1$ and the Weierstrass polynomial $$z_2^{N-1}+\frac{1}{N}\,z_1^K=z_2^{N-1}+\frac{1}{N}(h_1)^m$$ in the variable $z_2$, where $m=\frac{K}{M}$ which we assume for the time being to be a positive integer. It turns out that the argument used in the effective Kohn algorithm works in the same way without the assumption that $m=\frac{K}{M}$ is a positive integer. This assumption used in the setup merely motivates the steps of the argument.
For Catlin-D’Angelo’s example, the induction on $\nu$ to show, with effectiveness, that the Jacobian determinant of $h_1$ and the function $(h_1)^{m_\nu}\left(\frac{\partial^\nu h_2}{\partial w_2^\nu}\right)_{h_1={\rm constant}}$ is a multiplier (for some effective positive integer $m_\nu$) is translated (after obvious modifications) to verifying by induction on $j$ that each $H_j$ defined by $H_j=z_1^{(j+1)(M-1)}z_2^{N-j}$ is a multiplier for $1\leq j\leq N$, because the $\nu$-th derivative of $$z_2^{N-1}+\frac{1}{N}\,z_1^K=z_2^{N-1}+\frac{1}{N}(h_1)^m$$ with respect to $z_2$ with $h_1$ being kept constant is $(N-1)\cdots(N-\nu)z_2^{N-1-\nu}$ for $1\leq\nu\leq N-1$.
At this point we can forget that the use of $H_j=z_1^{(j+1)(M-1)}z_2^{N-j}$ for $1\leq j\leq N$ is motivated by the steps of the effective Kohn algorithm. We now simply carry out the induction on $j$ to verify that $H_j=z_1^{(j+1)(M-1)}z_2^{N-j}$ is a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{2^{j+2}}$ for $1\leq j\leq N$.
Since the Jacobian determinant $$g=\frac{\partial(F_1,F_2)}{\partial(z_1,z_2)}=Nz_1^{M-1}z_2^{N-1}+z_1^{K+M-1}$$ is multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{4}$, the Jacobian determinant $$\frac{\partial(F_1,g)}{\partial(z_1,z_2)}=N(N-1)z_1^{2M-2}z_2^{N-1}$$ is a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{8}$, which means that $H_1$ is a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{8}$. Suppose $H_j$ has been verified to be a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{2^{j+2}}$ for some $1\leq j<N$. Then the Jacobian determinant $$\begin{aligned}\frac{\partial(F_1,H_j)}{\partial(z_1,z_2)}&=
\det\left(\begin{matrix}Mz_1^{M-1}&0\cr \frac{\partial H_j}{\partial z_1}&(N-j)z_1^{(j+1)(M-1)}z_2^{N-j-1}\cr\end{matrix}\right)\cr
&=M(N-j)z_1^{(j+2)(M-1)}z_2^{N-j-1}\cr
\end{aligned}$$ is a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{2^{j+3}}$, which means that $H_{j+1}$ is a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{2^{j+3}}$. This finishes the induction argument and we know that $H_N=z_1^{(N+1)(M-1)}$ is a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{2^{N+2}}$.
By taking the effective $(N+1)(M-1)$-th root, we conclude that the holomorphic function germ $z_1$ is a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{2^{N+2}(N+1)(M-1)}$ and the holomorphic function germ $z_2z_1^K$ which contains $z_1$ as a factor is a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{2^{N+2}(N+1)(M-1)}$. Then $$z_2^N=(z_2^N+z_2z_1^K)-z_2z_1^K=F_2-z_2z_1^K$$ is a pre-multiplier whose differential has order of subellipticity $\geq\frac{1}{2^{N+3}(N+1)(M-1)}$. Since both $z_1$ and $z_2^N$ are pre-multipliers whose differentials have order of subellipticity $\geq\frac{1}{2^{N+3}(N+1)(M-1)}$, the Jacobian determinant $$\frac{\partial(z_1,z_2^N)}{\partial(z_1,z_2)}=\det\left(\begin{matrix}1&0\cr 0&Nz_2^{N-1}\cr\end{matrix}\right)=Nz_2^{N-1}$$ is a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{2^{N+3}(N+1)(M-1)}$, which means that $z_2^{N-1}$ is a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{2^{N+3}(N+1)(M-1)}$. By taking the $(N-1)$-th root of $z_2^{N-1}$, we conclude that $z_2$ is a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{2^{N+3}(N+1)(N-1)(M-1)}$. Finally $1$ which is the Jacobian determinant $\frac{\partial(z_1,z_2)}{\partial(z_1,z_2)}$ is a multiplier whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{2^{N+4}(N+1)(N-1)(M-1)}$. This algorithm is effective, because $\frac{1}{2^{N+4}(N+1)(N-1)(M-1)}$ is bounded from below by the explicit function $\frac{1}{2^{q+4}(q+1)(q-1)^2}$ of $q=NM$.
(4.4) [*Remark.*]{} In carrying out above the effective Kohn algorithm for Catlin-D’Angelo’s example, to get to the multiplier $1$ from $F_1,F_2$, we have to perform differentiation $N+2$ times in the construction of Jacobian determinants. Compared to the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm which requires only $4$ differentiation to terminate, to avoid ineffectiveness in the taking of roots in the effective Kohn algorithm we choose the option of performing more, but still an effective number of, differentiations.
(4.5) [*Geometric Reason for Ineffectiveness of Full-Real-Radical Kohn Algorithm for Catlin-D’Angelo’s Example.*]{} The above discussion shows by computation why in Catlin-D’Angelo’s example the full-real-radical Kohn algorithm is ineffective while the effective Kohn algorithm gives effectiveness. Now we would like to analyze geometrically why such a phenomenon occurs. When $F_2=z_2^N+z_2z_1^K$ is regarded as a polynomial in $z_2$, its degree $N$ is effective (in the sense of being bounded by an explicit function of $q=MN$) but its discriminant obtained by eliminating $z_2$ from $F_2$ and $\frac{\partial F_2}{\partial z_2}$, as a function germ in $z_1$ vanishes to an order at $z_1=0$ which is a function of $K$ and is not effective. In other words, the $N$ roots (in $z_2$) of $F_2=0$ as $N$ functions of $z_1$ are close together near $z_1=0$ to an order which is a function of $K$ and is not effective. The discriminant of $F_2$ and the closeness of the $N$ roots of $F_2=0$ enter the picture, because $F_1=z_1^M$ depends only on $z_1$ and the Jacobian determinant of $F_1, F_2$ is the first multiplier in the algorithm. Because of the ineffectiveness of the vanishing order of the discriminant of $F_2$ at a function in $z_1$ at $z_1=0$, the step of root-taking is ineffective. On the other hand, the effective Kohn algorithm replaces ineffective root-taking of the discriminant of a Weierstrass polynomial by differentiating the Weierstrass polynomial with respect to its variable as many times as its degree to avoid the ineffective root-taking.
[**§5.**]{} [Multipliers in More General Setting]{}
We now discuss the generalization of Kohn’s technique of multipliers to more general systems of partial differential equations.
(5.1) [*Generalization of Kohn’s Technique of Multiplier Ideal Sheaves to More General Setting.*]{} The generalization of Kohn’s technique of multiplier ideal sheaves to a more general setting comes from looking at Kohn’s technique for the complex Neumann problem from the following perspective. The subelliptic estimate for a bounded smooth weakly pseudoconvex domain $\Omega$ in ${\mathbb C}^n$ at its boundary point $P$ seeks to estimate $$\left\|\left|\varphi\right|\right\|_\varepsilon^2=\left\|\Lambda^\varepsilon\varphi\right\|^2$$ by a constant $C_\varepsilon$ times $$Q(\varphi,\varphi)=\left\|\bar\partial\varphi\right\|^2+\left\|\bar\partial^*\varphi\right\|^2+\left\|\varphi\right\|^2,$$ for some $\varepsilon>0$, for all smooth test $(0,1)$-form $\varphi$ on $U\cap\bar\Omega$ with compact support which belongs to the domain of the actual adjoint $\bar\partial^*$ of $\bar\partial$ (where $U$ is an open neighborhood of $P$ in ${\mathbb C}^n$). For the convenience of discussion, we simply say that $\Lambda^\varepsilon\varphi$ is [*estimable*]{} on $U$ when $$\left\|\Lambda^\varepsilon\varphi\right\|^2\leq C_\varepsilon Q(\varphi,\varphi).$$ In general, we say that some expression $\psi$ defined from $\varphi$ is [*estimable*]{} on $U$ (or simply [*estimable*]{}) if $$\left\|\psi\right\|^2\leq CQ(\varphi,\varphi)$$ for some constant $C$ independent of $\varphi$ (which is smooth on $U\cap\partial\Omega$ with compact support). The starting point is the basic identity $$\left\|\bar\partial\varphi\right\|^2+\left\|\bar\partial^*\varphi\right\|^2=\left\|\bar\nabla\varphi\right\|^2+\int_{\partial\Omega}\left<{\rm Levi}_{\partial\Omega},\,\bar\varphi\wedge\varepsilon\right>,$$ where $\bar\nabla$ is the (covariant) differentiation of $\varphi$ in the $(0,1)$-direction and ${\rm Levi}_{\partial\Omega}$ is the Levi form $\partial\bar\partial r$ of the boundary $\partial\Omega$ of $\Omega$ when $\Omega$ is locally defined by $r<0$ with $dr\equiv1$ on $\partial\Omega$. In particular, $$\left\|\bar\nabla\varphi\right\|^2\leq Q(\varphi,\varphi)\quad{\rm and}\quad
\left\|\bar\partial^*\varphi\right\|^2\leq Q(\varphi,\varphi).$$ Together with $\left\|\varphi\right\|^2\leq Q(x,y)$, this means that both $\bar\nabla\varphi$ and $\bar\partial^*\varphi$, as well as $\varphi$, are estimable. The expressions $$\bar\nabla\varphi=\left(\bar\partial_j\varphi_{\bar k}\right)_{1\leq j,k\leq n}\quad{\rm and}\quad\bar\partial^*\varphi=-\sum_{j=1}^n\partial_j\varphi_{\bar j}$$ are linear combinations of first-order partial derivatives of the components of $\varphi$. A multiplier $F$ means the estimability of $\Lambda^\varepsilon(F\varphi)$ and a vector multiplier $\theta$ means the estimability of $\Lambda^\varepsilon(\theta\cdot\varphi)$. Kohn’s technique is to use the estimability of $\bar\nabla\varphi$, $\bar\partial^*\varphi$ and $\varphi$ and apply algebraic manipulations and integration by parts to construct from the estimability of $\Lambda^\varepsilon(F\varphi)$ and $\Lambda^\varepsilon(\theta\cdot\varphi)$ other $F^\prime$ and $\theta^\prime$ with estimable $\Lambda^\varepsilon(F^\prime\varphi)$ and $\Lambda^\varepsilon(\theta^\prime\cdot\varphi)$. For such manipulations it does not matter what the meaning of $Q(\varphi,\varphi)$ is. Moreover, the operations of integration by parts are along the tangent directions of the boundary, because $\Lambda^\varepsilon$ is the pseudo-differential operator corresponding to the $\left(\frac{\varepsilon}{2}\right)$-th power of $1$ plus the Laplacian in tangential coordinates of the boundary.
(5.1.1) For our generalization of the technique of multiplier ideal sheaves, we use the following simple setting which highlights the core argument of the technique. Fix an integer $q\geq 2$. Let $\Omega$ be an open neighborhood of $0$ in ${\mathbb R}^m$ and $Y_{j\,\nu}$ be complex-valued smooth differential operators on $\Omega$ for $1\leq j\leq N$ and $1\leq\nu\leq q$. For any $q$-tuple $\varphi=\left(\varphi_1,\cdots,\varphi_q\right)$ of smooth complex-valued functions with compact support on $\Omega$, let $$Q(\varphi,\varphi)=\left\|\varphi\right\|^2+\sum_{1\leq j\leq N,\,1\leq\nu\leq q}\left\|Y_{j\,\nu}\varphi_\nu\right\|^2,$$ where $\left\|\cdot\right\|$ means the $L^2$ norm on $\Omega$. An expression $\psi$ of $\varphi$ of the form $\sum_{\nu=1}^q Z_\nu\varphi_\nu$ (where each $Z_\nu$ is a pseudo-differential operator on $\Omega$) is said to be [*estimable*]{} on an open neighborhood $U$ of $0$ in $\Omega$ (or simply [*estimable*]{}) if there is a positive constant $C$ such that $$\left\|\psi\right\|^2\leq CQ(\varphi,\varphi)$$ for all $q$-tuple $\varphi=\left(\varphi_1,\cdots,\varphi_q\right)$ of smooth complex-valued test functions with compact support on $U$. When $\psi$ is vector-valued instead of scalar-valued, the estimability of $\psi$ on $U$ means the estimability of each of its components on $U$. When we have two such expressions $\psi$ and $\tilde\psi$, we say that the inner product $\left(\psi,\tilde\psi\right)$ is [*estimable*]{} on $U$ if $$\left(\psi,\,\tilde\psi\right)\leq CQ(\varphi,\varphi)$$ all $q$-tuple $\varphi=\left(\varphi_1,\cdots,\varphi_q\right)$ of smooth complex-valued test functions with compact support on $U$. We refer to $C$ as the constant of estimability of $\psi$ or $(\psi,\tilde\psi)$.
(5.1.2) Let $\Lambda^\varepsilon$ be the the pseudo-differential operator which is the $\left(\frac{\varepsilon}{2}\right)$-th power of $1$ plus the Laplacian in the coordinates of ${\mathbb R}^m$. We introduce three kinds of multipliers: (i) scalar multiplier, (ii) vector multiplier, and (iii) matrix multiplier.
The germ at $0$ of a smooth function $\alpha$ is a [*scalar multiplier*]{} at $0$ with [*order of subellpticity*]{} $\geq\varepsilon$ if $\Lambda^\varepsilon(\alpha\varphi_\nu)$ (for $1\leq\nu\leq q$) is estimable on $U$ for some $\varepsilon>0$ and some open neighborhood $U$ of $0$ in $\Omega$ on which $\alpha$ is defined. Clearly the product of a scalar multiplier with any smooth function is again a scalar multiplier with no change in the order of subellipticity. By considering the commutator $\left[\Lambda^\varepsilon,\,\alpha\right]$ of pseudo-differential operators, we conclude that for $0<\varepsilon\leq 1$ the estimatbility of $\Lambda^\varepsilon(\alpha\varphi_\nu)$ on $U$ is equivalent to the estimability of $\alpha(\Lambda^\varepsilon\varphi_\nu)$ on $U$, because $\left\|\varphi\right\|^2$ is estimable on $U$.
The germ at $0$ of a smooth $q$-tuple of smooth complex-valued functions $\vec a=(a_1,\cdots,a_q)$ is called a [*vector multiplier*]{} at $0$ with [*order of subellpticity*]{} $\geq\varepsilon$ if $\Lambda^\varepsilon(\sum_{\nu=1}^q a_\nu\varphi_\nu)$ is estimable on $U$ for some $\varepsilon>0$ and some open neighborhood $U$ of $0$ in $\Omega$ on which $\vec a$ is defined. Clearly the product of a vector multiplier with any smooth function is again a vector multiplier with no change in the order of subellipticity. Again, for $0<\varepsilon\leq 1$ the estimatbility of $\Lambda^\varepsilon(\sum_{\nu=1}^q a_\nu\varphi_\nu)$ on $U$ is equivalent to the estimability of $\sum_{\nu=1}^q a_\nu(\Lambda^\varepsilon\varphi_\nu)$ on $U$.
An $q\times q$ matrix ${\mathbf a}=\left(a_{jk}\right)_{1\leq j,\ell\leq q}$ is called a [*matrix multiplier*]{} at $0$ with [*order of subellpticity*]{} $\geq\varepsilon$ if every one of its rows $\vec a_j=(a_{j1},\cdots,a_{jq})$ (for $1\leq r\leq q$) is a vector multiplier at $0$ with order of subellipticity $\geq\varepsilon$. Clearly a matrix multiplier multiplied on the left by a $q\times q$ matrix with smooth functions as entries yields a matrix multiplier with no change in the order of subellipticity.
Some simple relations among scalar multipliers, vector multipliers, and matrix multipliers are as follows. The product of a scalar multiplier with any row $q$-vector with smooth functions as components is a vector multiplier. The product of a scalar multiplier with any $q\times q$ matrix with smooth functions as entries is a matrix multiplier. Any vector multiplier (as a row vector) multiplied on the left by a column $q$-vector with smooth functions as components yields a matrix multiplier. By Cramer’s rule the determinant of a matrix multiplier is a scalar multiplier. Any matrix multiplier multiplied on the left by a row $q$-vector with smooth functions as components yields a vector multiplier.
(5.1.3) Just like the real radical property (C) of Kohn’s multipliers in (2.1), scalar multipliers here enjoy the same real radical property that if $\alpha$ is a scalar multiplier at $0$ with order of subellipticity $\geq\varepsilon$ (for some $0<\varepsilon\leq 1$) and $\beta$ is a smooth complex-valued function germ at $0$ such that $\left|\beta\right|^\sigma\leq\left|\alpha\right|$ for some $\sigma\in{\mathbb N}$, then $\beta$ is a scalar multiplier with order of subellipticity $\geq\frac{\varepsilon}{\sigma}$. The proof is completely analogous to the proof of \[Kohn1979, p.98, Lemma 4.3.4\] and is as follows. Let $U$ be an open neighborhood of $0$ in $\Omega$ such that both $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are represented by smooth functions on $U$ and $\varphi$ is a test $q$-tuple of smooth functions on $U$ with compact support. Let $\eta=\frac{\varepsilon}{\sigma}$. Since $$\begin{aligned}\left\|\Lambda^{\sigma\eta}(\beta^\sigma\varphi)\right\|_{L^2(U)}&\leq C_1^*\left\|\beta^\sigma\Lambda^{\sigma\eta}\varphi\right\|_{L^2(U)}+C_1^{**}\left\|\varphi\right\|_{L^2(U)}\cr
&\leq C_2^*\left\|\alpha\Lambda^{\sigma\eta}\varphi\right\|_{L^2(U)}+C_2^{**}\left\|\varphi\right\|_{L^2(U)}\cr
&\leq C_3^*\left\|\Lambda^{\sigma\eta}(\alpha)\varphi\right\|_{L^2(U)}+C_3^{**}\left\|\varphi\right\|_{L^2(U)},\cr
\end{aligned}$$ it suffices to prove the statement that $$\left\|\Lambda^{\tau\eta}(\beta^\tau\varphi)\right\|_{L^2(U)}
\leq C_\tau\left\|\Lambda^{\sigma\eta}(\beta^{\sigma\eta}\varphi)\right\|_{L^2(U)}+C_\tau^\prime\left\|\varphi\right\|_{L^2(U)}\leqno{(5.1.3.1)_\tau}$$ for $1\leq\tau\leq\sigma$. The statement $(5.1.3.1)_\tau$ follows from descending induction on $\tau$ for $1\leq\tau\leq\sigma$, because $$\begin{aligned}\left\|\Lambda^{\tau\eta}(\beta^\tau\varphi)\right\|_{L^2(U)}^2
&=
\left(\Lambda^{(\tau+1)\eta}(\beta^{\tau+1}\varphi),\Lambda^{(\tau-1)\eta}(\beta^{\tau-1}\varphi))\right)_{L^2(U)}
+\hat C\left\|\varphi\right\|^2\cr
&\leq\left\|\Lambda^{(\tau+1)\eta}(\beta^{\tau+1}\varphi)\right\|_{L^2(U)}
\left\|\Lambda^{(\tau-1)\eta}(\beta^{\tau-1}\varphi)\right\|_{L^2(U)}
+\tilde C\left\|\varphi\right\|^2\cr
\end{aligned}$$ for $1\leq\tau<\sigma$, where $C_j^*, C_j^{**}, C_\tau, C_\tau^\prime, \hat C, \tilde C$ are constants independent of $\varphi$.
In particular, if $\alpha$ is a scalar multiplier at $0$ with order of subellipticity $\geq\varepsilon$ (for some $0<\varepsilon\leq 1$), then its complex-conjugate $\bar\alpha$ is also scalar multiplier at $0$ with order of subellipticity $\geq\varepsilon$.
A very important part of the technique of multiply ideal sheaves is the differential relations among the scalar multipliers, vector multipliers, and matrix multipliers. This is represented by two procedures involving differentiation. The first procedure produces a new vector multiplier from a matrix multiplier. The second procedure produces a new vector multiplier from a scalar multiplier. The second procedure is similar to the procedure (B)(i) for Kohn’s multipliers for the complex Neumann problem in (2.1). The first procedure is a new one, even in the special case of Kohn’s multipliers for the complex Neumann problem. The following theorem presents a unified version of both procedures, which yields both procedures as special cases.
(5.2) [*Theorem (Generation of Vector Multiplier from Matrix Multiplier or Scalar Multiplier).*]{} Let $X_1,\cdots,X_q$ be complex-valued smooth first-order differential operators on $\Omega$ whose adjoint operators are $X_1^*,\cdots,X_q^*$ with respect to the $L^2$ inner product on $\Omega$ such that each $X_j^*\varphi$ is estimable on $\Omega$ for $1\leq j\leq q$. Let $\Gamma_{k\ell}$ be a smooth complex-valued function on $\Omega$ for $1\leq k,\ell\leq q$ such that $\sum_{1\leq k,\ell\leq q}\Gamma_{k\ell}X_k\varphi_\ell$ is estimable on $\Omega$. Let $\varepsilon_1,\,\varepsilon_2$ be positive numbers $\leq 1$. Let ${\mathbf a}=\left(a_{jk}\right)_{1\leq j,k\leq q}$ be a matrix of multipliers at $0$ so that each of its rows $\vec a_j=\left(a_{jk}\right)_{1\leq k\leq q}$ is a vector multiplier at $0$ with order of subellipticity $\geq\varepsilon_1$ for $1\leq j\leq q$. Let $\alpha$ be a scalar multiplier at $0$ with order of subellipticity $\geq\varepsilon_2$. Let $\left(A_{jk}\right)_{1\leq j,k\leq q}$ be a matrix of smooth complex-valued function germs at $0$ such that $\sum_{\ell=1}^q A_{j\ell}a_{\ell k}$ equals to the Kronecker delta $\delta_{jk}$ times $\alpha$ for $1\leq j,k\leq q$. Let $$b_j=\sum_{1\leq p,\ell,k\leq q}\Gamma_{pk}A_{k\ell}(X_pa_{\ell\,j})$$ and $\vec b=\left(b_j\right)_{1\leq j\leq q}$. Then $\vec b$ is a vector multiplier at $0$ whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{1}{2}\min(\varepsilon_1,\varepsilon_2)$. In particular, the following two special cases hold.
\(i) For $1\leq j\leq q$ let $$c_j=\sum_{1\leq p,\ell\leq q}{\rm adj}({\mathbf a})_{p\ell}(X_p a_{\ell\,j})$$ and $\vec c=\left(c_j\right)_{1\leq j\leq q}$, where ${\rm adj}({\mathbf a})$ is the adjoint matrix of ${\mathbf a}$ (so that the matrix product of ${\rm adj}({\mathbf a})$ and ${\mathbf a}$ is equal to $\det({\mathbf a})$ times the identity matrix of order $q$). Then $\vec c$ is a vector multiplier at $0$ whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{\varepsilon_1}{2}$.
\(ii) Let $d_j=\sum_{k=1}^q\Gamma_{kj}X_k\alpha$ for $1\leq j\leq q$ and $\vec d=\left(d_j\right)_{1\leq j\leq q}$. Then $\vec d$ is a vector multiplier at $0$ whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{\varepsilon_2}{2}$.
(5.2.1) [*Proof of Theorem (5.2).*]{} Let $\varepsilon=\min(\varepsilon_1,\varepsilon_2)$. Let $U$ be an open neighborhood of $0$ in $\Omega$ such that $\alpha$ and the vector multiplier $\vec a_j=\left(a_{jk}\right)_{1\leq k\leq q}$ (for $1\leq j\leq q$) are defined and smooth on $U$ and $\Lambda^\varepsilon(\sum_{\nu=1}^q a_{j\nu}\varphi_\nu)$ is estimable on $U$ for smooth test functions $\varphi=(\varphi_1,\cdots,\varphi_q)$ on $U$ with compact support. Let $\psi$ be a linear combination of $\varphi_j$ (for $1\leq j\leq q$) with smooth functions on $U$ as coefficients and which we will specify more precisely later. By the Cauchy-Schwarz inequaltiy, for $1\leq p,\ell\leq q$ the inner product $$\left(\Lambda^\varepsilon\left(\sum_{j=1}^q a_{\ell\,j}\,\varphi_j\right),\,X_p^*\psi\right)$$ is estimable on $U$, because $\vec a_\ell$ is a vector-multiplier for $1\leq\ell\leq q$ and $X_p^*\psi$ is estimable (from the estimability of $X_p^*\varphi$) for $1\leq p\leq q$. Note that the constant of estimability depends on the smooth coefficient functions in the linear combination $\psi$ of $\varphi_1,\cdots,\varphi_q$ which are yet to be specified. Integration by parts applied to $X_p$ (by switching $X_p$ over to $X_p^*$ in the inner product) yields the estimability of $$\left(\Lambda^\varepsilon\left(\sum_{j=1}^q (X_p a_{\ell\,j})\varphi_j\right),\,\psi\right)
+\left(\Lambda^\varepsilon\left(\sum_{j=1}^q a_{\ell\,j}(X_p \varphi_j)\right),\,\psi\right)\leqno{(5.2.1.1)}$$ on $U$ for $1\leq p,\ell\leq q$ after we take care of the error terms from the commutator of pseudodifferential operators in the standard way.
Now we apply $\sum_{\ell=1}^q A_{k\ell}$ to (5.2.1.1) to get the estimability of $$\left(\Lambda^\varepsilon\left(\sum_{\ell,j=1}^qA_{k\ell}(X_p a_{\ell\,j})\varphi_j\right),\,\psi\right)+\left(\Lambda^\varepsilon
\left(\sum_{\ell,j=1}^qA_{k\ell} a_{\ell\,j}(X_p \varphi_j)\right),\,\psi\right)$$ on $U$ for $1\leq k\leq q$, which is the same as $$\left(\Lambda^\varepsilon\left(\sum_{\ell,j=1}^qA_{k\ell}(X_p a_{\ell\,j})\varphi_j\right),\,\psi\right)+\bigg(\Lambda^\varepsilon\left(\alpha(X_p \varphi_k)\right),\,\psi\bigg),\leqno{(5.2.1.2)}$$ because $\sum_{j=1}^q A_{ij}a_{j\ell}=\alpha\delta_{i\ell}$ for $1\leq j,\ell\leq q$.
We apply $\sum_{1\leq p,k\leq q}\Gamma_{pk}$ to (5.2.1.2) to get the estimability of $$\left(\Lambda^\varepsilon\left(\sum_{1\leq p,\ell,j,k\leq q}\Gamma_{pk}A_{k\ell}(X_p a_{\ell\,j})\varphi_j\right),\,\psi\right)+
\left(\Lambda^\varepsilon\left(\alpha\sum_{1\leq p,k\leq q}\Gamma_{pk}(X_p \varphi_k)\right),\,\psi\right)$$ on $U$, which is the same as $$\left(\Lambda^\varepsilon\left(\sum_{1\leq p,\ell,j,k\leq q}\Gamma_{pq}A_{q\ell}(X_p a_{\ell\,j})\varphi_j\right),\,\psi\right)+
\left(\sum_{1\leq p,k\leq q}\Gamma_{pq}(X_p \varphi_q),\,\Lambda^\varepsilon\left(\overline\alpha\,\psi\right)\right)$$ up to estimable error terms from the commutators of pseudodifferential operators.
Since $\bar\alpha$ is a scalar-multiplier at $0$ (on account of $\alpha$ being a scalar multiplier at $0$), from the estimability of $\sum_{1\leq p,k\leq q}\Gamma_{pk}(X_p \varphi_k)$ on $U$ and the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality we conclude that $$\left(\sum_{1\leq p\leq r,1\leq k\leq q}\Gamma_{pk}(X_p\varphi_k),\,\Lambda^\varepsilon\left(\overline\alpha\,\psi\right)\right)$$ is estimable on $U$. Hence $$\left(\Lambda^\varepsilon\left(\sum_{1\leq p\leq r,\,1\leq\ell,j,k\leq q}\Gamma_{pk}A_{k\ell}(X_p a_{\ell\,j})\varphi_j\right),\,\psi\right)$$ is estimable on $U$.
We can now choose $$\psi=\sum_{1\leq p,\ell,j,k\leq q}\Gamma_{pk}A_{k\ell}(X_pa_{\ell\,j})\varphi_j$$ so that $$\left(\Lambda^\varepsilon\left(\sum_{1\leq p\leq r,\,1\leq\ell,j,k\leq q}\Gamma_{pk}A_{k\ell}(X_p a_{\ell\,j})\varphi_j\right),\,\psi\right)$$ is equal to $$\left\|\Lambda^{\frac{\varepsilon}{2}}\sum_{j=1}^q b_j\varphi_j\right\|^2$$ This means that $\vec b$ is a vector multiplier at $0$ whose order of subellipticity is $\geq\frac{\varepsilon}{2}$.
We now look at the two special cases. The special case (i) follows from setting $(A_{jk})_{1\leq j,k\leq q}$ to be the adjoint matrix ${\rm adj}({\mathbf a})$ of the matrix ${\mathbf a}$ and setting $\alpha$ to be $\det({\mathbf a)}$ with $\varepsilon_2=\varepsilon_1$. The special case (ii) follows from setting $A_{jk}$ to be the Kronecker delta $\delta_{jk}$ for $1\leq j,k\leq q$ and setting $a_{jk}$ to be $\alpha\delta_{jk}$ for $1\leq j,k\leq q$ with $\varepsilon_1=\varepsilon_2$ Q.E.D.
(5.3) [*Remark.*]{} Though Theorem (5.2) is presented as involving interior estimates, the same argument works also in boundary situations like the complex Neumann problem where, for the argument, integration by parts is needed only for the boundary tangential directions which do not affect the condition of the test forms to be in the domain of the actual adjoint $\bar\partial^*$ of $\bar\partial$. The special case (ii) of Theorem (5.2), after modification for application to the situation of the complex Neumann problem for special domains, gives a procedure to generate a vector multiplier from a matrix multiplier. In (6.5) below, computations of examples are given to show that this procedure is a new procedure of generating vector multipliers for special domains in ${\mathbb C}^n$ with $n\geq 4$.
(5.4) [*Estimable Linear Combinations and Initial Multipliers.*]{} The goal of the techninque of multiplier ideal sheaves is to use the differential relations among the multipliers and some initial multipliers to conclude, under some geometric conditions, that the function which is identically $1$ is a scalar multiplier. An increase in the differential relations among the multipliers facilitates the achievement of the goal. Theorem (5.2) uses the collection $\left(\Gamma_{k\ell}\right)_{1\leq k,\ell\leq q}$ of smooth functions on $\Omega$ to construct a new vector multiplier from a matrix multiplier. The condition on the collection $\left(\Gamma_{k\ell}\right)_{1\leq k,\ell\leq q}$ of smooth functions on $\Omega$ is that $\sum_{1\leq k,\ell\leq q}\Gamma_{k\ell}X_k\varphi_\ell$ is estimable on $\Omega$. For that reason we refer to the collection $\left(\Gamma_{k\ell}\right)_{1\leq k,\ell\leq q}$ of smooth functions on $\Omega$ an [*estimable linear combination*]{}. To facilitate the construction of new vector multipliers, we can use a family of such estimable linear combinations $\left(\Gamma_{k\ell}^{(\lambda)}\right)_{1\leq k,\ell\leq q}$ indexed by $1\leq\lambda\leq\lambda^*$ instead of a single one. There remains the crucial question of geometric conditions to guarantee solution of the regularity problem. This condition (which is similar to the condition of finite type for the complex Neumann problem) should be a condition on the family of estimable linear combinations $\left(\Gamma_{k\ell}^{(\lambda)}\right)_{1\leq k,\ell\leq q}$ for $1\leq\lambda\leq\lambda^*$ and the choice of initial scalar multipliers $\alpha^{(\sigma)}$ (for $1\leq\sigma\leq\sigma^*$) and initial vector multipliers ${\vec a}^{{}^{(\tau)}}$ (for $1\leq\tau\leq\tau^*$). This question has not yet been satisfactorily answered.
[**§6.**]{} [New Procedure to Generate Vector Multiplier from Matrix Multiplier in Complex Neumann Problem of Special Domain]{}
We now modify the argument in the special case (ii) of Theorem (5.2) to apply to the complex Neumann problem to obtain a new procedure of generating a vector multiplier from a matrix multiplier. This new procedure works for any bounded weakly pseudoconvex domain with smooth boundary, but we will carry out the modification only for a special domain, because the notations for a special domain have already been introduced here to make the argument for a special domain easier to present. Then we show by explicit computation for some special domains in ${\mathbb C}^4$ that this new way of generating a vector multiplier cannot be derived from Kohn’s procedures in (2.1).
(6.1) [*New Procedure to Generate Vector Multiplier from Matrix Multiplier for the Complex Neumann Problem.*]{} Let $\Omega$ be a special domain in ${\mathbb C}^{n+1}$ (with coordinates $w,z_1,\cdots,z_n$) defined by holomorphic functions $F_j(z_1,\cdots,z_n)$ on some open neighborhood of $\bar\Omega$, as described in (2.8.1). For the complex Neumann problem for the special domain $\Omega$ in ${\mathbb C}^{n+1}$, the roles of the vector fields $X_1,\cdots,X_q$ are played by $\partial_j=\frac{\partial}{\partial z_j}$ for $1\leq j\leq n$ and the roles of $X_1^*,\cdots,X_q^*$ are played by $\partial_{\bar j}=\frac{\partial}{\partial\bar z_j}$ for $1\leq j\leq n$ and the role of $\Gamma_{jk}$ for $1\leq j,k\leq q$ is played by the Kronecker delta $\delta_{jk}$ for $1\leq j,k\leq n$. Let ${\mathbf a}=\left(a_{jk}\right)_{1\leq j,k\leq n}$ be a matrix whose entry $a_{jk}$ is a holomorphic function of $z_1,\cdots,z_n$ defined on an open neighborhood of $0$ in ${\mathbb C}^n$ for $1\leq j,k\leq n$ such that each row vector $\vec a_j=(a_{jk})_{1\leq k\leq n}$ is a vector multiplier at $0$ with order of subellipticity $\geq\eta$ (for some $0<\eta\leq 1$). Let $U$ be an open neighborhood of $0$ in ${\mathbb C}^{n+1}$ such that each $a_{jk}$, as a holomorphic function in $z_1,\cdots,z_n,w$ but independent of $w$, is defined on $U$.
Let $\varphi=\sum_{j=1}^n\varphi_{\bar j}d\bar z_j+\hat\varphi d\bar w$ be a smooth test $(1,0)$-form on $\bar\Omega\cap U$ with compact support which is in the domain of the actual adjoint $\bar\partial^*$ of $\bar\partial$. Let $\psi$ be a scalar function which is a linear combination of $\varphi_{\bar j}$ with smooth functions as coefficients and which we will specify more precisely later. Let $0<\varepsilon<\frac{\eta}{2}$. The $L^2$ inner product $$\left(\Lambda^{2\varepsilon}\left(\sum_{j=1}^n a_{\ell\,j}\,\varphi_{\bar j}\right),\,\bar\partial_p\psi\right)$$ is estimable on $U$ by the Cauchy-Schwarz inequaltiy from the assumption that $\vec a_\ell=\sum_{j=1}^n a_{\ell\,j}dz_j$ is a vector-multiplier at $0$ with order of subellipticity $\geq\eta\geq 2\varepsilon$ for $1\leq\ell\leq n$ and the assumption that the $L^2$ norm of $\bar\partial_p\psi$ is estimable on $U$ for $1\leq p\leq n$ (from the estimability of $\bar\partial_p\varphi_{\bar j}$ on $U$ for any $1\leq p,\,j \leq n$). Integration by parts applied to $\bar\partial_p$ yields the estimability of $$\left(\Lambda^{2\varepsilon}\left(\sum_{j=1}^n (\partial_p a_{\ell\,j})\varphi_{\bar j}\right),\,\psi\right)
+\left(\Lambda^{2\varepsilon}\left(\sum_{j=1}^n a_{\ell\,j}(\partial_p \varphi_{\bar j})\right),\,\psi\right)\leqno{(6.1.1)}$$ on $U$ after we take care of the error terms from the commutators of operators in the standard way.
Let $\left(A_{q\ell}\right)_{1\leq q,\ell\leq n}$ be the adjoint matrix of ${\mathbf a}$ so that $\sum_{j=1}^n A_{ij}a_{jk}=(\det{\mathbf a})\delta_{ik}$ for $1\leq i,k\leq n$ (where $\delta_{jk}$ is the Kronecker delta). Now for $1\leq p\leq n$ we apply $\sum_{\ell=1}^n A_{p\ell}$ to (6.1.1) to get the estimability of $$\left(\Lambda^{2\varepsilon}\left(\sum_{\ell,j=1}^nA_{p\ell}(\partial_p a_{\ell\,j})\varphi_{\bar j}\right),\,\psi\right)+\left(\Lambda^{2\varepsilon}
\left(\sum_{\ell,j=1}^n A_{p\ell} a_{\ell\,j}(\partial_p \varphi_{\bar j})\right),\,\psi\right)$$ on $U$, which is the same as $$\left(\Lambda^{2\varepsilon}\left(\sum_{\ell,j=1}^n A_{p\ell}(\partial_p a_{\ell\,j})\varphi_{\bar j}\right),\,\psi\right)+\bigg(\Lambda^{2\varepsilon}\left((\det{\mathbf a})(\partial_p\varphi_{\bar p})\right),\,\psi\bigg),\leqno{(6.1.2)}$$ because $\sum_{j=1}^n A_{ij}a_{jk}=(\det{\mathbf a})\delta_{ik}$ for $1\leq i,k\leq n$.
We now sum (6.1.2) over $1\leq p\leq n$ to get the estimability of $$\left(\Lambda^{2\varepsilon}\left(\sum_{p,\ell,j=1}^n A_{p\ell}(\partial_p a_{\ell\,j})\varphi_{\bar j}\right),\,\psi\right)+\left(\Lambda^{2\varepsilon}\left((\det{\mathbf a})\left(\sum_{p=1}^n\partial_p\varphi_{\bar p}\right)\right),\,\psi\right)$$ on $U$, which is the same as $$\left(\Lambda^{2\varepsilon}\left(\sum_{p,\ell,j=1}^nA_{p\ell}(\partial_p a_{\ell\,j})\varphi_{\bar j}\right),\,\psi\right)+\left(\sum_{p=1}^n\partial_p\varphi_{\bar p},\,\Lambda^{2\varepsilon}\left(\overline{(\det{\mathbf a})}\psi\right)\right).$$ As a determinant whose rows are vector-multipliers with order of subellipticity $\geq\eta\geq 2\varepsilon$, the determinant $\det({\mathbf a})$ (as well as its complex-conjugate) is a scalar-multiplier with order of subellipticity $\geq\eta\geq 2\varepsilon$. The function $\Lambda^{2\varepsilon}\left(\overline{(\det{\mathbf a})}\psi\right)$ is estimable on $U$, because $\psi$ is a linear combination of $\varphi_{\bar j}$ for $1\leq j\leq n$ with smooth functions as coefficients. From the estimability of $\sum_{p=1}^n\partial_p\varphi_{\bar p}$ on $U$ and the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality we conclude that $$\left(\Lambda^{2\varepsilon}\left(\sum_{p,\ell,j=1}^n A_{p\ell}(\partial_p a_{\ell\,j})\varphi_{\bar j}\right),\,\psi\right)$$ is estimable on $U$. We now choose $$\psi=\sum_{p,\ell,j=1}^nA_{p\ell}(\partial_p a_{\ell\,j})\varphi_{\bar j}$$ so that $$\left(\Lambda^{2\varepsilon}\left(\sum_{p,\ell,j=1}^nA_{p\ell}(\partial_p a_{\ell\,j})\varphi_{\bar j}\right),\,\psi\right)_{L^2(\Omega)}$$ is equal to $\left\|\Lambda^\varepsilon\psi\right\|^2_{L^2(\Omega)}$. This means that the $(1,0)$-form $$\sum_{j=1}^n\left(\sum_{1\leq p,\ell\leq n}A_{p\ell}(\partial_p a_{\ell\,j})\right)dz_j$$ is a vector-multiplier with order of subellitpicity $\geq\frac{\eta}{2}$.. This is a new process of producing vector-multipliers from a matrix of vector-multipliers. We now summarize the result in the following theorem.
(6.2) [*Theorem.*]{} Let $\Omega$ be a special domain in ${\mathbb C}^{n+1}$ (with coordinates $w,z_1,\cdots,z_n$) defined by (2.8.1.1). Assume that $0$ is a boundary point of $\Omega$. Let ${\mathbf a}=\left(a_{jk}\right)_{1\leq j,k\leq n}$ be a matrix whose entry $a_{jk}$ is a holomorphic function of $z_1,\cdots,z_n$ defined on an open neighborhood of $0$ in ${\mathbb C}^n$ for $1\leq j,k\leq n$ such that each row vector $\vec a_j=(a_{jk})_{1\leq k\leq n}$ is a vector multiplier at $0$ with order of subellipticity $\geq\eta$ (for some $0<\eta\leq 1$). Let ${\rm adj}({\mathbf a})$ be the adjoint matrix of ${\mathbf a}$. Then the holomorphic $(1,0)$-form $$\sum_{j=1}^n\left(\sum_{1\leq p,\ell\leq n}\left({\rm adj}({\mathbf a})\right)_{p\ell}(\partial_p a_{\ell\,j})\right)dz_j\leqno{(6.2.1)}$$ is a vector multiplier at $0$ with order of subellipticity $\geq\frac{\eta}{2}$, where $\left({\rm adj}({\mathbf a})\right)_{p\ell}$ is the entry of ${\rm adj}({\mathbf a})$ in the $p$-th row and the $\ell$-th column.
(6.3) [*Comparison with Known Procedure of Generating Vector Multiplier from Matrix Multiplier.*]{} In the case of a special domain, the known procedure (B)(i)(ii) in (2.1) to generate a vector multiplier from a given matrix multiplier ${\mathbf a}$ is to first use (B)(ii) in (2.1) to get the determinant $\det({\mathbf a})$ of ${\mathbf a}$ as a scalar multiplier and then use (B)(i) in (2.1) to get the $(1,0)$-form $\partial(\det({\mathbf a}))$ as a vector multiplier. Here we use the same notations as in (6.2).
We would like to compare $\partial(\det({\mathbf a}))$ with the vector multiplier from Theorem (6.2). Since $\sum_{j=1}^n\left({\rm adj}({\mathbf a})\right)_{kj}a_{jk}=\det({\mathbf a})$ for any $1\leq k\leq n$, we have $$\partial(\det{\mathbf a})=\sum_{j=1}^n(\partial\left({\rm adj}({\mathbf a})\right)_{kj})a_{jk}+\sum_{j=1}^n\left({\rm adj}({\mathbf a})\right)_{kj}(\partial a_{jk})\leqno{(6.3.1)}$$ which is different from the vector multiplier (6.2.1) where the index $j$ of $a_{\ell\,j}$ is used as the index for the component of the vector multiplier instead of the subscript $j$ of $\partial_j$ which is the index for the component of the vector multiplier (6.3.1).
As shown in the computations given below in (6.4) and (6.5), it turns out that in the case of $n=2$ the old procedure (B)(i)(ii) in (2.1) produces the same result as the new procedure given in Theorem (6.2), but in the case of $n\geq 3$ the new procedure indeed gives some new vector multipliers different from those produced by the procedures B(i)(ii).
(6.4) [*New Procedure Gives No New Vector Multipliers for $3$-Dimensional Special Domain.*]{} We explicitly compute (6.2.1) and (6.3.1) in the case of a special domain $\Omega$ in ${\mathbb C}^3$ to determine whether the result (6.2.1) from the new procedure is different from the result (6.3.1) from the old procedure. We need only consider holomorphic functions and holomorphic $1$-forms on ${\mathbb C}^2$ as scalar and vector multipliers. Let $a_{j1}dz_1+a_{j2}dz_2$ as two holomorphic $1$-forms which are vector multipliers. For the matrix multiplier ${\mathbf a}=\left(a_{jk}\right)_{1\leq j,k\leq 2}$, the adjoint matrix ${\rm adj}({\mathbf a})$ is $$\left(A_{jk}\right)_{1\leq j,k\leq 2}=\left(\begin{matrix}a_{22}&-a_{12}\cr -a_{21}& a_{11}\end{matrix}\right).$$ The vector multiplier generated by the new procedure is $b_1dz_1+b_2dz_2$ with $$\begin{aligned}b_j&=A_{11}\partial_1 a_{1j}+A_{12}\partial_1 a_{2j}+A_{21}\partial_2 a_{1j}+A_{22}\partial_2 a_{2j}\cr
&=a_{22}\partial_1 a_{1j}-a_{12}\partial_1 a_{2j}-a_{21}\partial_2 a_{1j}+a_{11}\partial_2 a_{2j}.\cr
\end{aligned}$$ On the other hand, $$\partial_j(\det{\mathbf a})=a_{11}\partial_j a_{22}+a_{22}\partial_j a_{11}-a_{12}\partial_j a_{21}-a_{21}\partial_j a_{12}$$ so that the difference of their dot products with a test $(0,1)$-form $\varphi$ is $$\begin{aligned}&(b_1dz_1+b_2dz_2)\cdot\varphi-(\partial(\det{\mathbf a}))\cdot\varphi\cr
&=\Big(a_{22}(\partial_1 a_{11})\varphi_{\bar 1}-a_{12}(\partial_1 a_{21})\varphi_{\bar 1}-a_{21}(\partial_2 a_{11})\varphi_{\bar 1}+a_{11}(\partial_2 a_{21})\varphi_{\bar 1}\cr
&+a_{22}(\partial_1 a_{12})\varphi_{\bar 2}-a_{12}(\partial_1 a_{22})\varphi_{\bar 2}-a_{21}(\partial_2 a_{12})\varphi_{\bar 2}+a_{11}(\partial_2 a_{22})\varphi_{\bar 2}\Big)\cr
&-\Big(a_{11}(\partial_1a_{22})\varphi_{\bar 1}+a_{22}(\partial_1 a_{11})\varphi_{\bar 1}-a_{12}(\partial_1 a_{21})\varphi_{\bar 1}-a_{21}(\partial_1 a_{12})\varphi_{\bar 1}\cr
&+a_{11}(\partial_2a_{22})\varphi_{\bar 2}+a_{22}(\partial_2 a_{11})\varphi_{\bar 2}-a_{12}(\partial_2 a_{21})\varphi_{\bar 2}-a_{21}(\partial_2 a_{12})\varphi_{\bar 2}\Big)\cr
&=(\partial_2a_{21}-\partial_1a_{12})(a_{11}\varphi_{\bar 1}+a_{12}\varphi_{\bar 2})+(\partial_1a_{12}-\partial_2a_{21})(a_{21}\varphi_{\bar 1}+a_{22})\varphi_{\bar 2}\cr
\end{aligned}$$ with the cancellation of the four pairs of terms ((1,1),(3,2)), ((1,2),(3,3)), ((2,3),(4,4)), ((2,4),(4,1)) where $(j,k)$ refers to the term on the $j$-th row in the $k$-th position in the array of terms in four rows of four terms each. The difference is a linear combination of $a_{j1}\varphi_{\bar 1}+a_{j2}\varphi_{\bar 2}$ for $j=1,2$ with smooth coefficients and is known to be estimable, because $a_{j1}dz_1+a_{j2}dz_2$ is a vector multiplier for $j=1,2$. It means that in the case of a special domain in ${\mathbb C}^3$ the new procedure does not give any new multipliers.
(6.5) [*New Procedure Gives More Vector Multipliers for $4$-Dimensional Special Domain.*]{} The new procedure of generating vector multipliers already gives vector multiplies different from those generated by the procedure B(i)(ii) in (2.1) in the case of special domain in ${\mathbb C}^4$, as shown in the following computation. Consider the upper triangular matrix $${\mathbf a}=\left(\begin{matrix}a_{11}&\xi&0\cr
0&a_{22}&\eta\cr
0&0&a_{33}\cr\end{matrix}\right)$$ whose three row vectors are vector multipliers which are holomorphic in the variables $z_1,z_2,z_3$. Its adjoint matrix ${\rm adj}({\mathbf a})$, as the inverse of ${\mathbf a}$ times its determinant, is $$\left(A_{jk}\right)_{1\leq j,k\leq 3}=\left(\begin{matrix}a_{22}a_{33}&-a_{33}\xi&\xi\eta\cr
0&a_{11}a_{33}&-a_{11}\eta\cr
0&0&a_{11}a_{22}\cr\end{matrix}\right).$$ We now compare the vector multiplier $\partial(\det\,{\mathbf a})$ with the vector multiplier $\sum_{j=1}^3 b_jdz_j$ generated by the new procedure by taking the difference of their dot products with a test function $\varphi=\sum_{j=1}^3\varphi_{\bar j}d\bar z_j+\hat\varphi dw$ to get $$\begin{aligned}&\left(\sum_{j=1}^3 b_jdz_j\right)\cdot\varphi-\partial(\det\,{\mathbf a})\cdot\varphi\cr
&=\sum_{1\leq j<k\leq 3}A_{jk}(\partial_\nu a_{jk})\varphi_{\bar\nu}\cr
&=\sum_{\nu=1}^3\left(-a_{33}\xi\partial_\nu\xi-a_{11}\eta\partial_\nu\eta\right)\varphi_{\bar\nu}\cr
&=-\frac{1}{2}\sum_{\nu=1}^3\left(a_{33}\partial_\nu(\xi^2)-a_{11}\partial_\nu(\eta^2)\right)\varphi_{\bar\nu}.\cr
\end{aligned}$$ The assumption that ${\mathbf a}$ is a matrix multiplier gives us only the estimability of $$a_{11}\varphi_{\bar 1}+\xi\varphi_{\bar 2},\quad a_{22}\varphi_{\bar 2}+\eta\varphi_{\bar 3},\quad a_{33}\varphi_{\bar 3},$$ from which we cannot conclude the estimability of $$-\frac{1}{2}\sum_{\nu=1}^3\left(a_{33}\partial_\nu(\xi^2)-a_{11}\partial_\nu(\eta^2)\right)\varphi_{\bar\nu}$$ for arbitrary functions $\xi$ and $\eta$, because even in the special case of $\varphi_{\bar 1}=\varphi_{\bar 2}=0$, the estimability of $$-\frac{1}{2}\sum_{\nu=1}^3\left(a_{33}\partial_\nu(\xi^2)-a_{11}\partial_\nu(\eta^2)\right)\varphi_{\bar\nu}$$ would mean the estimability of $a_{11}\partial_3(\eta^2)\varphi_{\bar 3}$ for arbitrary $a_{11}$ and $\eta$, which cannot be derived from the estimability of $a_{33}\varphi_{\bar 3}$. This shows that the new procedure gives more vector multipliers.
[References]{}
\[Catlin-D’Angelo2010\] David Catlin and John P. D’Angelo, Subelliptic estimates. In: [*Several Complex Variables and Connections with PDE Theory and Geometry (Proc. 2008 Fridbourg Conference for Linda Rothschild)*]{}. ed. Ebenfelt [*et al*]{}. Trends in Mathematics. Birkhäuser/Springer Basel AG, Basel, 2010, pp.75 – 94.
\[D’Angelo1979\] John P. D’Angelo, Finite type conditions for real hypersurfaces. [*J. Differential Geom.*]{} **14** (1979), 59 – 66.
\[D’Angelo1982\] John P. D’Angelo, Real hypersurfaces, orders of contact, and applications. [*Ann. of Math.*]{} **115** (1982), 615 –- 637.
\[Diederich-Fornaess1978\] Klas Diederich and John-Erik Fornaess, Pseudoconvex domains with real-analytic boundary. [*Ann. of Math.*]{} **107** (1978), 371 – 384.
\[Donaldson1985\] Simon Donaldson, Anti self-dual Yang-Mills connections over complex algebraic surfaces and stable vector bundles. [*Proc. London Math. Soc.*]{} **50** (1985), 1 –- 26.
\[Hörmander1967\] Lars Hörmander, Hypoelliptic second order differential equations. [*Acta Math.*]{} **119** (1967), 147 –- 171.
\[Kohn1972\] Joseph J. Kohn, Boundary behavior of $\bar\partial$ on weakly pseudo-convex manifolds of dimension two. Collection of articles dedicated to S. S. Chern and D. C. Spencer on their sixtieth birthdays. [*J. Differential Geometry*]{} **6** (1972), 523 –- 542.
\[Kohn1977\] Joseph J. Kohn, Sufficient conditions for subellipticity on weakly pseudo-convex domains. [*Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.*]{} **74** (1977), 2214 –- 2216.
\[Kohn1979\] Joseph J. Kohn, Subellipticity of the $\bar \partial $-Neumann problem on pseudo-convex domains: sufficient conditions. [*Acta Math.*]{} **142** (1979), 79 – 122.
\[Kohn-Nirenberg1965\] Joseph J. Kohn and Louis Nirenberg, Non-coercive boundary value problems. [*Comm. Pure Appl. Math.*]{} **18** (1965), 443 –- 492.
\[Nadel1990\] Alan Michael Nadel, Multiplier ideal sheaves and Kähler-Einstein metrics of positive scalar curvature. [*Ann. of Math.*]{} **132** (1990), 549 –- 596.
\[Siu2010\] Yum-Tong Siu, Effective Termination of Kohn’s Algorithm for Subelliptic Multipliers, [*Pure and Applied Mathematics Quarterly*]{} **6** (2010) (Special Issue in honor of Joseph J. Kohn), 1169 – 1241. (arXiv:0706.4113)
\[Skoda1972\] Henri Skoda, Application des techniques $L^2$ à la théorie des idéaux d’une algèbre de fonctions holomorphes avec poids. [*Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup.*]{} **5** (1972), 545 – 579.
[*Author’s address:*]{} Department of Mathematics, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02238, U.S.A.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
A system of two immiscible fluids at rest will gradually phase-separate, forming domains whose size grows algebraically with time. Everyday experience, however, shows that by continuously stirring or shaking the fluids the domains or droplets of the phases (say, oil and vinegar) break and coalesce, leading to a dynamic stationary state with domains of finite size.
A first approach consists in modelling this situation by subjecting the binary fluid to a homogeneous shear velocity field [@onuki]. However, experiments [@bands], numerical simulations [@cogola], and more recently analytical approaches [@Cavagna] show that in such a situation infinitely long domains aligned with the flow are formed. The effect of the velocity field is to counter the Rayleigh instability, stabilising [*lamellar*]{} and (in certain cases) even cylindrical domains [@amalie; @foot]. Domain breakup in those situations takes place only at large Reynolds numbers, and is generally attributed to inertial effects [@onuki; @Julia]. Studying these inertial effects numerically is difficult, as a realistic description of the feedback of domain shape on the flow is required [@Julia]. The corresponding simulations are therefore limited by finite size effects.
In this paper we investigate a different mechanism by which domains of finite size can be stabilized in a demixing system. In particular, we show that a saturation of the average length scale takes place even in the absence of inertial effects if the flow has [*Lagrangian chaos*]{}, ([*i.e.*]{} if the trajectories of nearby starting points diverge exponentially with time). This is interesting for two reasons: First, with an appropriate time-dependence of the velocity field one can still have Lagrangian chaos in a situation of high viscosity in which inertial effects are negligible — this is how one mixes pastes. Secondly, it is possible in that case to decouple the hydrodynamic problem from the phase separation. This problem of a [*passive, phase separating scalar field* ]{} is of course much simpler, so that simulations using large systems are possible. Our approach therefore extends earlier extensive studies of [*passive scalar*]{} advection by periodically driven chaotic flows [@ottino].
Our study is also related in spirit to earlier studies of advection by ‘synthetic’ velocity fields tuned to model turbulent flows [@siggia; @babiano]. Phase separation was studied in this context in Ref. [@esp]. An essential difference, compared to our work, is that in such turbulent flows the separation between nearby tracer particles appears to increase algebraically, rather than exponentially, with time.
We consider a two dimensional flow that can be tuned to be regular, mixed, or fully chaotic. Specifically, the incompressible velocity field $\boldsymbol{v}(x,y,t)$ is a modified version of the so-called time-dependent Harper map [@Zas] (related to the ‘partitioned-pipe mixer’, a special case of ‘eggbeater flow’ [@ottino]). The dynamics takes place on a square of side $L$, with periodic boundary conditions. The velocity field is an alternating sequence of shears in the $x$ and in the $y$ direction with a time period $T$, $$\begin{aligned}
v_x & = -\frac{2\pi \alpha L}{T} \sin \left(\frac{2\pi y}{L}\right); \;
v_y = 0 ; & \quad
& n < \frac{t}{T} < n+\frac{1}{2} \\
v_y & =
\frac{2 \pi \alpha L}{T} \sin \left( \frac{2 \pi x}{L} \right); \;
v_x = 0; &
n + & \frac{1}{2} < \frac{t}{T} < n+1.
\label{dos}
\end{aligned}$$ The parameter $\alpha$ controls the chaoticity of the trajectories. If $\alpha$ is small, the two semicycles are composed into the smooth, laminar velocity field: $
v_x= -\frac{\pi \alpha L}{T} \sin \left(\frac{2\pi y}{L}\right)
$; $v_y =
\frac{\pi \alpha L}{T} \sin \left(\frac{2\pi x}{L}\right)$. For larger values of $\alpha$ the trajectories stretch and fold, and the flow becomes chaotic. In order to visualise this, it is convenient to follow the position of a point at the end of each cycle. This ‘kicked Harper’ map is shown in Fig. \[field\] for several values of $\alpha$. For $\alpha \sim 0.2$ the flow is a mixture of laminar and chaotic regions, and becomes fully chaotic around $\alpha \sim 0.4$. In the chaotic situation, it is convenient to characterise the flow by the Lyapunov exponent $\lambda$, defined by the fact that nearby starting points separate as $\sim e^{\lambda t}$. We have computed $\lambda$ as in Ref. [@babiano] and found that the relation $\lambda \simeq 1.96 \ln (3.35 \alpha)/T$ is a good approximation throughout the chaotic regime, $\alpha \gtrsim 0.4$.
-- --
-- --
The spinodal decomposition of the two-component fluid is described by the Cahn-Hilliard equation $$\frac{\partial \phi(\boldsymbol{r},t)}{\partial t} +
\boldsymbol{v}(\boldsymbol{r},t)
\cdot
\boldsymbol{\nabla} \phi(\boldsymbol{r},t) = \Gamma \nabla^2 \left( \frac
{\delta F[\phi]}{\delta \phi
(\boldsymbol{r},t)} \right) .
\label{cahn}$$ Here $\phi$ is a dimensionless concentration field, the concentrations of the species are $[1 \pm \phi]/2$. We work at $T=0$, since temperature is irrelevant in this process [@alan1]. The free energy functional is of the Ginzburg-Landau form and reads $$F [\phi] = \int {{\mathrm d}}^d \boldsymbol{x} \left[ \frac{\xi^2}{2}
(\boldsymbol{\nabla} \phi)^2 - \frac{1}{2}
\phi^2 + \frac{1}{4} \phi^4 \right].$$ Here, $\xi$ is the equilibrium correlation length controlling the width of the interfaces, and $d$ is the number of spatial dimensions. We consider two topologically different situations ([*i*]{}) $\langle \phi \rangle \neq 0$ : a species is less abundant than the other and forms disconnected droplets, and ([*ii*]{}) $\langle \phi \rangle = 0$: the two phases are in equal quantity and form a bicontinuous structure. Situation[*(i)*]{} has been studied experimentally [@muzio].
In a chaotic flow, the passive scalar mixes rapidly, whereas in the case of phase separation this tendency is opposed by surface tension. The competition between these two effects can be quantified through two adimensional parameters, $D \equiv \Gamma T/ \xi^2$ (the adimensional transport coefficient of the Cahn-Hilliard equation) and the chaoticity parameter $\alpha$, or alternatively the adimensional Lyapounov exponent $\lambda T$. A large $D$ means that appreciable diffusive transport will take place during each laminar half cycle. A large $\lambda T$, on the other hand, means that the mixing process is efficient within a few cycles. Note that $\lambda$ can also be interpreted as an average elongation or shear rate experienced by the fluid particles.
Equation (\[cahn\]) is integrated numerically with the velocity field (\[dos\]), using the implicit spectral method developed and discussed in Ref. [@BBK]. The results are presented with time and length units chosen as the cycle period $T$ and the interfacial thickness $\xi$, respectively. The system size, lattice parameter and time step are $L=512\xi$, $\Delta x = \xi$, and $\Delta t = 5 \cdot 10^{-4}T$ respectively.
-- --
-- --
[*Existence of a stationary state. —*]{} We first show that a purely chaotic flow does indeed stop the domain growth. In Fig. \[secasse\], we show the evolution of a phase-separated sample with $\langle \phi \rangle =1/2$, upon turning on a chaotic velocity field ($\alpha=0.4$). The large droplets of the initial configuration are broken into smaller droplets, until a stationary state where droplets successively grow and break is reached. Fig. \[alphas\] shows the late stages of coarsening of a system with equal concentrations of phases ($\langle \phi \rangle=0$) in the four velocity fields of Fig. \[field\]. For $\alpha=0.1$, the velocity field is laminar. We observe in that case structures very similar to those found in a homogeneous shear flow, but which now follow the winding flow lines. In the mixed case, $\alpha=0.25$, large-domain structures form in the laminar regions of the flow, and break into very small domains in the chaotic ones. In the fully chaotic situation, $\alpha \gtrsim 0.4$, a dynamical stationary state is reached, with small domains continuously breaking and reforming. For $\alpha =1.0$, the sinusoidal nature of the underlying velocity field becomes apparent. This snapshot nicely illustrates the typical ‘stretch and fold’ processes characteristic of chaotic advection [@ottino].
-- --
-- --
[*Scaling properties in the chaotic flow. —*]{} In the stationary regime, it is clear from Figs. \[secasse\] and \[alphas\] that there exist a typical length scale $L^\star$ which depends on the parameters $D$ and $\lambda$: this will be confirmed below by a quantitative analysis. As in the pure coarsening case [@alan1], scaling properties are expected in the regime $\xi \ll L^\star(D,\lambda) \ll L$. The length scale $L^\star$ may be estimated by the following simple argument. In the absence of flow, the domains grow as $L(t) / \xi \simeq ( D t/T)^{1/3}$, and this growth is stopped by the chaotic flow which introduces a time scale $\lambda^{-1}$. Hence, we estimate $L^\star \simeq L(t = \lambda^{-1})$ and predict $$L^\star(D,\lambda)
\simeq \xi \left( \frac{D}{\lambda T} \right)^{1/3}.
\label{typical}$$
[*Isolated droplets, $\langle \phi \rangle \neq 0$. —*]{} Following Ref. [@muzio], we characterize the assembly of droplets by computing the distribution of droplet surfaces $f(S)$, where $f(S){{\mathrm d}}S$ is the probability that the surface occupied by a droplet is between $S$ and $S+{{\mathrm d}}S$. In the scaling regime, we expect this distribution to be of the form $$f(S) \simeq \frac{1}{S^\star} {\cal F} \left( \frac{S}{S^\star} \right),
\label{scale}$$ where $S^\star$ is a typical droplet area. In Fig. \[gouttes\], data obtained for a wide range for the values of $D$ and $\lambda$ are collapsed by using a reduced variable $S/S^\star$, with $S^\star \simeq (D/\lambda)^{0.62}$. The data collapse is satisfactory, and the result for $S^\star$ reasonably close to what would be expected from Eq. (\[typical\]), [*i.e.*]{} $S^\star \simeq (D/\lambda)^{2/3}$. Finding an exponent slightly smaller than the one expected theoretically is not surprising, since the typical domain sizes are rather small ($S^\star \lesssim 50 \xi^2$), so that the asymptotic value for the domain growth exponent in the absence of flow may not be reached. The rescaled distribution functions exhibit an exponential tail, ${\cal F}(y) \sim e^{-y}$ (dotted-dashed line in Fig. \[gouttes\]). Such distributions are very is similar to those found in the experiments of Ref. [@muzio]. For the largest droplets, deviations from the exponential fit are observed, indicating either insufficient statistics or a different scaling behaviour for the extreme values of $S$ .
[*Equal concentrations: $ \langle \phi \rangle = 0$. —*]{} In the case of equal concentrations, the domains are ramified and extend throughout the sample, so that the area is not a useful measure of domain size. A characteristic domain size can nevertheless be obtained from the two-point correlation function $
C(\boldsymbol{r},t) \equiv L^{-2}
\int {{\mathrm d}}^2 \boldsymbol{x} \langle \phi(\boldsymbol{x},t)
\phi(\boldsymbol{x+r},t) \rangle$, which is the Fourier transform of the structure factor measured in light scattering experiments. Performing a time average over many configurations shows that the bicontinuous structure is on average perfectly isotropic, as it is in the absence of flow. One can therefore average $C(\boldsymbol{r},t)$ over orientations to obtain a one variable function, $C(r)$. The characteristic domain size $L^\star$ can be defined by $C(L^\star)=0.5$. Fig. \[lstar\] displays this domain size for various combinations of $D$ and $\lambda$, as a function of the ratio $D/\lambda$. The data can be fitted by $L^\star
\simeq \xi \left( D /\lambda T \right)^{0.27}$ Again, this is in reasonable agreement with the scaling analysis, Eq. (\[typical\]). Larger simulations, with smaller values of $\lambda$, would be necessary to obtain larger domain sizes and avoid the crossover effects which are well known in spinodal decomposition simulations [@alan1].
A more detailed information on the domain structure is obtained from the full correlation function $C(r)$. Here, one could expect from the scaling hypothesis a behaviour of the form $$C(r) \simeq {\cal C} \left(\frac{r}{L^\star}\right)
\label{scal}$$ with ${\cal C}$ a universal function. This hypothesis is tested in Fig. \[D\], where $C(r)$ is represented for fixed $\lambda$ and various values of $D$. At fixed $\lambda$, a good collapse of the data obtained for different $D$ is achieved by using a rescaled variable $r/D^{0.27} $. The inset of Fig. \[D\], however, shows that the shape of the scaling function slightly depends on $\lambda$, so that the universal scaling expressed by Eq. (\[scal\]) is not valid. We attribute this change of the scaling function with the flow pattern to the fact that even in the chaotic regime the flow cannot be considered as being homogeneous and isotropic, but exhibits an underlying sinusoidal structure. This is in contrast with the case of isolated droplets where the droplet distribution was not affected by this structure, recall Fig. \[gouttes\].
We have studied the phase separation in conditions in which the species boundaries are passively advected by a incompressible flow. We have shown that a chaotic flow results in a steady state with domains of finite size resulting from the balance between spinodal decomposition and chaotic advection, Eq. (\[typical\]). This should be contrasted with the situation observed in turbulent flow, where the flow intensity must exceed a threshold in order to stop domain growth [@esp]. Such a difference can be traced back to the fact that Lyapounov exponents for passive scalar advection are actually 0 in the latter case. The essential approximation in our work, compared to realistic experimental situations, is the assumption that the flow pattern is not modified by the domain growth. This assumption, however, may not be unrealistic if the two fluids have similar viscosities and if the capillary stresses are small compared to viscous stresses. This is measured by the capillary number $C_a= \eta \lambda / (\gamma/L^\star)$, where $\eta$ is the viscosity and $\gamma$ the surface tension. In highly viscous fluids, $C_a$ is expected to be large, so that the decoupling is possible. This decoupling also makes it possible to consider analytical treatments.
We acknowledge useful discussions with A. J. Bray, B. Cabane, P. Leboeuf, J. F. Pinton and J. E. Wesfreid.
A. Onuki, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter [**9**]{}, 6119 (1997).
T. Hashimoto, K. Matsuzaka, E. Moses and A. Onuki, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**74**]{}, 126 (1995).
F. Corberi, G. Gonnella and A. Lamura, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**81**]{}, 3852 (1998); L. Berthier, preprint cond-mat/0011314.
A. Cavagna, A. J. Bray and R. D. M. Travasso, Phys. Rev. E [**62**]{}, 4702 (2000).
A. Frischknecht, Phys. Rev. E [**56**]{}, 6970 (1997), Phys. Rev. E [**58**]{}, 3495 (1998).
Droplet formation in three dimensions at high dilution may happen at times long enough to destabilize cilindrical domains, but too short to form lamellar domains.
A. J. Wagner, J. M. Yeomans, Phys. Rev. [**E 59**]{}, 4366 (1999); M. E. Cates, V. M. Kendon, P. Bladon and J.-C. Desplat, Faraday Discuss. [**112**]{}, 1 (1999).
J. M. Ottino, Annu. Rev. Fluid. Mech. [**22**]{}, 207 (1990); J. M. Ottino [*et al.*]{}, Nature [**333**]{}, 419 (1988); H. Aref, J. Fluid. Mech. [**143**]{}, 1 (1984); J. M. Ottino [*et al.*]{}, Science [**257**]{}, 754 (1992).
M. Holzer and E. Siggia, Phys. Fluids [**6**]{}, 1820 (1994).
A. Babiano, G. Boffetta, A. Provenzale and A. Vulpiani, Phys. Fluids [**6**]{}, 2465 (1994).
A. M. Lacasta, J. M. Sancho and F. Sagués, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**75**]{}, 1791 (1995).
V.N. Govorukin, A. Morgulis, V. I. Yudovich and G. M. Zaslavsky, Phys. Rev. E [**60**]{}, 2788 (1999) and Refs. therein.
A. J. Bray, Adv. Phys. [**43**]{}, 357 (1994).
F. J. Muzio, M. Tjahjadi and J. M. Ottino, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**67**]{}, 54 (1991).
L. Berthier, J.-L. Barrat and J. Kurchan, Eur. Phys. J. B [**11**]{}, 635 (1999).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'A Banach space is $c_0$-saturated if all of its closed infinite dimensional subspaces contain an isomorph of $c_0$. In this article, we study the stability of this property under the formation of direct sums and tensor products. Some of the results are: (1) a slightly more general version of the fact that $c_0$-sums of $c_0$-saturated spaces are $c_0$-saturated; (2) $C(K,E)$ is $c_0$-saturated if both $C(K)$ and $E$ are; (3) the tensor product $JH\tilde{\otimes}_\epsilon JH$ is $c_0$-saturated, where $JH$ is the James Hagler space.'
---
\[thm\][Lemma]{} \[thm\][Corollary]{} \[thm\][Proposition]{} \[thm\][Example]{}
[**Some stability properties\
of $c_0$-saturated spaces**]{}\
[Denny H. Leung]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\
1991 [*Mathematics Subject Classification*]{} 46B20, 46B28.
Let $E$ be a Banach space. Following Rosenthal [@R], we say that a Banach space $F$ is $E$-saturated if every infinite dimensional closed subspace of $F$ contains an isomorphic copy of $E$. In this article, we will be concerned with the stability properties of ${c_0}$-saturated spaces under the formation of direct sums and tensor products. In §1, we prove a result which implies that ${c_0}$-sums of ${c_0}$-saturated spaces are ${c_0}$-saturated. In §2, it is shown that the tensor product $E {\tilde{\otimes}_\epsilon}F$ is ${c_0}$-saturated if $E$ is isomorphically polyhedral (see §2 for the definition) and $F$ is ${c_0}$-saturated. As a corollary, we obtain that $C(K,E)$ is ${c_0}$-saturated if and only if both $C(K)$ and $E$ are. Finally, in §3, we show that $JH {\tilde{\otimes}_\epsilon}JH$ is ${c_0}$-saturated, where $JH$ denotes the James Hagler space [@H].
Standard Banach space terminology, as may be found in [@LT], is employed. The (closed) unit ball of a Banach space $E$ is denoted by $U_E$. The space ${c_{00}}$ consists of all finitely non-zero real sequences. If $(x_n)$ and $(y_n)$ are sequences residing in possibly different Banach spaces, we say that $(x_n)$ [*dominates*]{} $(y_n)$ if there is a constant $K < \infty$ such that $\|\sum a_ny_n\| \leq
K\|\sum a_nx_n\|$ for all $(a_n) \in {c_{00}}$. Two sequences which dominate each other are said to be [*equivalent*]{}. A sequence $(x_n)$ in a Banach space is [*semi-normalized*]{} if $0 <
\inf\|x_n\| \leq \sup\|x_n\| < \infty$. If $A$ is an arbitrary set, $|A|$ denotes the cardinality of $A$. For an infinite set $A$, ${{\cal P}_\infty}(A)$ is the set of all infinite subsets of $A$.
Direct sums of ${c_0}$-saturated spaces
=======================================
In [@R], it is stated without proof that ${c_0}$-sums of ${c_0}$-saturated spaces are ${c_0}$-saturated. In this section, we prove a result which includes this as a special case. Let $(E_n)$ be a sequence of Banach spaces, and let $F$ be a Banach space with a basis $(e_n)$. The $F$-sum of the spaces $E_n$ is the Banach space $(\oplus
E_n)_F$ of all sequences $(x(n))$ such that $x(n) \in E_n$ for all $n$, and $\sum\|x(n)\|e_n$ converges in $F$, endowed with the norm $$\|(x(n))\| = \|\sum\|x(n)\|e_n\|.$$ For convenience, we will say that a Banach space is $p$-saturated if it is $\ell^p$-saturated ($1 \leq p < \infty$) or ${c_0}$-saturated ($p
= \infty$).
\[EF\] Let $E, F$ be $p$-saturated Banach spaces for some $1 \leq p \leq
\infty$, then $E\oplus F$ is $p$-saturated.
It suffices to show that every normalized basic sequence in $E\oplus F$ has a block basis equivalent to the $\ell^p$-basis ($c_0$-basis if $p = \infty$). Let $(x_n\oplus y_n)$ be a normalized basic sequence in $E\oplus F$. If $p = 1$, and $(x_n\oplus y_n)$ has a $\ell^1$-subsequence, then we are done. Otherwise, by Rosenthal’s Theorem [@Ro], we may assume that $(x_n\oplus y_n)$ is weakly Cauchy. If $p \neq 1$, using again Rosenthal’s Theorem, we may assume that both $(x_n)$ and $(y_n)$ are weakly Cauchy. In both cases, by replacing the sequence $(x_n\oplus y_n)$ with $(x_{2n-1}-x_{2n}\oplus y_{2n-1}-y_{2n})$ if necessary, we may even assume that both $(x_n)$ and $(y_n)$ are weakly null. If $\|y_n\| \to 0$, then a subsequence of $(x_n\oplus y_n)$ is equivalent to a subsequence of $(x_n\oplus 0)$. But then the latter is a basic sequence in $E$, and hence has a block basis equivalent to the $\ell^p$-basis. Therefore, $(x_n\oplus y_n)$ has a $\ell^p$-block basis as well. A similar argument holds if $\|x_n\| \to 0$. Otherwise, we may take both $(x_n)$ and $(y_n)$ to be semi-normalized weakly null sequences. By using a subsequence, it may be assumed that both are basic sequences. Then $(x_n)$ has a $\ell^p$-block basis $(u_k) = (\sum^{n_{k+1}}_{j=n_k+1}a_jx_j)$. Let $(v_k) =
(\sum^{n_{k+1}}_{j=n_k+1}a_jy_j)$ be the corresponding block basis of $(y_n)$. If $\|v_k\| \to 0$, then we apply the same argument as above. If $\|v_k\| \to \infty$, then $$\left(\frac{u_k}{\|v_k\|}\oplus\frac{v_k}{\|v_k\|}\right)$$ is a semi-normalized block basis of $(x_n\oplus y_n)$. Since $\|u_k\|/\|v_k\| \to 0$, we may apply the argument above yet again to conclude the proof. Finally, then, we may assume that $(v_k)$ is semi-normalized. Then $(v_k)$ has a $\ell^p$-block basis $(t_k)$. Let $(s_k)$ be the corresponding block basis of $(u_k)$ formed by using the same coefficients. Arguing as before, we may assume that $(s_k)$ is semi-normalized. But since $(u_k)$ is a $\ell^p$-sequence, so is $(s_k)$. Therefore, $(s_k\oplus t_k)$ is a $\ell^p$-block basis of $(u_k\oplus
v_k)$, and hence of $(x_n\oplus y_n)$.
Let $(E_n)$ be a sequence of $p$-saturated Banach spaces, and let $F$ be a $p$-saturated Banach space with a basis. Then $E = (\oplus E_n)_F$ is $p$-saturated.
For each $x \in E$, write $x = (x(n))$, where $x(n) \in E_n$ for all $n$. Let $(x_k)$ be a normalized basic sequence in $E$. For each $m
\in {\mbox{\hskip.1em N \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}$, let $P_m$ be the projection on $E$ defined by $P_mx = y$, where $y(n) = x(n)$ if $n
\leq m$, and $y(n) = 0$ otherwise. If for some subsequence $(z_j)$ of $(x_k)$, and some $m \in {\mbox{\hskip.1em N \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}$, $(P_mz_j)_j$ dominates $(z_j)$, then $(z_j)$ is equivalent to $(P_mz_j)_j$. But then the latter is a basic sequence in $E_1\oplus\ldots\oplus E_m$, which is $p$-saturated by Lemma \[EF\] and induction. Hence $(z_j)$, and thus $(x_k)$, has a $\ell^p$-block basis, and we are done. Otherwise, for all $m \in {\mbox{\hskip.1em N \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}$, and every subsequence $(z_j)$ of $(x_k)$, $$\label{nodom}
\inf\{\|\sum_j a_jP_mz_j\| : (a_j) \in c_{00},\ \|\sum a_jz_j\| =
1\} = 0 .$$ Let $m_0 = 0$, and $y_1 = x_1$. Choose $m_1$ such that $\|(1-P_{m_1})y_1\| \leq 1$. By (\[nodom\]), there exists $k_2 \geq 2$, and $y_2 \in
\mbox{span}\{x_k: 2 \leq k \leq k_2\}$, $\|y_2\| = 1$, such that $\|P_{m_1}y_2\| \leq
1/4$. Then choose $m_2 > m_1$ so that $\|(1-P_{m_2})y_2\| \leq 1/4$. Continuing inductively, we obtain a normalized block basis $(y_j)$ of $(x_k)$, and $(m_j)^\infty_{j=0}$ such that $$\|y_j - (P_{m_j}-P_{m_{j-1}})y_j\| \leq 1/j$$ for all $j \geq 1$ ($P_0 = 0$). Let $v_j =
(P_{m_j}-P_{m_{j-1}})y_j$. Then $(y_j)$ has a subsequence equivalent to a subsequence of $(v_j)$. But, writing the basis of $F$ as $(e_n)$, it is clear that $(v_j)$ is equivalent to the sequence $(\sum^{m_j}_{n=m_{j-1}+1}\|v_j(n)\|e_n)$ in $F$. Since $F$ is $p$-saturated, we conclude that any subsequence of $(v_j)$ has a $\ell^p$-block basis. Thus, the same can be said of $(x_k)$, and the proof is complete.
Tensor products of ${c_0}$-saturated spaces
===========================================
For Banach spaces $E$ and $F$, let ${K_{w*}}(E',F)$ denote the space of all compact weak\*-weakly continuous operators from $E'$ into $F$, endowed with the operator norm. The ${\epsilon}$-tensor product $E {\tilde{\otimes}_\epsilon}F$ is the closure in ${K_{w*}}(E',F)$ of the finite rank operators that belong to ${K_{w*}}(E',F)$. These spaces are equal if either $E$ or $F$ has the approximation property [@Ru]. In this section and the next, we investigate special cases of the following:\
[*Problem*]{}: Is ${K_{w*}}(E',F)$ (or $E{\tilde{\otimes}_\epsilon}F$) ${c_0}$-saturated if both $E$ and $F$ are?\
A Banach space is [*polyhedral*]{} if the unit ball of every finite dimensional subspace is a polyhedron. It is [*isomorphically polyhedral*]{} if it is isomorphic to a polyhedral Banach space. Our interest in isomorphically polyhedral spaces arises from the following result of Fonf [@F1].
[*(Fonf)*]{} An isomorphically polyhedral Banach space is ${c_0}$-saturated.
A subset $W$ of the dual of a Banach space $E$ is said to be [*isomorphically precisely norming*]{} (i.p.n.) if $W$ is bounded and\
(a) there exists $K < \infty$ such that $\|x\| \leq K\sup_{w\in
W}|w(x)|$ for all $x \in E$,\
(b) the supremum $\sup_{w\in W}|w(x)|$ is attained at some $w_0 \in W$ for all $x \in E$.\
This terminology was introduced by Rosenthal [@R1; @R] to provide a succint formulation of the following result of Fonf [@F2].
[*(Fonf)*]{} A separable Banach space $E$ is isomorphically polyhedral if and only if $E'$ contains a countable i.p.n. subset.
In this section, we consider the space ${K_{w*}}(E',F)$ when one of the spaces $E$ or $F$ is isomorphically polyhedral, and the other is ${c_0}$-saturated. Note the symmetry in the situation as ${K_{w*}}(E',F)$ is isometric to ${K_{w*}}(F',E)$ via the mapping $T \mapsto T'$. For Lemma \[pn\], note that if $x' \in E'$ and $y' \in F'$, the pair $(x',y')$ defines a functional on ${K_{w*}}(E',F)$ by $T \mapsto {\langle}Tx',y'{\rangle}$.
\[pn\] Let $E, F$ be Banach spaces, and let $W$ and $V$ be i.p.n.subsets of $E'$ and $F'$ respectively. Then $W\times V$ is an i.p.n. subset of $({K_{w*}}(E',F))'$.
It is clear that if both $W$ and $V$ satisy (a) of the definition of an i.p.n. set with constant $K$, then $W\times V$ also satisfies it with constant $K^2$. Now assume that both $W$ and $V$ satisfy part (b) of the definition. It is easy to see that $(x',y') \mapsto {\langle}Tx',y'{\rangle}$ is a continuous function on $\overline{W}^{w^*}\times\overline{V}^{w^*}$, where both $\overline{W}^{w^*}$ and $\overline{V}^{w^*}$ are given their respective weak\* topologies. Since $\overline{W}^{w^*}\times\overline{V}^{w^*}$ is compact, there exists $(w_0,v_0) \in \overline{W}^{w^*}\times\overline{V}^{w^*}$ such that $$\sup_{(x',y')\in W\times V}|{\langle}Tx',y'{\rangle}| =
\sup_{(x',y')\in\overline{W}^{w^*}\times\overline{V}^{w^*}}|{\langle}Tx',y'{\rangle}| = |{\langle}Tw_0,v_0{\rangle}| .$$ Now there exists $v\in V$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
|{\langle}Tw_0,v{\rangle}| & = & \sup_{y'\in V}|{\langle}Tw_o,y'{\rangle}| \\
& = & \sup_{y'\in\overline{V}^{w^*}}|{\langle}Tw_o,y'{\rangle}| \\
& \geq & |{\langle}Tw_0,v_0{\rangle}|.\end{aligned}$$ Similarly, there exists $w \in W$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
|{\langle}Tw,v{\rangle}| & = & |{\langle}w,T'v{\rangle}| \\
& = & \sup_{x'\in W}|{\langle}x',T'v{\rangle}| \\
& = & \sup_{x'\in\overline{W}^{w^*}}|{\langle}x',T'v{\rangle}| \\
& \geq & |{\langle}Tw_0,v{\rangle}|.\end{aligned}$$ Combining the above, we see that $|{\langle}Tw,v{\rangle}| \geq
\sup_{(x',y')\in W\times V}|{\langle}Tx',y'{\rangle}|$. Since the reverse inequality is obvious, the proof is complete.
\[block\] Let $(x_n)$ be a non-convergent sequence in a ${c_0}$-saturated Banach space $F$. There exists a normalized block $(u_k) =
(\sum^{n_k}_{n=n_{k-1}+1}b_nx_n)$ of $(x_n)$ which is equivalent to the ${c_0}$-basis.
Going to a subsequence, we may assume that $\inf_{m\neq n}\|x_m-x_n\|
> 0$. By Rosenthal’s Theorem [@Ro], we may also assume that $(x_n)$ is weakly Cauchy. Let $y_n = (x_{2n-1}-x_{2n})/\|x_{2n-1}-x_{2n}\|$ for all $n$. Then $(y_n)$ is a weakly null normalized block of $(x_n)$. Without loss of generality, we may assume that $(y_n)$ is a basic sequence. Since $F$ is ${c_0}$-saturated, $(y_n)$ has a normalized block basis $(u_k)$ equivalent to the ${c_0}$-basis. As $(u_k)$ is also a normalized block of $(x_n)$, the proof is complete.
\[opbl\] Let $E, F$ be Banach spaces so that $F$ is ${c_0}$-saturated, and let $(T_n)$ be a normalized basic sequence in ${K_{w*}}(E',F)$. For every $x' \in E'$, there is a normalized block basis $(S_n)$ of $(T_n)$, and a constant $C$, such that $$\|\sum a_nS_nx'\| \leq C\sup_n|a_n|$$ for all $(a_n) \in {c_{00}}$.
There is no loss of generality in assuming that $\|x'\| = 1$.\
$(T_nx')$ converges.\
We may assume without loss of generality that $\|(T_{2n-1}-T_{2n})x'\|
\leq 2^{-n}$ for all $n$. Let $\epsilon_n = \|T_{2n-1}-T_{2n}\|$. Since $(T_n)$ is a normalized basic sequence, $\epsilon \equiv
\inf_n\epsilon_n > 0$. Now let $S_n =
\epsilon^{-1}_n(T_{2n-1}-T_{2n})$ for all $n$. Then $(S_n)$ is a normalized block basis of $(T_n)$. Furthermore, for any $(a_n) \in
{c_{00}}$, $$\begin{aligned}
\|\sum a_nS_nx'\| & \leq &
\epsilon^{-1}\sup_n|a_n|\sum\|(T_{2n-1}-T_{2n})x'\| \\
& \leq & \epsilon^{-1}\sup_n|a_n| .\end{aligned}$$ $(T_nx')$ does not converge.\
By Lemma \[block\], $(T_nx')$ has a normalized block $(u_k) =
(\sum^{n_k}_{n=n_{k-1}+1}b_nT_nx')$ which is equivalent to the ${c_0}$-basis. Let $R_k = (\sum^{n_k}_{n=n_{k-1}+1}b_nT_n)$. Then $\|R_k\| \geq \|R_kx'\| = \|u_k\| = 1$. Let $S_k = R_k/\|R_k\|$ for all $k$. Then $(S_k)$ is a normalized block basis of $(T_n)$, and $$\|\sum a_kS_kx'\|
= \|\sum \frac{a_k}{\|R_k\|}u_k\| \leq C\sup_k|a_k|$$ for all $(a_k) \in {c_{00}}$, since $(u_k)$ is equivalent to the ${c_0}$-basis and $\|R_k\| \geq 1$.
\[main\] Let $E, F$ be Banach spaces so that $E$ is isomorphically polyhedral and $F$ is ${c_0}$-saturated. Then ${K_{w*}}(E',F)$ is ${c_0}$-saturated.
Let $(T_n)$ be a normalized basic sequence in ${K_{w*}}(E',F)$. It is easily seen that $G = [\cup T'_nF']$ is a separable subspace of $E$, and that the sequences $(T_n)$ and $(T_{n|G})$ are equivalent. Thus we may assume that $E$ is separable. Then $E'$ contains a countable i.p.n. subset $W$. Write $W = (w_m)$. By Lemma \[opbl\], $(T_n)^\infty_{n=1}$ has a normalized block basis $(T^{(1)}_n)$ such that $$\|\sum a_nT^{(1)}_nw_1\| \leq C_1\sup_n|a_n|$$ for some constant $C_1$ for all $(a_n) \in {c_{00}}$. Inductively, if $(T^{(m)}_n)$ has been chosen, let $(T^{(m+1)}_n)$ be a normalized block basis of $(T^{(m)}_n)^\infty_{n=2}$ such that there is a constant $C_{m+1}$ satisfying $$\|\sum a_nT^{(m+1)}_nw_{m+1}\| \leq C_{m+1}\sup_n|a_n|$$ for all $(a_n) \in {c_{00}}$. Now let $S_m = T^{(m)}_1$ for all $m \in
{\mbox{\hskip.1em N \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}$. Then $(S_m)$ is a normalized block basis of $(T_n)$. Also, for all $k$, $(S_m)^\infty_{m=k}$ is a block basis of $(T^{(k)}_n)$. Fix $k$, and write $S_m = \sum^{j_m}_{n=j_{m-1}+1}b_nT^{(k)}_n$ for all $m
\geq k$. Since $(S_m)$ is normalized, and $(T^{(k)}_n)$ is normalized basic, $(b_i)$ is bounded. Therefore, by the choice of $(T^{(k)}_n)$, $$\begin{aligned}
\left\|\sum^\infty_{m=k}a_mS_mw_k\right\| & = &
\left\|\sum^\infty_{m=k}a_m\left(\sum^{j_m}_{n=j_{m-1}+1}
b_nT^{(k)}_nw_k\right)\right\| \\
& \leq & C_k\sup_{m\geq k}\sup_{j_{m-1}<n\leq j_m}|a_mb_n| \\
& \leq & C_k\sup_n|b_n|\sup_{m\geq k}|a_m|\end{aligned}$$ for all $(a_m) \in {c_{00}}$. Consequently, $\sum^\infty_{m=1}a_mS_mw_k$ converges in $F$ for all $k$ and all $(a_m)
\in {c_0}$. Hence $\sum|{\langle}S_mw,y'{\rangle}|
< \infty$ for all $(w,y') \in W\times U_{F'}$. But by Lemma \[pn\], $W\times U_{F'}$ is an i.p.n. subset of ${K_{w*}}(E',F)$. Applying Elton’s extremal criterion ([@E], see also [@R Theorem 18]), we see that $[S_m]$ contains a copy of $c_0$.
Recall that a subset $A$ of topological space $X$ is [*dense-in-itself*]{} if every point of $A$ is an accumulation point of $A$. $A$ is [*scattered*]{} if it contains no non-empty dense-in-itself subset.\
Let $K$ be a compact Hausdorff space, and let $E$ be a Banach space. Then $C(K,E)$ is ${c_0}$-saturated if and only if both $C(K)$ and $E$ are ${c_0}$-saturated.
The “only if” part is clear, since both $C(K)$ and $E$ embed in $C(K,E)$. Now assume that both $C(K)$ and $E$ are ${c_0}$-saturated. To begin with, assume additionally that $C(K)$ is separable. Then $K$ is metrizable [@S Proposition II.7.5]. If $K$ is not scattered, by [@Sem Theorem 8.5.4], there is a continuous surjection $\phi$ of $K$ onto $[0,1]$. Then $f \mapsto f\circ\phi$ is an isometric embedding of $C[0,1]$ into $C(K)$. This contradicts the fact that $C(K)$ is ${c_0}$-saturated. Thus $K$ is scattered. By [@Sem Theorem 8.6.10], $K$ is homeomorphic to a countable compact ordinal. In particular, $K$ is countable. Hence $C(K)'$ contains a countable i.p.n. subset, namely, $\{\delta_k: k \in
K\}$, where $\delta_k$ denotes the Dirac measure concentrated at $k$. Therefore, $C(K)$ is isomorphically polyhedral, and $C(K,E) =
{K_{w*}}(C(K)',E)$ is ${c_0}$-saturated by Theorem \[main\].
If $C(K)$ is non-separable, as in the proof of the theorem, it suffices to show that ${K_{w*}}(G',E)$ contains a copy of ${c_0}$ for an arbitrary separable closed subspace $G$ of $C(K)$. However, ${K_{w*}}(G',E)$ is isometric to ${K_{w*}}(E',G)$, which clearly embeds in ${K_{w*}}(E',F)$ for any closed subspace $F$ of $C(K)$ containing $G$. Take $F$ to be the closed sublattice generated by $G$ and the constant $1$ function. By Kakutani’s Representation Theorem [@S Theorem II.7.4], $F$ is lattice isometric to some $C(H)$. Note that $C(H)$ is separable since $F$ is. Therefore, ${K_{w*}}(E',F)$, which is isometric to ${K_{w*}}(F',E) = C(H,E)$, is ${c_0}$-saturated by the above. Since ${K_{w*}}(G',E)$ is isomorphic to a subspace of ${K_{w*}}(E',F)$, it contains a copy of ${c_0}$.
The space $JH{\tilde{\otimes}_\epsilon}JH$
==========================================
In view of Theorem \[main\] in §2, it is interesting to consider spaces ${K_{w*}}(E',F)$ where both $E$ and $F$ are ${c_0}$-saturated, but neither is isomorphically polyhedral. In this section, we investigate one such case. Namely, when $E = F = JH$, the James Hagler space. In [@L], it was shown that $JH{\tilde{\otimes}_\epsilon}JH = {K_{w*}}(JH',JH)$ does not contain an isomorph of $\ell^1$. We show here that, in fact, $JH{\tilde{\otimes}_\epsilon}JH$ is ${c_0}$-saturated. The proof uses Elton’s extremal criterion for weak unconditional convergence, and the “diagonalization technique” employed by Hagler to show that every normalized weakly null sequence in $JH$ has a ${c_0}$-subsequence.
Let us recall the definition of the space JH, as well as fix some terms and notation. Let $T = \cup^\infty_{n=0}\{0,1\}^n$ be the dyadic tree. The elements of $T$ are called [*nodes*]{}. If $\phi$ is a node of the form $({\epsilon}_i)^n_{i=1}$, we say that $\phi$ has [*length*]{} $n$ and write $|\phi| = n$. The length of the empty node is defined to be $0$. For $\phi, \psi \in T$ with $\phi = ({\epsilon}_i)^n_{i=1}$ and $\psi = (\delta_i)^m_{i=1}$, we say that $\phi \leq \psi$ if $n \leq
m$ and ${\epsilon}_i = \delta_i$ for $1 \leq i \leq n$. The empty node is $\leq \phi$ for all $\phi \in T$. We write $\phi < \psi$ if $\phi
\leq \psi$ and $\phi \neq \psi$. Two nodes $\phi$ and $\psi$ are [*incomparable*]{} if neither $\phi \leq \psi$ nor $\psi \leq \phi$ hold. If $\phi \leq \psi$, we say that $\phi$ is an [*ancestor*]{} of $\psi$, while $\psi$ is a [*descendant*]{} of $\phi$. For any $\phi \in T$, let $\Delta_\phi$ be the set of all descendants of $\phi$. If $\phi \leq \psi$, let $$S(\phi,\psi) = \{\xi: \phi \leq \xi \leq \psi\}.$$ A set of the form $S(\phi,\psi)$ is called a [*segment*]{}, or more specifically, a $m$-$n$ [*segment*]{} provided $|\phi| = m,$ and $|\psi| =
n$. A [*branch*]{} is a maximal totally ordered subset of $T$. The set of all branches is denoted by $\Gamma$. A branch $\gamma$ (respectively, a segment $S$) is said to [*pass through*]{} a node $\phi$ if $\phi \in \gamma$ (respectively, $\phi \in S$). If $x: T \to {\mbox{\hskip.1em R \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}$ is a finitely supported function and $S$ is a segment, we define (with slight abuse of notation) $Sx = \sum_{\phi\in S}x(\phi)$. Similarly, if $\gamma \in \Gamma$, we define $\gamma(x) = \sum_{\phi\in
\gamma}x(\phi)$. A set of segments $\{S_1,\ldots,S_r\}$ is [*admissible*]{} if they are pairwise disjoint, and there are $m, n \in
{\mbox{\hskip.1em N \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}\cup\{0\}$ such that each $S_i$ is a $m$-$n$ segment. The James Hagler space $JH$ is defined as the completion of the set of all finitely supported functions $x: T \to {\mbox{\hskip.1em R \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}$ under the norm: $$\|x\| = \sup\left\{\sum^r_{i=1}|S_ix| : S_1,\ldots,S_r \mbox{ is an
admissible set of segments}\right\}.$$ Clearly, all $S$ and $\gamma$ extend to norm $1$ functionals on $JH$. Finally, if $x: T \to {\mbox{\hskip.1em R \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}$ is finitely supported, and $n \geq 0$, let $P_nx: T \to {\mbox{\hskip.1em R \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}$ be defined by $$(P_nx)(\phi) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
x(\phi) & \mbox{if $|\phi| \geq n$} \\
0 & \mbox{otherwise.}
\end{array}
\right.$$ Obviously, $P_n$ extends uniquely to a norm $1$ projection on $JH$, which we denote again by $P_n$.
We begin with some lemmas on “node management”. Let $\phi$ and $\psi$ be nodes. Denote by $A(\phi,\psi)$ denote the unique node of maximal length such that $A(\phi,\psi) \leq \phi$ and $A(\phi,\psi) \leq \psi$. A sequence of nodes $(\phi_n)$ is a [*strongly incomparable sequence*]{} if\
(a) $\phi_n$ and $\phi_m$ are incomparable if $n \neq m$,\
(b) no family of admissible segments passes through more than two of the $\phi_n$’s.\
The first lemma is due to Hagler [@H Lemma 2].
[*(Hagler)*]{} Let $(\phi_n)$ be a sequence of nodes with strictly increasing lengths. Then there exists $N \in {{\cal P}_\infty}{\em({\mbox{\hskip.1em N \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}})}$ such that either $(\phi_n)_{n\in N}$ determines a unique branch of $T$, or $(\phi_n)_{n\in N}$ is a strongly incomparable sequence.
\[ancestor\] Let $(\phi(n))$ be a strongly [incomparable ]{}sequence of nodes such that $|\phi(n)| < |\phi(n+1)|$ for all $n$. Then for all $m \geq n \geq
1$, $\phi(m) \in {\Delta}_{A(\phi(n),\phi(n+1))}$.
Otherwise, there exist $m \geq n \geq 1$ such that $\phi(m) \notin
{\Delta}_{A(\phi(n),\phi(n+1))}$. In particular, note that $m \geq n + 2$. Let $\phi_1 = \phi(n)$, and let $\phi_2$ and $\phi_3$ be the ancestors of $\phi(n+1)$ and $\phi(m)$ respectively of length $|\phi(n)|$. Then $\phi_1
{\neq}\phi_2$ since $\phi(n)$ and $\phi(n+1)$ are [incomparable]{}. Also $\phi_1 {\neq}\phi_3$ and $\phi_2 {\neq}\phi_3$ since $\phi_1,
\phi_2 \in {\Delta}_{A(\phi(n),\phi(n+1))}$, while $\phi_3 \notin
{\Delta}_{A(\phi(n),\phi(n+1))}$. Let $\psi_1, \psi_2$ be nodes of length $|\phi(m)|$ which are $\geq \phi(n)$ and $\phi(n+1)$ respectively, and let $\psi_3 = \phi(m)$. Then $\{S(\phi_i,\psi_i) : i = 1, 2, 3\}$ is an admissible set of segments. However, $\phi(n) \in
S(\phi_1,\psi_1), \phi(n+1) \in S(\phi_2,\psi_2)$, and $\phi(m) \in
S(\phi_3,\psi_3)$, violating the strong incomparability of $(\phi(k))$.
\[inc\] Let $m \in$ [**]{}, and let $(\phi(i,j))^\infty_{i=1}$ be a [strongly ]{}[incomparable ]{}sequence of nodes for $1 \leq j \leq m$. Assume that $|\phi(i,j)| =
|\phi(i,j')| < |\phi(i+1,j)|$ whenever $i, j , j' \in {\em {\mbox{\hskip.1em N \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}}$, $1
\leq j,
j' \leq m$, and that for each $i$, $\{\phi(i,j) : 1 \leq j \leq m\}$ are pairwise distinct. Then there exists $k_0$ such that $\{\phi(i,j) : i
\geq k_0, 1 \leq j \leq m\}$ are pairwise [incomparable]{}.
Induct on $m$. If $m = 1$, there is nothing to prove. Now assume that the statement is true for $m - 1$ $(m \geq 2)$. Let $\{\phi(i,j)
: i \geq 1, 1 \leq j \leq m\}$ be as given. Without loss of generality, we may assume that $\{\phi(i,j) : i \geq 1, 1 \leq j \leq m-1 \}$ are pairwise [incomparable]{}. First observe that if $\phi(i_1,j_1) < \phi(i_2,j_2)$ for some $j_1, j_2 \leq m$, then $A(\phi(i_2,j_2),\phi(i_2+1,j_2))
\geq \phi(i_1,j_1)$. Indeed, since $A(\phi(i_2,j_2),\phi(i_2+1,j_2))$ and $\phi(i_1,j_1)$ share the same descendant $\phi(i_2,j_2)$, they are comparable. Hence if the claim fails, $A(\phi(i_2,j_2),\phi(i_2+1,j_2))
< \phi(i_1,j_1)$. But then the ancestor of $
\phi(i_2+1,j_2)$ of length $|\phi(i_1,j_1)|$, $\phi(i_1,j_1)$, and $\phi(i_1,j_2)$, are distinct. From this it is easy to construct an admissible set of segments which pass through all three nodes $\{\phi(i_1,j_2), \phi(i_2,j_2),
\phi(i_2+1,j_2)\}$, in violation of their strong incomparability. This proves the claim. In particular, under the circumstances, Lemma \[ancestor\] implies $\phi(i,j_2) \in {\Delta}_{\phi(i_1,j_1)}$ for all $i \geq i_2$. The remainder of the proof is divided into two cases.\
There exist $j_1 < m$ and $i_1, i_2
\in {\mbox{\hskip.1em N \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}\ $ such that $\phi(i_1,j_1) \leq \phi(i_2,m)$.\
Note that since $\{\phi(i_1,j) : j \leq m\}$ are pairwise distinct, we must have $\phi(i_1,j_1) < \phi(i_2,m)$. By the observation above, we obtain that $\phi(i,m) \in {\Delta}_{\phi(i_1,j_1)}$ for all $i \geq i_2$. However, for any $i' \geq i_2, j < m$, $\phi(i',j)$ is [incomparable ]{}with $\phi(i_1,j_1)$ by induction. Hence $\phi(i',j) \notin {\Delta}_{\phi(i_1,j_1)}$. Thus $\phi(i,m)$ and $\phi(i',j)$ are [incomparable ]{}whenever $i, i' \geq i_2$ and $j < m$. This is enough to show that $\{\phi(i,j) : i \geq i_2, 1 \leq j \leq m\}$ are pairwise [incomparable]{}.\
For all $j_1 < m$ and $i_1, i_2
\in {\mbox{\hskip.1em N \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}$, $\phi(i_1,j_1) \not\leq \phi(i_2,m)$.\
Let $I = \{i :$ there exist $i' \in {\mbox{\hskip.1em N \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}, j < m$ such that $\phi(i,m) < \phi(i',j)\}$. Let $i_1$ and $i_2$ be distinct elements of $I$. Choose $i'_1, i'_2 \in {\mbox{\hskip.1em N \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}$, $j_1, j_2 < m$ such that $\phi(i_k,m) < \phi(i'_k,j_k)$, $k = 1, 2$. By the observation above, $\phi(i,j_k) \in {\Delta}_{\phi(i_k,m)}$ for all $i \geq i'_k$, $k = 1, 2$. Now $\phi(i_1,m)$ and $\phi(i_2,m)$ are [incomparable ]{}by assumption. Therefore, ${\Delta}_{\phi(i_1,m)} \cap {\Delta}_{\phi(i_2,m)} = \emptyset$. Combined with the above, we see that $j_1 \neq j_2$. It follows that $|I| \leq m-1$. Now choose $k_0$ such that $i < k_0$ for all $i \in
I$. By the case assumption, $\phi(i,m)$ is [incomparable ]{}with $\phi(i',j)$ whenever $i \geq k_0$ and $j < m$. This is enough to show that $\{\phi(i,j) : i \geq k_0, 1 \leq j \leq m\}$ are pairwise [incomparable]{}.
\[seven\] Let $(x_n)$ be a bounded weakly null sequence in $JH$ so that there is a sequence $0 = j_1 < j_2 < j_3 < \cdots$ with $x_n \in (P_{j_n}-P_{j_{n+1}})JH$ for all $n$. Assume that $\sup_{\xi\in\Gamma}|{\langle}x_n,\xi{\rangle}| \leq \epsilon$ for all $n$. Then there is a subsequence $(x_{n_k})$ such that $$\sup_{\xi\in\Gamma}\sum^\infty_{k=1}|{\langle}x_{n_k},\xi{\rangle}| \leq
7\epsilon.$$
For $m, n \in$ , let $$\begin{aligned}
F(n,m) & = & \{\phi \in \{0,1\}^{j_n} : \mbox{there exists at least
one branch } \xi \mbox{ through } \phi \mbox{ with }
\\ & & |{\langle}x_n,\xi{\rangle}| >{\epsilon}/2^m,
\mbox{ and for all branches $\xi$ through } \phi,\ |{\langle}x_n,\xi{\rangle}| \leq {\epsilon}/2^{m-1} \}.\end{aligned}$$ Since $(x_n)$ is bounded, $\sup_n|F(n,m)| < \infty$ for all $m$. Let $N_1 \in {{\cal P}_\infty}({\mbox{\hskip.1em N \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}})$ be such that $(|F(n,1)|)_{n\in N_1}$ is constant, say, $b_1$. Write $F(n,1) = \{\phi(n,1,i) : 1 \leq i \leq b_1\}$ for all $n \in N_1$. Choose $N'_1 \in {{\cal P}_\infty}(N_1)$ so that for $1 \leq i
\leq
b_1$, $(\phi(n,1,i))_{n\in N'_1}$ is either a [strongly ]{}[incomparable ]{}sequence or determines a branch. Let $$I_1 = \{i \leq b_1 : (\phi(n,1,i))_{n\in N'_1} \mbox{
determines a branch}\},$$ and let $\Gamma_1$ be the set of branches determined by some $(\phi(n,1,i))_{n\in N'_1}$ for some $i \in I_1$. Let $L_1 = \{1,\ldots,b_1\}\backslash I_1.$ By Lemma \[inc\], there exists $N''_1 \in {{\cal P}_\infty}(N'_1)$ such that $\{\phi(n,1,i) : n \in N''_1,
i \in L_1\}$ are pairwise incomparable. Finally, since $\Gamma_1$ is finite, there exists $n_1 \in N''_1$ such that $|{\langle}x_{n_1},\gamma{\rangle}| \leq {\epsilon}/2$ for all $\gamma \in \Gamma_1$. Continue inductively to obtain $n_1 < n_2 < \cdots$, numbers $b_1,
b_2, \ldots$, and sets $I_1, I_2,
\ldots$, $L_1, L_2, \ldots$, and $\Gamma_1, \Gamma_2, \ldots$ so that
1. for all $k \geq m$, $|F(n_k,m)| = b_m$,
2. for all $k \geq m$, $F(n_k,m) = \{\phi(n_k,m,i) : i \leq b_m\}$, where $(\phi(n_k,m,i))^\infty_{k=m}$ determines a branch if $i \in
I_m$, and is a [strongly ]{}[incomparable ]{}sequence if $i \in L_m = \{1,\ldots,b_m\}\backslash I_m$,
3. for all $m$, $\Gamma_m$ is the set of branches determined by $(\phi(n_k,m,i))^\infty_{k=m}$ for some $i \in I_m$,
4. for all $m$, $\{\phi(n_k,m,i) : m \leq k, i \in L_m\}$ are pairwise [incomparable]{},
5. for all $k$, $|{\langle}x_{n_k},\gamma{\rangle}| \leq {\epsilon}/2^k$ for every $\gamma \in \Gamma_1\cup\ldots\cup\Gamma_k$.
For all $k$, let $G(k) =
\{0,1\}^{j_{n_k}}\backslash\cup^k_{m=1}F(n_k,m)$. Then $\{F(n_k,1),\ldots,F(n_k,k),G(k)\}$ is a partition of $\{0,1\}^{j_{n_k}}$ for each $k$. Fix $\xi \in \Gamma$. Say $\xi =
(\phi_n)^\infty_{n=0}$, where $|\phi_n| = n$ for all $n \geq 0$. Now let $J_0 = \{k : \phi_{n_k} \in G(k)\}$, and let $J_m = \{k \geq m :
\phi_{n_k} \in F(n_k,m)\}$ for all $m \geq 1$. Then $(J_m)^\infty_{m=0}$ is a partition of . For all $k$ such that $k
\in J_m$ for some $m \geq 1$, choose $i_k$ such that $\phi_{n_k} =
\phi(n_k,m,i_k)$. For all $m \geq 1$, let $J_{m,1} = \{k \in J_m :
i_k \in I_m\}$, and let $J_{m,2} = \{k \in J_m : i_k \in L_m\}$. Fix $m \geq 1$ such that $J_{m,1} \neq \emptyset$.\
$J_{m,1}$ is infinite.\
In this case, there exists $\gamma \in \Gamma_m$ such that $\gamma = \xi$. Therefore, $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{k\in J_{m,1}}|{\langle}x_{n_k},\xi{\rangle}| & \leq & \sum^\infty_{k=m}|{\langle}x_{n_k},\xi{\rangle}| = \sum^\infty_{k=m}|{\langle}x_{n_k},\gamma{\rangle}| \\
& \leq & \sum^\infty_{k=m}\frac{{\epsilon}}{2^k} = \frac{{\epsilon}}{2^{m-1}}.\end{aligned}$$ $J_{m,1}$ is finite.\
Let $k_0 = \max J_{m,1}$. There exists $\gamma \in \Gamma_m$ such that $\phi_{n_{k_0}} \in \gamma$. Then, since $\phi_{n_{k_0}}
\in
F(n_{k_0},m)$, $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{k\in J_{m,1}}|{\langle}x_{n_k},\xi{\rangle}| & \leq & \sum^{k_0}_{k=m}|{\langle}x_{n_k},\xi{\rangle}| = \sum^{k_0-1}_{k=m}|{\langle}x_{n_k},\gamma{\rangle}| +
|{\langle}x_{n_{k_0}},\xi{\rangle}| \\
& \leq & \sum^\infty_{k=m}\frac{{\epsilon}}{2^k} + \frac{{\epsilon}}{2^{m-1}} =
\frac{{\epsilon}}{2^{m-2}}.\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, in either case, we have $$\label{jmone}
\sum_{k\in J_{m,1}}|{\langle}x_{n_k},\xi{\rangle}| \leq
\frac{{\epsilon}}{2^{m-2}}.$$ Now suppose for some $m \geq 1$, there are distinct $k_1, k_2 \in
J_{m,2}$. Then $k_1, k_2 \geq m$, and $\phi_{n_{k_l}} =
\phi(n_{k_l},m,i_{k_l})$, for some $i_{k_l} \in L_m$, $l = 1, 2$. But then by choice, $\phi_{n_{k_1}}$ and $\phi_{n_{k_2}}$ must be [incomparable]{}. This is a contradiction since they both belong to the branch $\xi$. Thus, for all $m \geq 1$, $|J_{m,2}| \leq 1$. Now $k \in J_{m,2}$ implies $\phi_{n_k} \in F(n_k,m)$, and hence $|{\langle}x_{n_k},\xi{\rangle}|
\leq {\epsilon}/2^{m-1}$. Consequently, for all $m \geq 1$ $$\sum_{k\in J_{m,2}}|{\langle}x_{n_k},\xi{\rangle}| \leq \frac{{\epsilon}}{2^{m-1}}.$$ Finally, $$\label{jz}
\sum_{k\in J_0}|{\langle}x_{n_k},\xi{\rangle}| \leq
\sum^\infty_{k=1}\frac{{\epsilon}}{2^k} = {\epsilon}.$$ Combining inequalities (\[jmone\])–(\[jz\]), we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_k|{\langle}x_{n_k},\xi{\rangle}| & \leq &
\sum^\infty_{m=1}\sum_{k\in J_m}|{\langle}x_{n_k},\xi{\rangle}| +
\sum_{k\in J_0}|{\langle}x_{n_k},\xi{\rangle}| \\
& \leq & \sum^\infty_{m=1}\frac{3{\epsilon}}{2^{m-1}} + {\epsilon}= 7{\epsilon}.\end{aligned}$$
For $n \geq 0$, call a subset $D$ of ${\{0,1\}^n}\times {\{0,1\}^n}$ [*diagonal*]{} if whenever $(\phi_1, \psi_1), (\phi_2, \psi_2)$ are distinct elements of $D$, then $\phi_1 \neq \phi_2$, and $\psi_1 \neq
\psi_2$.
\[diag\] Let $n \geq 0$, ${\epsilon}> 0$, and let $T : JH' \to JH$ be normalized. Let $$\begin{aligned}
A & = & \{(\phi,\psi) \in {\{0,1\}^n}\times{\{0,1\}^n}: \mbox{there exists\ }
\gamma,\xi \in \Gamma, \\
& & \phi\in\gamma, \psi\in\xi, \mbox{such that\ } |{\langle}TP'_n\gamma,P'_n\xi{\rangle}| > {\epsilon}\}.\end{aligned}$$ Then $|D| \leq 1/{\epsilon}$ for all diagonal subsets $D$ of $A$.
Let $D = \{(\phi_i,\psi_i): 1 \leq i \leq k\}$ be a diagonal subset of $A$. For each $i$, choose $\gamma_i, \xi_i \in \Gamma$ such that $\phi_i \in \gamma_i, \psi_i \in \xi_i$, and $|{\langle}TP'_n\gamma_i,P'_n\xi_i{\rangle}|
> {\epsilon}$. Using the diagonality of $D$, we see that $(P'_n\gamma_i)^k_{i=1}$ and $(P'_n\xi_i)^k_{i=1}$ are both isometrically equivalent to the $\ell^\infty(n)$-basis. For $1 \leq i,j \leq k$, let $a_{ij} = {\langle}TP'_n\gamma_i,P'_n\xi_j{\rangle}$. Define $S, R: \ell^\infty(k) \to
\ell^1(k)$ by $S(b_1,\ldots,b_k) = (\sum^k_{j=1}a_{ij}b_j)^k_{i=1}$ and $R(b_1,\ldots,b_k) = (a_{ii}b_i)^k_{i=1}$ respectively. Then $\|S\| \leq \|T\| = 1$, and $\|R\| \geq k{\epsilon}$. However, by [@LT Proposition 1.c.8], $\|R\| \leq \|S\|$. Therefore, $|D| = k
\leq 1/{\epsilon}$.
\[longlem\] Let $(T_n)$ be a normalized weakly null sequence in $JH{\tilde{\otimes}_\epsilon}JH$ such that there is a sequence $0 = j_1 < j_2 < \cdots$ with $(P_{j_n} - P_{j_{n+1}})T_n(P_{j_n} - P_{j_{n+1}})' = T_n$ for all $n$. Then there is a subsequence $(T_{n_k})$ such that $$\sum|{\langle}T_{n_k}\gamma,\xi{\rangle}| < \infty$$ for all $\gamma, \xi \in \Gamma$.
Note that $\|T_n\| = 1$ implies $|{\langle}T_n\gamma,\xi{\rangle}| \leq 1$ for all $\gamma, \xi \in \Gamma$. For all $m, n \in {\mbox{\hskip.1em N \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}$, let $$\begin{aligned}
A(n,m) & = & \{(\phi,\psi)\in {\{0,1\}^{j_n}}\times{\{0,1\}^{j_n}}: \mbox{there exist
branches } \gamma \mbox{ and } \xi \mbox{ through }\\
& & \phi \mbox{ and } \psi \mbox{ respectively so that }
|{\langle}T_n\gamma,\xi{\rangle}| > 1/2^m, \mbox{ and for all branches} \\
& & \gamma \mbox{ and $\xi$ through $\phi$ and
$\psi$ respectively, }
|{\langle}T_n\gamma,\xi{\rangle}| \leq 1/2^{m-1} \}.\end{aligned}$$ Fix $n$. Let $B(n,1)$ be a maximal diagonal subset of $A(n,1)$. Then let $$C(n,1) = \bigcup_{(\phi,\psi)\in B(n,1)}\{(\phi_1,\psi_1): \phi_1 =
\phi \mbox{ or } \psi_1 = \psi\}.$$ Inductively, if $B(n,k)$ and $C(n,k)$ have been chosen for $k < m$, let $B(n,m)$ be a maximal diagonal subset of $A(n,m)\backslash
\cup^{m-1}_{k=1}C(n,k)$. Then let $$C(n,m) = \bigcup_{(\phi,\psi)\in B(n,m)}\{(\phi_1,\psi_1): \phi_1 =
\phi \mbox{ or } \psi_1 = \psi\}.$$ It is easily seen that\
(a) $\cup^\infty_{m=1}B(n,m)$ is a diagonal subset of ${\{0,1\}^{j_n}}\times{\{0,1\}^{j_n}}$,\
(b) for all $m$, $B(n,m) \subseteq A(n,m)\cap C(n,m)$,\
(c) for all $k$, $\cup^k_{m=1}A(n,m) \subseteq \cup^k_{m=1}C(n,m)$.\
In particular, by (b) and Lemma \[diag\], $|B(n,m)| \leq 2^m$ for all $m, n$. Also, if $(\phi,\psi) \in
{\{0,1\}^{j_n}}\times{\{0,1\}^{j_n}}\backslash\cup^k_{m=1}C(n,m)$, then (c) implies $(\phi,\psi) \notin \cup^k_{m=1}A(n,m)$. Hence if $\gamma, \xi \in
\Gamma$ pass through $\phi$ and $\psi$ respectively, then $$\label{size}
|{\langle}T_n\gamma,\xi{\rangle}| \leq 1/2^k.$$ Now choose $N_1 \in {{\cal P}_\infty}({\mbox{\hskip.1em N \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}})$ such that $|B(n,1)|$ is a constant, say $b_1$, for all $n \in N_1$. Write $$B(n,1) = \{(\phi(n,1,i),\psi(n,1,i)) : 1 \leq i \leq b_1\}$$ for all $n \in N_1$. There exists $N'_1 \in {{\cal P}_\infty}(N_1)$ such that for each $i \leq b_1$, $(\phi(n,1,i))_{n\in N'_1}$ as well as $(\psi(n,1,i))_{n\in N'_1}$ are either strongly incomparable or determine a branch. Let $$I_1(\phi) = \{1 \leq i \leq b_1: (\phi(n,1,i))_{n\in N'_1} \mbox{
determines a branch}. \}$$ Let the set of branches so determined be denoted by $\Gamma_1(\phi)$. Define $I_1(\psi)$ and $\Gamma_1(\psi)$ similarly with regard to the sequence $(\psi(n,1,i))_{n\in N'_1}$. Since $(T_n)$ is weakly null, so are $(T_n\gamma)$ and $(T'_n\xi)$ for all $\gamma, \xi \in \Gamma$. Thus, because both $\Gamma_1(\phi)$ and $\Gamma_1(\psi)$ are finite sets, Lemma \[seven\] yields a set $N''_1 \in {{\cal P}_\infty}(N'_1)$ such that $$\sup_{\xi\in\Gamma}\sum_{n\in N''_1}|{\langle}T_n\gamma,\xi{\rangle}| \leq 7
{\hspace{1em}}\mbox{for all} {\hspace{1em}}\gamma \in \Gamma_1(\phi)$$ and $$\sup_{\gamma\in\Gamma}\sum_{n\in N''_1}|{\langle}\gamma,T'_n\xi{\rangle}| \leq
7
{\hspace{1em}}\mbox{for all} {\hspace{1em}}\xi \in \Gamma_1(\psi).$$ Inductively, if $N''_m \in {{\cal P}_\infty}(N)$ has been chosen, let $N_{m+1}
\in
{{\cal P}_\infty}(N''_m)$ be such that $|B(n,m+1)|$ is a constant, say $b_{m+1}$, for all $n \in N_{m+1}$. For $n \in N_{m+1}$, list $$B(n,m+1) = \{(\phi(n,m+1,i),\psi(n,m+1,i)) : 1 \leq i \leq
b_{m+1}\},$$ choose $N'_{m+1} \in {{\cal P}_\infty}(N_{m+1})$ such that for each $i \leq b_{m+1}$, $(\phi(n,m+1,i))_{n\in N'_{m+1}}$ as well as $(\psi(n,m+1,i))_{n\in N'_{m+1}}$ are either strongly incomparable or determine a branch. Let $$I_{m+1}(\phi) = \{1 \leq i \leq b_{m+1}: (\phi(n,m+1,i))_{n\in
N'_{m+1}} \mbox{ determines a branch}. \}$$ Let the set of branches so determined be denoted by $\Gamma_{m+1}(\phi)$. Define $I_{m+1}(\psi)$ and $\Gamma_{m+1}(\psi)$ similarly with regard to the sequence $(\psi(n,m+1,i))_{n\in N'_{m+1}}$. If $\gamma \in \Gamma_{m+1}(\phi)$, $\xi \in \Gamma$, and $n \in
N'_{m+1}$, let $\phi$ and $\psi$ be the nodes of length $j_n$ in $\gamma$ and $\xi$ respectively. Then $\phi = \phi(n,m+1,i)$ for some $i$. But $(\phi(n,m+1,i),\psi(n,m+1,i)) \in B(n,m+1)$. Therefore, $(\phi,\psi)
\in C(n,m+1)$. In particular, $(\phi,\psi) \notin \cup^m_{k=1}C(n,k)$. By equation (\[size\]), $|{\langle}T_n\gamma,\xi{\rangle}| \leq 1/2^m$. Similarly, $|{\langle}\gamma,T'_n\xi{\rangle}| \leq 1/2^m$ for all $\gamma \in
\Gamma$ and $\xi \in \Gamma_{m+1}(\psi)$. By Lemma \[seven\], there is a set $N''_{m+1} \in {{\cal P}_\infty}(N'_{m+1})$ such that $$\label{supt}
\sup_{\xi\in\Gamma}\sum_{n\in N''_{m+1}}|{\langle}T_n\gamma,\xi{\rangle}| \leq
7/2^m
{\hspace{1em}}\mbox{for all {\hspace{1em}}$\gamma \in \Gamma_{m+1}(\phi)$},$$ and $$\label{suptp}
\sup_{\gamma\in\Gamma}\sum_{n\in N''_{m+1}}|{\langle}\gamma,T'_n\xi{\rangle}|
\leq 7/2^m
{\hspace{1em}}\mbox{for all {\hspace{1em}}$\xi \in \Gamma_{m+1}(\psi)$}.$$ Pick $n_1 < n_2 < \cdots$ such that $n_m \in N''_m$ for all $m$, and let $$D(m) = {\{0,1\}^{j_{n_m}}}\times{\{0,1\}^{j_{n_m}}}\backslash\bigcup^m_{k=1}C(n_m,k).$$ For all $m$, $\{C(n_m,1),\ldots,C(n_m,m),D(m)\}$ is a partition of ${\{0,1\}^{j_{n_m}}}\times{\{0,1\}^{j_{n_m}}}$. Fix $\gamma, \xi \in \Gamma$. We proceed to estimate $\sum_m|{\langle}T_{n_m}\gamma,\xi{\rangle}|$. For all $m \in {\mbox{\hskip.1em N \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}$, let $\phi_m$ and $\psi_m$ be the nodes of length $j_{n_m}$ in $\gamma$ and $\xi$ respectively. Define $J_0 = \{m:
(\phi_m,\psi_m) \in D(m)\}$, and $J_k = \{m\geq k: (\phi_m,\psi_m) \in
C(n_m,k)\}$ for all $k \geq 1$. Note that $\{J_0, J_1, J_2, \ldots\}$ is a partition of ${\mbox{\hskip.1em N \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}$. If $m \in J_0$, then equation (\[size\]) yields ${|{\langle}T_{n_m}\gamma,\xi{\rangle}|}\leq 1/2^m$. Consequently, $$\label{jnot}
\sum_{m\in J_0}{|{\langle}T_{n_m}\gamma,\xi{\rangle}|}\leq \sum_{m\in J_0}\frac{1}{2^m} \leq 1.$$ Now fix $k \geq 1$ and $m \in J_k$. Then $m \geq k$ and hence $n_m \in N_k$. Thus $B(n_m,k)$ is listed as $\{(\phi(n_m,k,i),\psi(n_m,k,i)): 1 \leq i \leq b_k\}$. But $(\phi_m,\psi_m) \in C(n_m,k)$. Hence there exists $1 \leq i_m \leq
b_k$ such that either $\phi_m = \phi(n_m,k,i_m)$ or $\psi_m =
\psi(n_m,k,i_m)$. Let $J_k(\phi) = \{m\in J_k: \phi_m =
\phi(n_m,k,i_m)\}$, and let $J_k(\psi) = J_k\backslash J_k(\phi)$. Since $n_m \in N'_k$ as well, we may further subdivide these sets into: $$\begin{aligned}
J_{k,1}(\phi) & = & \{m\in J_k(\phi): i_m \in I_k(\phi)\}, \\
J_{k,2}(\phi) & = & J_{k}(\phi)\backslash J_{k,1}(\phi), \\
J_{k,1}(\psi) & = & \{m\in J_k(\psi): i_m \in I_k(\psi)\}, \\
J_{k,2}(\psi) & = & J_{k}(\psi)\backslash J_{k,1}(\psi).\end{aligned}$$ Now $\{\phi(n_m,k,i_m): m \in J_{k,2}(\phi)\}$ is a subset of the branch $\gamma$. But it is also contained in the union of the strongly incomparable sequences $(\phi(n,k,i))_{n\in N'_{k}}$, $i \notin I_k(\phi)$. Hence $|J_{k,2}(\phi)| \leq 2b_k$. Recalling equation (\[size\]), we obtain $$\label{jphitwo}
\sum_{m\in J_{k,2}(\phi)}{|{\langle}T_{n_m}\gamma,\xi{\rangle}|}\leq \sum_{m\in
J_{k,2}(\phi)}\frac{1}{2^{k-1}} \leq \frac{4b_k}{2^k}.$$ Similarly, $$\label{jpsitwo}
\sum_{m\in J_{k,2}(\psi)}{|{\langle}T_{n_m}\gamma,\xi{\rangle}|}\leq \frac{4b_k}{2^k}.$$ For any $m \in J_{k,1}(\phi)$, $\phi_m$ belongs to a branch in $\Gamma_k(\phi)$. Let $\tilde{\gamma}$ be a branch in $\Gamma_k(\phi)$ such that $M(\tilde{\gamma}) = \{m\in
J_{k,1}(\phi):\phi_m\in\tilde{\gamma}\}$ is non-empty. If $M(\tilde{\gamma})$ is finite, let $m_0$ be its maximal element. Then $\phi_{m_0}$ belongs to both branches $\tilde{\gamma}$ and $\gamma$. Therefore, $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{m\in M(\tilde{\gamma})}{|{\langle}T_{n_m}\gamma,\xi{\rangle}|}& = &
\sum_{m\in M(\tilde{\gamma})\backslash\{m_0\}}{|{\langle}T_{n_m}\tilde{\gamma},\xi{\rangle}|}+ {|{\langle}T_{n_{m_0}}\gamma,\xi{\rangle}|}\\
& \leq & \sup_{\xi\in\Gamma}\sum_{n\in N''_k}{|{\langle}T_n\tilde{\gamma},\xi{\rangle}|}+ {|{\langle}T_{n_{m_0}}\gamma,\xi{\rangle}|}\\
& \leq & \frac{7}{2^{k-1}} + \frac{1}{2^{k-1}} = \frac{16}{2^k}\end{aligned}$$ by equations (\[supt\]) and (\[size\]) respectively. On the other hand, if $M(\tilde{\gamma})$ is infinite, then $\tilde{\gamma}$ and $\gamma$ coincide. Thus the term containing $T_{n_{m_0}}$ may simply be omitted from the above inequality. Now since $|\Gamma_k(\phi)| \leq b_k$, we obtain $$\label{jphione}
\sum_{m\in J_{k,1}(\phi)}{|{\langle}T_{n_m}\gamma,\xi{\rangle}|}\leq \frac{16b_k}{2^k}.$$ Similarly, $$\label{jpsione}
\sum_{m\in J_{k,1}(\psi)}{|{\langle}T_{n_m}\gamma,\xi{\rangle}|}\leq \frac{16b_k}{2^k}.$$ Combining equations (\[jnot\])–(\[jpsione\]), we see that $$\sum{|{\langle}T_{n_m}\gamma,\xi{\rangle}|}\leq \sum^\infty_{k=0}\sum_{m\in J_k}{|{\langle}T_{n_m}\gamma,\xi{\rangle}|}\leq 1 +
\sum^\infty_{k=1}\frac{40b_k}{2^k}.$$ To complete the proof, it remains to show that $\sum b_k/2^k <
\infty$. Fix $m \in {\mbox{\hskip.1em N \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}$. By property (a) of the sets $B(n,k)$, $\cup^m_{k=1}B(n_m,k)$ is a diagonal subset of ${\{0,1\}^{j_{n_m}}}\times{\{0,1\}^{j_{n_m}}}$. Hence $\{\phi(n_m,k,i): i\leq b_k,\ k\leq
m\}$ are all distinct, as are $\{\psi(n_m,k,i): i\leq b_k,\ k\leq m\}$. By the definition of $B(n_m,k)$, one can choose, for any $i\leq b_k,\
k\leq m$, branches $\gamma_{k,i}$ and $\xi_{k,i}$, passing through $\phi(n_m,k,i)$ and $\psi(n_m,k,i)$ respectively, so that ${|{\langle}T_{n_m}\gamma_{k,i},\xi_{k,i}{\rangle}|}>
1/2^k$. Keeping in mind the assumption on $(T_n)$, we see that this inequality remains valid if $\gamma_{k,i}$ and $\xi_{k,i}$ are replaced by $\delta_{k,i} = P'_{j_{n_m}}\gamma_{k,i}$ and $\zeta_{k,i} = P'_{j_{n_m}}\xi_{k,i}$ respectively. Since $(\delta_{k,i})$ and $(\zeta_{k,i})$ are isometrically equivalent to the $\ell^\infty(\sum^m_{k=1}b_k)$-basis, the map $S : \ell^\infty(\sum^m_{k=1}b_k) \to \ell^1(\sum^m_{k=1}b_k)$ $$S(b_{k,i})^{b_k\ \,m}_{i=1 k=1} = (\sum_{k,i}{{\langle}T_{n_m}\delta_{k,i},\zeta_{k',i'}{\rangle}}b_{k,i})^{b_{k'}\ \,m}_{i'=1 k'=1}$$ has norm $\leq \|T_{n_m}\| = 1$. Then [@LT Proposition 1.c.8] implies that the “diagonal” of $S$ also has norm $\leq 1$. But this means $$\sum^m_{k=1}\frac{b_k}{2^k} \leq
\sum^m_{k=1}\sum^{b_k}_{i=1}|{{\langle}T_{n_m}\delta_{k,i},\zeta_{k',i'}{\rangle}}| \leq 1.$$ Since $m$ is arbitrary, $\sum b_k/2^k$ converges, as required.
In order to apply Elton’s extremal criterion, we need the following. For convenience, we call an element of $JH'$ of the form $P'_m\gamma$, where $m \geq 0$, and $\gamma \in \Gamma$, a $m$-$\infty$ [*segment*]{}.
\[ipnset\] Let $W$ be the collection of all elements in $JH'$ of the form $\sum^r_{i=1}a_iS_i$, where $r \in {\em {\mbox{\hskip.1em N \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}}$, $\max|a_i| \leq 1$, and there exist $m,\ n$, with $n$ possibly equal to $\infty$, so that $\{S_1,\ldots,S_r\}$ is a set of pairwise disjoint $m$-$n$ segments. Then $W$ is an i.p.n. subset of $JH'$. Consequently, $W\times W$ is an i.p.n. subset of $JH{\tilde{\otimes}_\epsilon}JH$.
The second assertion follows from the first by Lemma \[pn\]. If $\sum^r_{i=1}a_iS_i \in W$, and $x \in JH$, then $$|\sum^r_{i=1}a_iS_ix| \leq \sum^r_{i=1}|S_ix| \leq \|x\|.$$ To complete the proof, it suffices to show that for all $x \in JH$, there is a collection $\{S_1,\ldots,S_r\}$ of disjoint $m$-$n$ segments ($n$ possibly $= \infty$) such that $\|x\| = \sum^r_{i=1}|S_ix|$. Let $x \in JH$ be fixed. For each $j$, choose an admissible collection of $m_j$-$n_j$ segments $A_j$ such that $$\label{norming}
\|x\| = \lim_j\sum_{S\in A_j}|Sx|.$$ If $(m_j)$ is unbounded, $\sum_{S\in
A_j}|Sx| \leq \|P_{m_j}x\| \to 0$ as $j \to \infty$. Hence $x = 0$, and the result is obvious. If $(n_j)$ is bounded, then so is $(m_j)$. Without loss of generality, we may assume that both $(m_j)$ and $(n_j)$ are constant sequences with finite values, say, $m$ and $n$. But as there are only finitely many sets of admissible $m$-$n$ segments, the limiting value in (\[norming\]) is attained, and the claim holds. Finally, we consider the case when $(m_j)$ is bounded and $(n_j)$ is unbounded. Going to a subsequence, we may assume that $(m_j)$ has a constant value, say $m$, and $n_j \to \infty$. Then, for each $j$, $|A_j| \leq 2^m$. Using a subsequence again, we may assume that $|A_j| = r$ for some fixed $r$ for all $j$. For each $j$, write $A_j = \{S_1(j),\ldots,S_r(j)\}.$ Choose a subsequence $(j_k)$ such that $(S_i(j_k))_k$ converges weak\* to some $S_i$ for every $1 \leq i
\leq r$. It is easy to see that $\{S_1,\ldots,S_r\}$ is a collection of pairwise disjoint $m$-$\infty$ segments. From equation (\[norming\]), we deduce that $\|x\| = \sum^r_{i=1}|S_ix|$, as desired.
\[mainlem\] Let $(T_n)$ be as in Lemma \[longlem\], then $[T_n]$ contains a copy of ${c_0}$.
Let $W$ be as in Lemma \[ipnset\]. Choose a subsequence $(T_{n_k})$ as given by Lemma \[longlem\]. Then we have $\sum|{\langle}T_{n_k}w,v{\rangle}| < \infty$ for all $(w,v) \in W\times W$. But by Lemma \[ipnset\], $W\times W$ is an i.p.n. subset of $JH{\tilde{\otimes}_\epsilon}JH$. Hence Elton’s extremal criterion [@E] assures us that $[T_{n_k}]$ contains a copy of ${c_0}$.
The space $JH{\tilde{\otimes}_\epsilon}JH$ is ${c_0}$-saturated.
For all $m \in {\mbox{\hskip.1em N \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}$, let $$E_m = {K_{w*}}(JH',(1-P_m)JH) {\hspace{1em}}\mbox{and} {\hspace{1em}}F_m =
{K_{w*}}((1-P_m)'JH',JH).$$ Both $E_m$ and $F_m$ are isomorphic to a direct sum of a finite number of copies of $JH$, hence they are ${c_0}$-saturated by Lemma \[EF\]. Let $(S_n)$ be a normalized basic sequence in $JH{\tilde{\otimes}_\epsilon}JH$. If there exist a subsequence $(R_n)$ of $(S_n)$ and $m \in {\mbox{\hskip.1em N \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}$ such that $(R_n)$ is dominated by $((1-P_m)R_n\oplus R_n(1-P_m)') \in E_m\oplus F_m$, then $(R_n)$ is equivalent to a sequence in $E_m\oplus F_m$, which is a ${c_0}$-saturated space by Lemma \[EF\]. Thus $[R_n]$, and consequently $[S_n]$, contains a copy of ${c_0}$. Otherwise, for all $m
\in {\mbox{\hskip.1em N \hskip -1.25em \relax I \hskip
.1em}}$ and every subsequence $(R_n)$ of $S_n$, $$\inf\left\{\|\sum_na_n(1-P_m)R_n\| + \|\sum_na_nR_n(1-P_m)'\| :
(a_n)
\in {c_{00}}, \|\sum a_nR_n\| = 1\right\} = 0.$$ Also, it is clear that for any $T \in JH{\tilde{\otimes}_\epsilon}JH$, $\lim_n(1-P_n)T(1-P_n)' =
T$ in norm. Using these observations and a standard perturbation argument, we obtain a normalized block basis of $(S_n)$ which is equivalent to some sequence $(T_n)$ satisfying the hypotheses of Lemma \[longlem\]. By Lemma \[mainlem\], $[T_n]$ contains a copy of ${c_0}$. Thus, so does $[S_n]$.
Hagler [@H] proved that, in fact, $JH$ has [*property*]{} (S): every normalized weakly null sequence has a ${c_0}$-subsequence. Coupled with the absence of $\ell^1$, property (S) implies ${c_0}$-saturation. In [@KO], it was also shown that property (S) implies property (u). Thus, we may ask\
[*Question*]{}: Does $JH{\tilde{\otimes}_\epsilon}JH$ has property (S) or property (u)?
3ex
[99]{}
J. Elton, [*Extremely weakly unconditionally convergent series*]{}, Israel J. Math. [**40**]{}(1981), 255-258.
V. F. Fonf, [*On a property of Lindenstrauss-Phelps spaces*]{}, Funct. Anal. Appl. [**13**]{}(1979), 79-80 (translated from Russian).
V. F. Fonf, [*Polyhedral Banach spaces*]{}, Matematicheskie Zametki [**30**]{}(1981), 627-634 (translated from Russian).
James Hagler, [*A counterexample to several questions about Banach spaces* ]{}, Studia Math. [**60**]{}(1977), 289-308.
H. Knaust and E. Odell, [*On ${c_0}$-sequences in Banach spaces*]{}, Israel J. Math. [**67**]{}(1989), 153-169.
Denny H. Leung, [*Embedding $\ell^1$ into tensor products of Banach spaces*]{}, Functional Analysis (eds. E. Odell and H. Rosenthal), Lecture Notes in Math., vol. 1470, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1991, 171-176.
Joram Lindenstrauss and Lior Tzafriri, “Classical Banach Spaces I, Sequence Spaces”, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1977.
H. Rosenthal, [*A characterization of Banach spaces containing $\ell^1$*]{}, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. (U.S.A.), [**71**]{}(1974), 2411-2413.
H. Rosenthal, Class Notes, Topics course in analysis, University of Texas at Austin.
H. Rosenthal, [*Some aspects of the subspace structure of infinite dimensional Banach spaces*]{}, Approximation Theory and Functional Analysis (ed. C. Chuy), Academic Press, 1990.
W. Ruess, [*Duality and geometry of spaces of compact operators*]{}, Functional Analysis: Surveys and Recent Results III, (eds.K.-D. Bierstedt and B. Fuchssteiner) Math. Studies, no. 90, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1984, 59-78.
H. H. Schaefer, “Banach Lattices and Positive Operators”, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1974.
Z. Semadeni, “Banach Spaces of Continuous Functions I”, Monografie Matematyczne, PWN-Polish Scientific Publishers 55, Warszawa, 1971.
Department of Mathematics\
National University of Singapore\
Singapore 0511\
E-mail(bitnet) : matlhh@nusvm
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'It is known that, for given integers $s \geq 0$ and $j>0$, the nested recursion $R(n) = R(n-s-R(n-j))+R(n-2j-s-R(n-3j))$ has a closed form solution for which a combinatorial interpretation exists in terms of an infinite, labeled tree. For $s=0$, we show that this solution sequence has a closed form as the sum of ceiling functions $C(n) = \sum_{i=0}^{j-1}{ \left\lceil \frac{n-i}{2j} \right\rceil}$. Further, given appropriate initial conditions, we derive necessary and sufficient conditions on the parameters $s_1, a_1, s_2$ and $a_2$ so that $C(n)$ solves the nested recursion $R(n) = R(n - s_1 -R(n-a_1)) + R(n-s_2-R(n-a_2))$.'
address: |
Department of Mathematics\
University of Toronto\
40 St. George Street\
Toronto\
ON M5S 2E4\
Canada
author:
- Rafal Drabek
- Abraham Isgur
- Vitaly Kuznetsov
- 'Stephen M. Tanny'
title: Sums of ceiling functions solve nested recursions
---
Introduction {#sec:Intro}
============
This paper investigates the occurrence of sums of ceiling functions as solutions to nested recursions of the form $$\begin{aligned}
R(n) = R(n - s_1 -R(n-a_1)) + R(n-s_2-R(n-a_2))
\label{Hn}\end{aligned}$$ with $s_i,a_i$ integers, $a_i > 0$, and specified initial conditions. We adopt the terminology and notation from [@ConollyLike], and write the above recursion as ${{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$.
The convergence of several recent discoveries has motivated our interest in such solutions. In [@BLT] the authors prove that the ceiling function ${ \left\lceil \frac{n}{2} \right\rceil}$ solves the nested recursion ${{\langle 0 ; 1 : 2 ; 3 \rangle}}$, with initial conditions 1,1,2. In [@ConollyLike], we vastly generalize this result by deriving necessary and sufficient conditions for the parameters $s_i,a_i$ so that ${ \left\lceil \frac{n}{2} \right\rceil}$ solves the nested recursion ${{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$ with appropriate initial conditions. [^1]
In a separate but related direction, in [@Rpaper] we solved a natural generalization of the recursion ${{\langle 0 ; 1 : 2 ; 3 \rangle}}$, namely, ${{\langle s ; j : s+2j ; 3j \rangle}}$, with $s,j$ integers and $j$ positive. In so doing, we identified a closed form for the solution sequence that included a nesting of ceiling functions, albeit in a complicated way.
Finally, in [@CeilFunSol] we focused once again on the occurrence of certain ceiling function solutions, this time to nested recursions that naturally generalize the nested recursion ($\ref{Hn}$). In this case, for each $q>1$, we derived necessary and sufficient conditions on the parameters of the recurrence so that its solution has the closed form ${ \left\lceil \frac{n}{q} \right\rceil}$ (given appropriate initial conditions).
Inspired by the repeated derivation of classification schemes for ceiling function solutions, we reexamine here the solutions to the family of recursions ${{\langle s ; j : s+2j ; 3j \rangle}}$ in [@Rpaper] from a ceiling function perspective. We prove that certain of these solutions have the closed form of a sum of ceiling functions. For these solutions, we discover a classification theorem analogous to the result in [@ConollyLike]; loosely speaking, we determine all of the possible nested recursions of this “general" form which share the same solution sequence as ${{\langle 0 ; j : 2j ; 3j \rangle}}$.
In the body of this paper we proceed as follows. In Section $\ref{sec:Exp}$, we examine the periodicity properties of sums of ceiling functions. In particular, we derive several useful properties of the ceiling function sum $C(n)$ defined by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:solution}
C(n) = \sum_{i=0}^{j-1}{ \left\lceil \frac{n-i}{2j} \right\rceil}.\end{aligned}$$ We explain our interest in $C(n)$ in Section $\ref{sec:Main}$, where we prove that $C(n)$ solves ${{\langle 0 ; j : 2j ; 3j \rangle}}$. For $s \neq 0$, we show in Section $\ref{sec:Exp}$ that we cannot write the solution to ${{\langle s ; j : s+2j ; 3j \rangle}}$ as a sum of ceiling functions. Thus, we must limit our findings to the $s=0$ case.
In Section $\ref{sec:Main}$ we apply the results of Section $\ref{sec:Exp}$ to derive a classification theorem for all the recursions ${{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$ that have the solution $C(n)$ with appropriate initial conditions. In other words, we determine completely all the parameters $s_i,a_i$ for which $(\ref{eqn:solution})$ solves the recursion ${{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$. As a byproduct of this work, it follows that $C(n)$ solves ${{\langle 0 ; j : 2j ; 3j \rangle}}$. In Section $\ref{sec:Conc}$ we conclude with some thoughts about potential further work in this general area.
Periodicity and Sums of Ceiling Functions {#sec:Exp}
=========================================
In this section, we examine some key properties of sequences that arise as sums of ceiling functions in general, and of the sum $C(n)$ in particular. We begin by determining which sequences have a closed form as a sum of ceiling functions.
\[thm:Periodic\] Let $\{a_n\}$ be an integer sequence. We can find a closed form $a_n = c+\sum_{i=1}^k \lceil{q_in+r_i}\rceil$ with $q_i,r_i$ rational if and only if the difference sequence $d_n = a_{n+1} - a_n$ is periodic.
First, suppose $a_n = c+\sum_{i=1}^k \lceil{q_in+r_i}\rceil$. The difference sequence of $a_n$ is the sum of the difference sequences of $\lceil q_in+r_i \rceil$, each of which is periodic (with period the denominator of $q_i$), and their sum is thus periodic (with period a divisor of the lowest common denominator of the $q_i, i=1,...,k$).
Now suppose $d_n$ is periodic with period $p$. Then consider $b_n = a_1+\sum_{i=1}^pd_i{ \left\lceil \frac{n-i}{p} \right\rceil}$. First, note that $b_1=a_1$. Next, observe that ${ \left\lceil \frac{n-i}{p} \right\rceil}$ has a difference sequence consisting of $0$ for $n \not \equiv i$ (mod p), $1$ for $n \equiv i$ (mod p). Thus, $d_i{ \left\lceil \frac{n-i}{p} \right\rceil}$ has a difference sequence of 0 for $n \not \equiv i$ (mod p), $d_i$ for $n \equiv i$ (mod p), and so the difference sequence of $b_n$ is just $b_{n+1}-b_n = d_i$ where $0<i\leq p$ and $i \equiv n$ (mod p). But since $d_n$ is periodic with period $p$, this means the difference sequence of $b_n$ is $d_n$, and so $a_n$ and $b_n$ have the same first element and the same difference sequence and are therefore equal.
In [@Rpaper], we derived a closed form for the solution to the recurrence ${{\langle s ; j : s+2j ; 3j \rangle}}$. This formula clearly shows that the solution has a periodic difference sequence if and only if $s=0$. Thus, in the remainder of this paper, we restrict ourselves to examining the solution to the $s=0$ case.
An interesting result related to Theorem $\ref{thm:Periodic}$ follows:
If the solution sequence to a nested recursion has a periodic difference sequence, then this same sequence also solves a non-nested recursion.
By Theorem $\ref{thm:Periodic}$, such a solution sequence has a closed form $c+\sum_{i=1}^k \lceil{q_in+r_i}\rceil$; without loss of generality, rewrite the $q_i$ to have a common denominator so that $q_i = b_i/q$ with $b_i,q$ integers. Then the same solution sequence solves the recursion $A(n) = A(n-q)+\sum_{i=1}^kb_i$.
Based on the structure of the solution to ${{\langle 0 ; j : 2j ; 3j \rangle}}$ found in [@Rpaper], we can observe that the sequence ($\ref{eqn:solution}$) solves ${{\langle 0 ; j : 2j ; 3j \rangle}}$. We will prove this fact in the next section, but first we prove here two lemmas which simplify computations involving $C(n)$.
For any $n$,$d \in \mathbb{Z}$, $C(n+2jd) = C(n)+jd$. \[lm:C\]
We have $C(n+2jd) = \sum_{i=0}^{j-1}{ \left\lceil \frac{n+2jd-i}{2j} \right\rceil} =
\sum_{i=0}^{j-1}({ \left\lceil \frac{n-i}{2j} \right\rceil}+d)= \sum_{i=0}^{j-1}{ \left\lceil \frac{n-i}{2j} \right\rceil}+jd=C(n)+jd$ and this completes the proof.
This lemma shows that if we know the values of $C(n)$ for $2j$ consecutive values of $n$, then we can easily compute the rest of the sequence. In the next lemma, we find the values of $C(n)$ for $0 \leq n \leq 2j-1$.
$C(n)=n$ for $1 \leq n \leq j-1$ and $C(n)=j$ for $j \leq n \leq 2j$. \[lm:freq\]
Let $n\in \{1,2,...,j-1\}$ and $i \in \{0,1,2,...,j-1\}$. Then $-j+2 \leq n-i \leq j-1$. Therefore, we have that ${ \left\lceil \frac{n-i}{2j} \right\rceil}$ is $1$ when $n>i$ and it vanishes otherwise. Hence, we have $C(n) = \sum_{i=0}^{j-1}{ \left\lceil \frac{n-i}{2j} \right\rceil} = \sum_{i=0}^{n-1}1 + \sum_{i=n}^{j-1}0 = n$. Now let $n\in \{j,j+1,...,2j\}$ and $i \in \{0,1,2,...,j-1\}$. Then $1 \leq n-i \leq 2j$, which implies that ${ \left\lceil \frac{n-i}{2j} \right\rceil}=1$. Hence,
$$\begin{aligned}
C(n) = \sum_{i=0}^{j-1}{ \left\lceil \frac{n-i}{2j} \right\rceil} = \sum_{i=0}^{j-1}1 = j\end{aligned}$$
as required.
Finding All Recursions ${{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$ Solved By $C(n)$ {#sec:Main}
===================================================================================
In this section we determine all of the recursions $R(n) = {{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$ solved by $C(n)$ when given appropriate initial conditions. In so doing we make use of the idea of “formal satisfaction." We say an infinite sequence formally satisfies a recursion if the recursive formula is well-defined and true on that sequence for all integers. By contrast, a sequence is generated as the unique solution to a recursion and a set of $c$ specific initial conditions if for all $n>c$, the recursion allows us to calculate the value of the solution sequence at $n$ by referencing only terms with indices less than $n$.
A simple example will clarify this distinction. The recursion $S(n) = S(S(n+1))$ is formally satisfied by the sequence $S(n)= 1$ for all $n$. However, for any positive integer $c$, if we are given the initial conditions $S(1) = S(2) = \ldots = S(c) = 1$, we cannot determine the value of $S(c+1)$ because the recursion requires we know the value of $S(c+2)$.
Thus, in general, formal satisfaction does not imply generation as an infinite solution sequence. But for the particular case we are dealing with, namely, the recursion $R(n) = {{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$ and the sequence $C(n)$, formal satisfaction does imply generation as an infinite solution sequence. To see why, note that $C(n)$ asymptotically approaches $n/2$, so $n-s_1-C(n-a_{1})$ and $n-s_2-C(n-a_{2})$ also asymptotically approach $n/2$. Furthermore, as long as $a_i>0$, for large enough $n$ the recursion for $R(n)$ refers only to prior positive terms and can thus be generated given sufficiently many appropriate initial conditions.
Although it might at first seem like an additional complication, the idea of formal satisfaction simplifies many of our proofs - in many cases, we can most easily prove that a recursion generates $C(n)$ as an infinite solution sequence by proving that $C(n)$ formally satisfies the recursion. Thus, we now proceed with a theorem classifying all recursions $R(n) = {{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$ that $C(n)$ formally satisfies.
$C(n) = \sum_{i=0}^{j-1}{ \left\lceil \frac{n-i}{2j} \right\rceil}$ formally satisfies the nested recursion ${{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$ if and only if the following conditions hold:
$$\begin{aligned}
s_1,s_2 \equiv 0 \bmod{j} \tag{i}\\
a_1,a_2 \equiv j \bmod{2j} \tag{ii}\\
2(s_1+s_2) = a_1 + a_2 \tag{iii}\end{aligned}$$
\[thm:Main\]
Notice that for $j=1$, the conditions on the parameters reduce to the characterization of all nested recursions ${{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$ formally satisfied by the ceiling function ${ \left\lceil \frac{n}{2} \right\rceil}$ (derived in [@ConollyLike]).
To show that the conditions listed above suffice for $C(n)$ to formally satisfy ${{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$, we adapt the proof technique used in [@CeilFunSol] to prove an analogous result classifying all nested recursions formally satisfied by ${ \left\lceil \frac{n}{q} \right\rceil}$. The basic elements of our approach follow: first, we establish a natural equivalence relation on the set of all recursions of the form ${{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$. Next, we show that if the sequence ($\ref{eqn:solution}$) formally satisfies one element of an equivalence class, then it satisfies every element of that equivalence class. Then we prove that every equivalence class has a representative in the set $\mathbb{Z}\times S \times S \times S$, where $S = \{0,1,2,...,2j-1\}$. Finally, we demonstrate that if $C(n)$ formally satisfies ${{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$ for $4j$ consecutive values of $n$, then it does so for all $n$. Putting all these facts together, we conclude by directly verifying that when the conditions listed above hold, then $C(n)$ satisfies ${{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$ for $0 \leq n \leq 4j-1$.
We now proceed with a series of five lemmas. To establish a natural equivalence relation on the set of all recursions of the form ${{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$, we treat ${{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$ as a vector in $\mathbb{Z}^4$, denoted by $y$. Then we define the equivalence relation $\sim$ on the set of vectors $y$: $$\begin{aligned}
{{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}} \sim {{\langle s_1 + cj ; a_1 + 2cj : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}} \tag{a}\\
{{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}} \sim {{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 + dj ; a_2 + 2dj \rangle}} \tag{b}\\
{{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}} \sim {{\langle s_1 - 2ej ; a_1 : s_2 + 2ej ; a_2 \rangle}} \tag{c}\end{aligned}$$ where $c$, $d$, $e \in \mathbb{Z}$. Our first lemma shows that if any element of an equivalence class satisfies conditions (i)-(iii) then every element of that equivalence class satisfies those conditions.
Let $y$ satisfy (i)-(iii). If $y \sim y'$, then $ y'$ satisfies (i)-(iii). \[lm:CondPreserve\]
It suffices to verify the statement of the theorem for relations (a), (b) and (c) separately. In the following, let $y = {{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$ and $ y' = {{\langle s_1' ; a_1' : s_2' ; a_2' \rangle}}$.
We first check that equivalence under (a) preserves (i)-(iii). Assume $ y' = {{\langle s'_1 ; a'_1 : s'_2 ; a'_2 \rangle}} = {{\langle s_1 + cj ; a_1 + 2cj : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$ for some $c \in \mathbb{Z}$. Then since $s_1 \equiv 0 \bmod{j}$ and $a_1 \equiv j \bmod{2j}$ by assumption, we have that $
s_1 + cj \equiv 0 + cj \equiv 0 \bmod{j}$ and $a_1 + 2cj \equiv j + 2cj \equiv j \bmod{2j}.$ Furthermore, since $2(s_1 + s_2) = a_1 + a_2$, we have $2(s_1 + cj + s_2) = 2(s_1 + s_2) + 2cj = a_1 + a_2 + 2cj = (a_1 + 2cj) + a_2$. It follows that $s'_1$, $a'_1$, $s'_2$ and $a'_2$ satisfy (i)-(iii).
The argument for (b) is identical and therefore omitted.
Finally, we verify that equivalence under (c) preserves (i)-(iii). Let $ y' = {{\langle s'_1 ; a'_1 : s'_2 ; a'_2 \rangle}} = {{\langle s_1 - 2ej ; a_1 : s_2 + 2ej ; a_2 \rangle}}$ for some $e \in \mathbb{Z}$. By assumption $s_1 \equiv 0 \bmod{j}$ and $s_2 \equiv 0 \bmod{j}$, so we have $
s_1 - 2ej \equiv 0 - 2ej \equiv 0 \bmod{j},
s_2 + 2ej \equiv 0 + 2ej \equiv 0 \bmod{j}$, and $2(s_1 -2ej + s_2 + 2ej) = 2(s_1 + s_2) = a_1 + a_2.$
This shows that $s'_1$, $a'_1$, $s'_2$ and $a'_2$ satisfy (i)-(iii) as required, thereby completing the proof.
Now we show that if the sequence ($\ref{eqn:solution}$) formally satisfies one element of an equivalence class, then it satisfies every element of that equivalence class. Define the difference function $h(n, y) = C(n-s_1-C(n-a_1))+C(n-s_2-C(n-a_2))-C(n)$. Observe that for a fixed $y$, the sequence ($\ref{eqn:solution})$ formally satisfies $y$ if and only if $h(n,y) = 0$ for all $n \in \mathbb{Z}$. We have the following lemma.
If $y \sim y'$ then $ h(n, y)= h(n, y').$ \[lm:hInvariant\]
As before, it suffices to prove this lemma separately for relations (a), (b) and (c).
First, we verify (a) preserves $h$. Let $y = {{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$ and $y' = {{\langle s_1 + cj ; a_1 + 2cj : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$ for some $c \in \mathbb{Z}$. Note that by Lemma \[lm:C\] we have $
C(n-s_1-cj-C(n-a_1-2cj)) =
C(n-s_1-cj-(C(n-a_1)-cj)) =
C(n-s_1-cj+cj-(C(n-a_1))=
C(n-s_1-C(n-a_1)).
$ Hence, $h(n, y') = C(n-s_1-cj-C(n-a_1-2cj))+C(n-s_2-C(n-a_2))-C(n) =
C(n-s_1-C(n-a_1))+C(n-s_2-C(n-a_2))-C(n) =
h(n, y)
$
The same argument applies to confirm that (b) preserves $h$; we omit the details.
We check that (c) preserves $h$. Assume $y = {{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$ and $y' = {{\langle s_1-2ej ; a_1 : s_2+2ej ; a_2 \rangle}}$ for some $e \in \mathbb{Z}$.
Applying Lemma \[lm:C\], we get $
h(n, y') = C(n-s_1+2ej-C(n-a_1))+C(n-s_2-2ej-C(n-a_2))-C(n) =
C(n-s_1-C(n-a_1))+ej+C(n-s_2-C(n-a_2))-ej-C(n) =
h(n, y)$ and this completes the proof.
Now we show that every equivalence class has a representative in the set $\mathbb{Z}\times S \times S \times S$, where $S = \{0,1,2,...,2j-1\}$. As we will see later, this result, together with the following lemma and conditions (i)-(iii), will reduce the verification of formal satisfaction to a finite number of confirmatory calculations.
For every $y \in \mathbb{Z}^4$, there exists $ y' \in \mathbb{Z}\times S \times S \times S$ such that $ y \sim y'$. \[lm:repBouned\]
Consider an arbitrary $ y = {{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}} \in \mathbb{Z}^4$. Note that by the division algorithm $a_2 = 2jq + a'_2$ for some $q \in \mathbb{Z}$ and $a'_2 \in S$. Then, we apply (b) to obtain $y = {{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; 2jq+a'_2 \rangle}} \sim {{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2-jq ; 2jq+a'_2-2jq \rangle}} = {{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s'_2 ; a'_2 \rangle}}$.
As before, $s'_2 = 2jc+s''_2$ for some $c \in \mathbb{Z}$ and $s''_2 \in S$. Now, we apply (c) to get ${{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s'_2 ; a'_2 \rangle}} = {{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : 2jc+s''_2 ; a'_2 \rangle}} \sim {{\langle s_1+2jc ; a_1 : 2jc+s''_2-2jc ; a'_2 \rangle}} = {{\langle s'_1 ; a_1 : s''_2 ; a'_2 \rangle}}$.
Finally, we use the fact that $a_1 = 2jd +a'_1$, where $d \in \mathbb{Z}$ and $a'_1 \in S$, and (a) to get ${{\langle s'_1 ; a_1 : s''_2 ; a'_2 \rangle}} = {{\langle s'_1 ; 2jd + a'_1 : s''_2 ; a'_2 \rangle}} \sim {{\langle s'_1-jd ; 2jd + a'_1-2jd : s''_2 ; a'_2 \rangle}} = {{\langle s''_1 ; a'_1 : s''_2 ; a'_2 \rangle}}$.
Therefore, $ y \sim y' = {{\langle s''_1 ; a'_1 : s''_2 ; a'_2 \rangle}}$, where $a'_1$,$s''_2$,$a'_2 \in S$ and $s''_1 \in \mathbb{Z}$.
Currently, to check that $C(n)$ formally satisfies some recursion corresponding to $y$, we have to check that $h(n, y) = 0$ for each $n \in \mathbb{Z}$. Our next lemma remedies this situation by reducing to finitely many $n$.
For a fixed $y$ and any integer $d$, $h(n, y) = h(n + 4jd, y)$. \[lm:nBounded\]
Fix $y = {{\langle s_1 ; a_1 : s_2 ; a_2 \rangle}}$ and an integer $d$. Applying Lemma \[lm:C\], we have $
C(n+4jd-s_1-C(n+4jd-a_1)) =
C(n+4jd-s_1-(C(n-a_1)+2jd)) =
C(n+2jd-s_1-C(n-a_1)) =
C(n-s_1-C(n-a_1)) + jd
$ and similarly $C(n+4jd-s_2-C(n+4jd-a_2)) = C(n-s_2-C(n-a_2)) + jd$. Then, we calculate $
h(n+4jd, y) = C(n+4jd-s_1-C(n+4jd-a_1)) + C(n+4jd-s_2-C(n+4jd-a_2)) - C(n+4jd) =
C(n-s_1-C(n-a_1)) + jd + C(n-s_2-C(n-a_2)) + jd - C(n) -2jd =
C(n-s_1-C(n-a_1)) + C(n-s_2-C(n-a_2)) - C(n) =
h(n, y)$ and this completes the proof.
Lemma \[lm:nBounded\] has a key consequence: to confirm that $h(n, y) = 0$ for all $n \in \mathbb{Z}$, it suffices to verify that $h(n, y) = 0$ for $0 \leq n \leq 4j-1$.
The above results provide all the necessary tools to show that conditions (i)-(iii) suffice for the sequence $(\ref{eqn:solution})$ to formally satisfy $ y$.
Let $ y$ satisfy conditions (i)-(iii). Then the sequence $(\ref{eqn:solution})$ formally satisfies $y$. \[lm:sufficient\]
Observe that by Lemma \[lm:repBouned\] there exists $y' = {{\langle s'_1 ; a'_1 : s'_2 ; a'_2 \rangle}}$ such that $ y' \sim y$ and $ y' \in \mathbb{Z} \times S \times S \times S$. Notice that, by Lemma \[lm:CondPreserve\], $s_1'$,$a_1'$,$s_2'$ and $a_2'$ also satisfy conditions (i)-(iii). Then, $a'_1 = a'_2 = j$ and $s'_2$ is 0 or $j$. If $s'_2$ is 0, then from condition (iii) it follows that $s'_1 = j$. Alternatively, if $s'_2 = j$ then condition (iii) implies that $s'_1 = 0$. Either way (switching the order of the summands if needed), $ y'$ corresponds to the recursion $R(n) = R(n - R(n-j)) + R(n-j-R(n-j))$. Therefore, without loss of generality we assume that $y' = {{\langle 0 ; j : j ; j \rangle}}$.
By Lemma \[lm:hInvariant\], to show that $h(n, y) = 0$ for all integers $n$, it suffices to show that $h(n, y') = 0$ for all integers $n$. Furthermore, Lemma \[lm:nBounded\] shows that we only need to show that $h(n, y') = 0$ for $0 \leq n \leq 4j-1$. By Lemmas \[lm:C\] and $\ref{lm:freq}$ we have
$$\begin{aligned}
C(n) =
\begin{cases}
0, & -j \leq n \leq -1 \\
n, & 0 \leq n \leq j-1 \\
j, & j \leq n \leq 2j-1 \\
n-j, & 2j \leq n \leq 3j-1 \\
2j, & 3j \leq n \leq 4j-1
\end{cases}\end{aligned}$$
We need to consider several cases. First, suppose that $0 \leq n \leq j-1$. Then $C(n-j)=0$ since $-j \leq n-j \leq -1$. Therefore, $h(n,y') = C(n-C(n-j)) + C(n-j-C(n-j)) - C(n) = C(n) + C(n-j) - C(n) = 0$, as required.
Next consider the case when $j \leq n \leq 2j-1$. Hence, $C(n-j)=n-j$ as $0 \leq n-j \leq j-1$. Thus, $h(n, y') = C(n-C(n-j)) + C(n-j-C(n-j)) - C(n) =
C(j) + C(0) - C(n) =
j + 0 - j = 0$.
Now let $2j \leq n \leq 3j-1$. In this case, $C(n-j)=j$ and $C(n-2j)=n-2j$ since $j \leq n-j \leq 2j-1$ and $0 \leq n-2j \leq j-1$. Hence, $
h(n, y') = C(n-C(n-j)) + C(n-j-C(n-j)) - C(n) =
C(n-j) + C(n-2j) - C(n) =
j + n-2j - n+j = 0$.
Finally, suppose that $3j \leq n \leq 4j-1$. Then $C(n-j)=n-2j$ since $2j \leq n-j \leq 3j-1$. Then $h(n, y') = C(n-C(n-j)) + C(n-j-C(n-j)) - C(n)
= C(2j) + C(j) - C(n) =
j + j - 2j = 0 $ as required. We conclude that $h(n, y')=0$ for $0 \leq n \leq 4j-1$ and this completes the proof of the lemma.
We conclude the proof of Theorem \[thm:Main\] by showing the necessity of conditions (i)-(iii) for $(\ref{eqn:solution}$) to formally satisfy $ y$.
Let the sequence $(\ref{eqn:solution}$) formally satisfy $ y$. Then $ y$ satisfies conditions (i)-(iii). \[lm:Necess\]
By Lemma \[lm:repBouned\], $ y \sim y'$ for some $ y' \in \mathbb{Z} \times S \times S \times S$, where $S = \{0,1,2,...,2j-1\}$. Furthermore, by Lemma \[lm:CondPreserve\], $ y$ satisfies (i)-(iii) if and only if $ y'$ does. Therefore, without loss of generality, we may assume that $ y \in \mathbb{Z} \times S \times S \times S$. We now prove that $ y = {{\langle 0 ; j : j ; j \rangle}}$; since ${{\langle 0 ; j : j ; j \rangle}}$ clearly satisfies conditions (i)-(iii), this will complete the proof of this lemma.
By assumption, $(\ref{eqn:solution}$) formally satisfies $ y$, so $C(n) = C(n-s_1-C(n-a_1)) + C(n-s_2-C(n-a_2))$ for all $n$. By the Euclidean division algorithm, $s_1 = 2jk + s$ for some $k \in \mathbb{Z}$ and $s \in S$. Therefore, by Lemma \[lm:C\], $C(n) = C(n-s-C(n-a_1)) + C(n-s_2-C(n-a_2))-jk$. Further, as in Lemma $\ref{lm:sufficient}$, we will use the following values of $C(n)$, which follow from Lemmas \[lm:C\] and \[lm:freq\]:
$$\begin{aligned}
C(n) =
\begin{cases}
n+j &-2j \leq n \leq -j-1 \\
0, &-j \leq n \leq 0 \\
n, & 1 \leq n \leq j-1 \\
j, & j \leq n \leq 2j
\end{cases}\end{aligned}$$
In particular, observe that for $n$ satisfying $-2j \leq n < 2j$, $C(n)$ is constant precisely on the intervals $[-j,0]$ and $[j,2j]$ only; that is, if $C(n) = C(n+1)$ for some $n$ with $-2j \leq n < 2j$, then $n$ must satisfy $-j \leq n < 0$ or $j \leq n < 2j$. We repeatedly use this observation.
First, we demonstrate that one of the summands $C(n-s-C(n-a_1))$ or $C(n-s_2-C(n-a_2))$ is in fact $C(n-C(n-j))$; that is, we show that either $s=0,a_1=j$ or $s_2=0,a_2=j$. Note that the sequences defined by $C(n-s-C(n-a_1))$ and $C(n-s_2-C(n-a_2))$ are both slow, that is, their forward differences equal either $0$ or $1$. This follows directly from the fact that $C(n)$ itself is slow, which in turn follows from Lemmas \[lm:freq\] and \[lm:C\]. Our main use of this fact is to note that if $C(n)$ stays constant, both of its summands must stay constant, and if $C(n)$ increases by 1, then exactly one of its summands must increase by $1$.
Since $C(0) = 0$ and $C(1) = 1$, one of the summands must have increased by $1$; without loss of generality we may assume it was $C(n-s-C(n-a_1))$, interchanging the summands if needed. Hence, $C(1-s-C(1-a_1)) = 1+C(-s-C(-a_1))$. Since $C(n)$ is slow, either $C(-a_1)=C(1-a_1)$, or $C(-a_1)+1=C(1-a_1)$. In the latter case, we would have $1-s-C(1-a_1)=-s-C(-a_1)$, contradicting $C(1-s-C(1-a_1)) = 1+C(-s-C(-a_1))$. Thus, $C(-a_1)=C(1-a_1)$ and so $C(1-s-C(-a_1))=1+C(-s-C(-a_1))$.
Since $C(-a_1) = C(1-a_1)$ and $a_1 \in S$, it must be the case that $C(-a_1) = 0$ and $0<a_1\leq j$ (see the listing of values of $C(n)$ above). Furthermore, since $C(-a_1) = 0$, it follows (by substituting into the last equation in the previous paragraph) that $C(1-s) = 1+C(-s)$. This implies that either $s=0$ or $j<s<2j$.
Summarizing the above results, we have the following restrictions: $0<a_1\leq j$, and either $s=0$ or $j<s<2j$.
Next, we show that $a_1 = j$. If not, then $0<a_1<j$. By the list of values of $C(n)$ above, $C(j+a_1)=C(j+a_1+1)= \ldots = C(2j) = j$. Therefore, since $C(n)$ is constant as $n$ ranges from $j+a_1$ to $2j$, both of its summands must be constant on the same range. In particular, $C(n-s-C(n-a_1))$ must stay constant as $n$ ranges from $j+a_1$ to $2j$. Thus $C(j+a_1-s-C(j+a_1-a_1)) = \ldots = C(2j-s-C(2j-a_1))$. Since $C(j+a_1-a_1) = \ldots = C(2j-a_1) = j$, we have that $C(j+a_1-s-j) = ... = C(2j-s-j)$, or, simplifying, $C(a_1-s) = C(a_1+1-s) = ... = C(j-s)$. This implies that $s \neq 0$ since otherwise $C(j) = C(a_1)$, where $a_1 < j$. Hence, we must have $j<s<2j$.
But observe that $C(n)$ also remains constant and equal to 0 as $n$ ranges from $-j$ to $0$. Applying the same argument as above with all the terms shifted back by 2j, we can conclude that $C(-j+a_1-s) = C(-j+1+a_1-s) = ... = C(-s)$. But this is impossible, since for $j<s<2j$ we have $C(-s) = -s+j$ and $C(-s-1) = -s-1+j$ (see the list of values of $C(n)$ above). Therefore, we must have $a_1 = j$.
Summarizing our current situation, we have $a_1=j$ and either $s=0$ or $j<s<2j$.
Now we show that $s=0$. If not, then $j<s<2j$. As an immediate consequence, $C(j-1-s-C(j-1-a_1)) = C(j-1-s)=0=C(j-s)=C(j-s-C(j-a_1))$ where the first and last equalities come from substituting $a_1=j$, and the middle two equalities hold because $j-s$ and $j-1-s$ lie between $-j$ and $0$, and thus $C(j-s)=C(j-1-s)=0$. Since $C(j-1) + 1 = C(j)$ and $C(j-1-s-C(j-1-a_1)) = C(j-s-C(j-a_1))$, the second summand of $C(n)$ must be the one to increase as $n$ changes from $j-1$ to $j$, so $C(j-1-s_2-C(j-1-a_2)) + 1 = C(j-s_2-C(j-a_2))$. Therefore, we now turn our attention to the term $C(n-s_2-C(n-a_2))$.
We have that $C(j-1-s_2-C(j-1-a_2)) + 1 = C(j-s_2-C(j-a_2))$. Thus, the arguments $j-1-s_2-C(j-1-a_2)$ and $j-s_2-C(j-a_2)$ must be different, which requires $C(j-1-a_2)=C(j-a_2)$. Since $0\leq a_ 2 < 2j$, we have that $-j < j - a_2 \leq j$, which together with $C(j-1-a_2) = C(j-a_2)$ implies that $-j < j-a_2 \leq 0$ (see the list of values for $C(n)$ above). Thus, $C(j-1-a_2)=C(j-a_2)=0$. So we can conclude $C(j-a_2) = C(j-1-a_2) = 0$ and $j \leq a_2 < 2j$. Furthermore, this implies that $C(j-s_2) = C(j-1-s_2)+1$, so $0 \leq s_2 < j$. Consider first the case that $a_2 \neq j$, so that $j<a_2<2j$. Since $C(n)$ is constant as $n$ ranges from $j$ to $a_2$, its second summand must be constant on this range so $C(j-s_2-C(j-a_2)) = ... = C(a_2-s_2-C(a_2-a_2))$. However, since $C(j-a_2) = ... = C(a_2-a_2) = 0$, this tells us that $C(j-s_2) = ... = C(a_2-s_2)$, which is only possible if $s_2 = 0$. Next, since $C(n)$ is also constant as $n$ ranges from $-j$ to $-2j+a_2$, we can apply the preceding argument shifted back by $2j$ terms to conclude that $C(-j+j) = ... = C(-2j+a_2+j)$, which we rewrite as $C(0) = ... = C(a_2-j)$. This is impossible since $C(a_2-j) \neq C(0)$. Thus we conclude that the case $j<a_2<2j$ cannot occur, and we now let $a_2=j$.
Recall that we are still working under the assumption that $j<s<2j$, and we have shown that $a_1=j$ and now $a_2=j$, and that $0 \leq s_2 < j$. Note that $0=C(0) = C(-s-C(-j)) + C(-s_2 - C(-j)) -jk$. Since $C(-j) = 0$, this reduces to $0 = C(-s) + C(-s_2)-jk$. However, $0 \leq s_2 < j$ and consulting the list of values for $C(n)$, we see $C(-s_2) = 0$. This implies $C(-s) = jk$. Since $j<s<2j$ we have $0 > C(-s) > -j$, giving a contradiction. Therefore, we conclude that $s=0$.
We now have proved that $s = 0$ and $a_1=j$, so $C(n) = C(n-C(n-j)) + C(n-s_2-C(n-a_2)) -jk$. We still don’t know anything about $s_2$ or $a_2$.
A key property of $C(n-C(n-j))$ is that it remains constant as $n$ ranges from $2j$ to $3j$. Indeed, by the listing of values of $C(n)$ above, if $2j \leq n \leq 3j$, then $C(n-j)=j$, so $n-C(n-j)=n-j$, so $C(n-C(n-j))=j$, again by the listing of values of $C(n)$.
By Lemmas \[lm:freq\] and \[lm:C\], $C(n+1)=C(n)+1$ for $2j \leq n < 3j$. But the first summand $C(n-C(n-j))$ remains constant on this range, so it follows that the second summand $C(n-s_2-C(n-a_2))$ must be increasing on this range. That is, for $2j \leq n < 3j$, we have $1+C(n-s_2-C(n-a_2))=C(n+1-s_2-C(n+1-a_2))$. This in turn implies that for $n$ in this range, $n-s_2-C(n-a_2) \neq n+1-s_2-C(n+1-a_2)$, which simplifies to $C(n+1-a_2) \neq 1+C(n-a_2)$. Since $C(n)$ increases only by 0 or 1, it must be the case that $C(n+1-a_2)=C(n-a_2)$ for all $n$ in the range $2j \leq n < 3j$. By consulting the list of values of $C(n)$ above, we see that the sequence $2j-a_2,2j+1-a_2,\ldots,3j-a_2$ must begin with $(2z+1)j$ for some integer $z$ (so that $C(n)$ is constant on the next $j$ values). But $a_2$ lies in the range $0 \leq a_2 < 2j$, so the only possibility is $2j-a_2=j$, or $a_2=j$.
In the previous paragraph, we showed that for $2j \leq n < 3j$, we have $1+C(n-s_2-C(n-a_2))=C(n+1-s_2-C(n+1-a_2))$. But $a_2=j$, so $j \leq n-a_2<2j$ and therefore by the list of values of $C(n)$, $C(n-a_2)=C(n+1-a_2)=j$. Thus, $1+C(n-s_2-j)=C(n+1-s_2-j)$ for all $n$ in the range $2j \leq n < 3j$. Consulting the list of values for $C(n)$ above, we see that $2j-s_2-j$ must be $2zj$ for some integer $z$, to ensure that $C(n)$ increases on the next $n$ values. Then since $0 \leq s_2 < 2j$, $2j-s_2-j=0$ is the only possibility so $s_2=j$.
Thus, we have that $C(n) = C(n-C(n-j))+C(n-j-C(n-j))-kj$. By substituting $n=j$ we immediately deduce that $k=0$, so $C(n) = C(n-C(n-j))+C(n-j-C(n-j))$ as desired. This completes the proof.
Together, Lemmas \[lm:sufficient\] and \[lm:Necess\] prove Theorem \[thm:Main\]. Further, observe that this also proves that $C(n)$ formally satisfies $R(n) = R(n-R(n-j)) + R(n-2j-R(n-3j))$ since ${{\langle 0 ; j : j ; j \rangle}} \sim {{\langle 0 ; j : 2j ; 3j \rangle}}$.
Concluding Remarks {#sec:Conc}
==================
A wide variety of nested recursions have solutions exhibiting either periodic or “periodic-like" behaviour. In [@Golomb1990], Golomb observed that if the one-term nested recursion $a_n = a_{n-a_{n-1}}$ has a solution, then it always eventually becomes periodic; in fact, this holds for any one-term homogeneous nested recursion. This paper, as well as [@Rpaper], [@CeilFunSol], and [@ConollyLike], have exhibited large families of nested recursions with periodic difference sequences. In [@Golomb1990], Golomb illustrated that with appropriate initial conditions Hofstadter’s Q-recursion $Q(n) = Q(n-Q(n-1))+Q(n-Q(n-2))$ could be made to exhibit what he called “quasi-periodic" behavior: more precisely, given initial conditions $Q(1) = 3, Q(2)=2$, and $Q(3)=1$, the resulting solution has $Q(3k+1)=3, Q(3k+2)=3k+2$ and $Q(3k)=3k-2$. Ruskey [@FibHof] has demonstrated similar behaviour involving the Q-recursion and the Fibonacci sequence.
All together, this suggests that “periodic-like" behavior appears frequently in the solutions to nested recursions. Perhaps more such periodicity variants await discovery. Even further, perhaps some property, such as “$a_n-a_{n-p}$ is periodic for some $p$", may unify the known examples and lead to a broader result about all such solution sequences.
[99]{}
B. Balamohan, Z. Li, and S. Tanny, A combinatorial interpretation for certain relatives of the Conolly sequence, [*J. Integer Seq.*]{} 11 (2008). Available at [www.cs.uwaterloo.ca/journals/JIS/VOL11/Tanny/tanny7.pdf](www.cs.uwaterloo.ca/journals/JIS/VOL11/Tanny/tanny7.pdf). Article 08.2.1, 11 pages.
Solomon W. Golomb, Discrete chaos: sequences satisfying strange recursions, preprint, undated, 17 pages.
Abraham Isgur, David Reiss, and Stephen Tanny, Trees and meta-Fibonacci sequences, [*Electron. J. Combin.*]{} 16 (2009). Available at [www.combinatorics.org/Volume\_16/PDF/v16i1r129.pdf](www.combinatorics.org/Volume_16/PDF/v16i1r129.pdf). R129, 40 pages.
A. Erickson, A. Isgur, B. W. Jackson, F. Ruskey, S. M. Tanny Nested recurrence relations with Conolly-like solutions, preprint, 2010, 32 pages.
Abraham Isgur, Vitaly Kuznetsov, and Stephen Tanny, Nested recursions with ceiling function solutions, [*J. Difference Equations and Applications*]{}, to appear in 2011, 12 pages.
Frank Ruskey, Fibonacci meets Hofstadter, [*J. Integer Sequences*]{}, to appear in 2011, 3 pages.
[^1]: It is also shown in [@ConollyLike] that for every $p \geq 1$, the ceiling function ${ \left\lceil \frac{n}{2p} \right\rceil}$ solves an infinite family of order $p$ nested recursions. In this paper we restrict our attention to the recursion ($\ref{Hn}$), which has order 1.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Muon spin relaxation ($\mu$SR) measurements were carried out on [SrDy$_2$O$_4$]{}, a frustrated magnet featuring short range magnetic correlations at low temperatures. Zero-field muon spin depolarization measurements demonstrate that fast magnetic fluctuations are present from $T=300$ K down to 20 mK. The coexistence of short range magnetic correlations and fluctuations at $T=20$ mK indicates that [SrDy$_2$O$_4$]{} features a spin liquid ground state. Large longitudinal fields affect weakly the muon spin depolarization, also suggesting the presence of fast fluctuations. For a longitudinal field of $\mu_0H=2$ T, a non-relaxing asymmetry contribution appears below $T=6$ K, indicating considerable slowing down of the magnetic fluctuations as field-induced magnetically-ordered phases are approached.'
address: '$^1$ Laboratory for Scientific Developments and Novel Materials, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland $^2$ Département de Physique, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Canada $^3$ Laboratory for Muon Spin Spectroscopy, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland $^4$ Laboratory for Neutron Scattering and Imaging, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland $^5$ Department of Chemistry, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, USA'
author:
- 'N Gauthier$^{1,*}$, B Prévost$^2$, A Amato$^3$, C Baines$^3$, V Pomjakushin$^4$, A D Bianchi$^2$, R J Cava$^5$ and M Kenzelmann$^{1,\dagger}$'
bibliography:
- 'biblioV2.bib'
title: 'Evidence for spin liquid ground state in [SrDy$_2$O$_4$]{} frustrated magnet probed by $\mu$SR'
---
Introduction
============
In magnetically frustrated systems, competing interactions can inhibit long range order at low temperatures and enforce highly degenerate ground states. This can give rise to novel states of matter such as spin liquids, in which strongly fluctuating magnetic degrees of freedom persist to the lowest temperatures [@Balents2010]. For example, in the spin ices Dy$_2$Ti$_2$O$_7$ and Ho$_2$Ti$_2$O$_7$, well-known classical spin liquids, the low temperature dynamics are explained by the presence of magnetic monopoles [@Castelnovo2008; @Jaubert2009; @Fennell2009; @Morris2009]. Other examples include Tb$_2$Ti$_2$O$_7$, where the magnetoelastic coupling is believed to play a major role in the spin liquid ground state [@Fennell2014a], and MnSc$_2$S$_4$, where the spins fluctuate collectively between degenerate spiral states [@Bergman2007; @Gao2016]. Muon spin relaxation ($\mu$SR) technique is a useful tool to study these types of systems since the experimental signatures of fluctuating moments, static disordered moments and static ordered moments are clearly distinguishable. It is therefore possible to distinguish a spin liquid from a spin glass or a long range ordered system.
The Sr*Ln*$_2$O$_4$ (*Ln* = Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm and Yb) compounds form a family of frustrated rare-earth magnets [@Karunadasa2005; @Li2014a]. They crystallize in an orthorhombic structure (space group *Pnam*) with two inequivalent rare-earth ion sites, each forming one-dimensional zig-zag chains along the $c$-axis. In most of these compounds, the crystal electric fields generate different spin anisotropies at the two sites [@Fennell2014; @Malkin2015] and lead to very anisotropic properties, as seen in magnetic susceptiblity measurements [@J.Hayes2012]. At very low temperatures, one dimensional correlations are observed in many members of this family [@Hayes2011; @Young2013; @Fennell2014; @Wen2015] as a result of dominant magnetic interactions along the chains. The zig-zag chain is equivalent to the one-dimensional chain with nearest neighbour interaction $J_1$ and next-nearest neighbour interaction $J_2$, which for Ising spins is referred to as the axial next-nearest neighbour Ising (ANNNI) model [@Selke1988]. The model is frustrated for antiferromagnetic $J_2$ and this is the source of magnetic frustration in the Sr*Ln*$_2$O$_4$ compounds. In [SrDy$_2$O$_4$]{}, no evidence for a magnetic phase transition has been reported down to $T=50$ mK in zero magnetic field despite the emergence of broad magnetic scattering features below $T\approx4$ K in powder neutron diffraction [@Karunadasa2005], reflecting the presence of a high degree of frustration. The specific heat features a broad maximum near $T=1.2$ K, indicative of magnetic correlations, but no sharp peak that would indicate a second order phase transition. At $T=50$ mK, powder neutron diffraction indicate that the system has quasi-one dimensional (1D) short range correlations [@Fennell2014].
Experimental details
====================
The $\mu$SR technique measures the time-dependent depolarization of spin-polarized muons that are implanted in a sample. The experimentally probed parameter is the asymmetry $A(t)$ given as: $$A(t)=\frac{\alpha N_F(t)-N_B(t)}{\alpha N_F(t)+N_B(t)}$$ where $N_F(t)$ and $N_B(t)$ are the number of detected positrons, arising from the weak-decay of the muon, in the forward (F) and backward (B) detectors respectively and $\alpha$ is a parameter taking into account the detector efficiency and geometry. The asymmetry $A(t)$ is proportional to the muon spin depolarization function $P(t)$ and $A(0)=a_0$ is the total initial asymmetry which is in part dependent on the instrument characteristics and typically $a_0\approx 0.25$.
$\mu$SR spectra have been measured on the General Purpose Surface-Muon Instrument (GPS) and the Low Temperature Facility Instrument (LTF) at the Paul Scherrer Institut on powder samples of [SrDy$_2$O$_4$]{}, prepared as reported in Ref. [@Karunadasa2005]. The spectra were collected in zero field from $T=5$ K to 300 K on GPS and from 20 mK to 9 K on LTF. Longitudinal field spectra have been measured on LTF up to $\mu_0H=2$ T. The $\alpha$ parameter was determined on GPS from a weak transverse field (TF) spectrum at $T=300$ K with $\mu_0H=0.005$ T, giving $\alpha=1.269(1)$. For LTF, it was determined from a weak TF spectrum at $T=20$ mK with $\mu_0H=0.010$ T, giving $\alpha=1.328(3)$. It is noteworthy that our measurements showed no temperature dependence of the TF spectra from $T=20$ mK up to 9 K on LTF. The obtained $\alpha$ parameter was used in the analysis of the zero-field (ZF) measurements. The value of this parameter changes in longitudinal field (LF) measurements due for instance to the trajectory curvature of the decay positrons in magnetic field. For the results presented here, the field dependence of $\alpha$ was evaluated by fitting it for the spectra at $T=9$ K in the paramagnetic regime from $\mu_0H=0$ to 2 T. The resulting values were used as fixed parameters for the other measured temperatures.
Experimental results
====================
At $T=300$ K in zero field, we observe that the initial asymmetry is close to 0.25 and decays exponentially with time (Fig. \[musrZFGPS\]a). The relaxation rate increases with decreasing temperature. Below $T=60$ K the muon spin depolarization is so fast that most of the asymmetry relaxation occurs in the electronics dead time. This behaviour is observed down to $T=5$ K, the lowest reached temperature on GPS. A stretched exponential is the most appropriate function to describe the data over the full temperature range and the experimental spectra were fitted by: $$A(t)=a_\text{s} e^{-\left( \lambda t \right)^\beta}+a_\text{b}
\label{asymmetry1}$$ where $\lambda$ is the relaxation rate, $\beta$ is an exponent stretching the exponential function, $a_\text{s}$ is the sample initial asymmetry and $a_\text{b}$ is a constant asymmetry arising from muons missing the sample, with $a_\text{s}+a_\text{b}=a_0$. The spectra from $T=60$ K to 300 K were fitted simultaneously and the asymmetry values $a_\text{s}$ and $a_\text{b}$ were taken as temperature-independent parameters. The fits show that the relaxation rate $\lambda$ increases with decreasing temperature (Fig. \[musrZFGPS\]b) while the exponent $\beta$ is almost one at $T=300$ K and decreases with decreasing temperature (Fig. \[musrZFGPS\]c).
![(a) $\mu$SR spectra of [SrDy$_2$O$_4$]{} in zero field at various temperatures on GPS and the temperature dependence of the fitted parameters from Eq. \[asymmetry1\]: (b) the relaxation rate $\lambda$ and (c) the exponent $\beta$.[]{data-label="musrZFGPS"}](musr_proceedingsNewV2.eps)
For $\beta=1$, the relaxation corresponds to a simple exponential where the relaxation rate can be defined in the fast fluctuations limit as $\lambda=2 \Delta^2/\nu$ [@Reotier1997]. The parameter $\Delta$ is proportional to $\sqrt{\left< B_\text{loc}^2 \right>}$, where $B_\text{loc}$ is the dynamic local internal field at the muon implantation site, and it thus is a measure of the field distribution width. The parameter $\nu$ is the fluctuation rate of $B_\text{loc}$. In systems with large magnetic moments, $\Delta$ can be expected to be large and responsible for the fast depolarization of the muon spin. In the paramagnetic regime, $\Delta$ should be weakly temperature dependent while $\nu$ should reduce at lower temperature, as a decreasing number of crystal-field levels are accessible by thermally-induced transitions. This implies an increasing $\lambda$ with decreasing temperature, in agreement with our observation.
A value of $\beta$ different from unity can be interpreted has the presence of a distribution of relaxation rates $\lambda$ [@Campbell1994]. At $T=300$ K the exponent $\beta$ is close to one and this system is well described by a single relaxation rate. As the temperature decreases, $\beta$ decreases, suggesting a broadening of the relaxation rate distribution, from multiple fluctuation rates $\nu$ and/or multiple field distribution widths $\Delta$. The presence of two inequivalent magnetic sites with different single ion anisotropy could explain such an effect.
![$\mu$SR spectra of [SrDy$_2$O$_4$]{} (a) in zero field at $T=20$ mK and 9 K on LTF and (b) in longitudinal fields at $T=20$ mK on LTF.[]{data-label="musrZFLTF"}](musr_ZFplus0p02K_Stretched.eps)
$\mu$SR spectra were also measured at LTF from $T=9$ K down to 20 mK and no significant temperature dependence was observed (Fig. \[musrZFLTF\]a). The temperature range overlaps with the GPS measurements and suggest that the muon spin polarization on the LTF spectra is too fast to be reliably measured. This indicates that fluctuations remain down to 20 mK, in agreement with the absence of long range order in this compound [@Fennell2014].
Longitudinal field measurements give more insights into the low temperature spin dynamics. Typically for static internal fields, the application of a sufficiently strong longitudinal field will dominate the muon spin depolarization and effectively decouple it from the sample internal fields. For dynamic internal fields, the application of a longitudinal field usually has a smaller effect. In [SrDy$_2$O$_4$]{}, the muon spin depolarization is weakly affected by a longitudinal field of $\mu_0H=1$ T while a non-relaxing asymmetry contribution attributed to static moments emerges at $\mu_0H=2$ T (Fig. \[musrZFLTF\]b). This is strong evidence of the presence of spin dynamics for $\mu_0H\leq1$ T. Longitudinal-field measurements at $T=9$ K for fields up to $\mu_0H=2$ T, shown in Fig. \[musrLF1\]a, show the presence of spin dynamics, as expected in the paramagnetic regime. The initial asymmetry increases with increasing field, indicating that the relaxation rate is reduced with field. The spectra were fitted with Eq. \[asymmetry1\] by fixing $a_0=0.25$, the expected total initial asymmetry, and $a_\text{b}=0.0418$, as determined from the amplitude of the oscillations in the weak TF spectrum at $T=0.02$ K in zero field. The fitted parameters $\lambda$ and $\beta$ evolve smoothly with field (Fig. \[musrLF1\]b,c). The increasing value of the exponent $\beta$ suggests a narrowing of the relaxation rate distribution. The decreasing value of the relaxation parameter $\lambda$ indicates a gradual decoupling of the muon spin polarization from the sample, while the polarization is increasingly affected by the external field. The effect observed here is relatively weak in comparison to the strength of the applied field, indicating that the magnetism at $T=9$ K is dynamic up to $\mu_0H=2$ T.
![(a) $\mu$SR spectra of [SrDy$_2$O$_4$]{} at $T=9$ K in longitudinal fields on LTF and the magnetic field dependence of the fitted parameters from Eq. \[asymmetry1\]: (b) the relaxation rate $\lambda$ and (c) the exponent $\beta$.[]{data-label="musrLF1"}](musr_LF_9K_Hdep_Stretched.eps)
A temperature dependence of LF spectra at $\mu_0H=2$ T shows the emergence of the non-relaxing asymmetry contribution below $T=6$ K (Fig. \[musrLF2\]). For static fields the muon polarization at long times should lead in a powder sample to a constant $\frac{1}{3}$ of the initial asymmetry. The observed non-relaxing asymmetry is therefore attributed to a sample fraction where the moments appear static to the muons, i.e. the fluctuation rate is too slow to be felt by the muons which have a lifetime of 2.2 $\mu$s. Therefore, the Eq. \[asymmetry1\] was modified to take into account this new term: $$A(t)=a_\text{s} e^{-\left( \lambda t \right)^\beta}+a_\text{static}+a_\text{b}
\label{asymmetry2}$$ where $a_\text{static}$ is a non-relaxing constant accounting for the static fraction of the sample, and the total asymmetry is fixed such that $a_\text{s}+a_\text{static}+a_\text{b}=a_0$. The value $a_\text{b}$ was taken from the zero field spectrum and kept fixed for all temperatures. The temperature dependence of the stretched exponential parameters are shown in Fig. \[musrLF2\]b,c. The exponent $\beta$ is fairly constant but the relaxation rate $\lambda$ increases below $T=6$ K. Under that same temperature, the constant $a_\text{static}$ becomes non-zero and increases with decreasing temperature, reaching a value of about one tenth of the initial polarization (Fig. \[musrLF2\]d).
![(a) $\mu$SR spectra of [SrDy$_2$O$_4$]{} at various temperatures in a longitudinal field of $\mu_0H=2$ T on LTF and the temperature dependence of the fitted parameters from Eq. \[asymmetry2\]: (b) the relaxation rate $\lambda$, (c) the exponent $\beta$ and (d) the time-independent constant $a_\text{static}$ (left scale). The corresponding sample fraction which has static moments is also represented on the right scale.[]{data-label="musrLF2"}](musr_LF_2T_Tdep_Stretched_log.eps)
Discussion and summary
======================
The high temperature $\mu$SR spectra of [SrDy$_2$O$_4$]{} share many similarities with the spin ice Dy$_2$Ti$_2$O$_7$. In both case, a stretched exponential describe the data well and the fitted parameters have a similar tendency with decreasing temperature: (i) an increase of the relaxation rate $\lambda$ and (ii) a reduction of $\beta$ with a maximum of unity at room temperature [@Lago2007]. Below $T\approx60$ K, the muon spin depolarization is so fast that it can not be measured in both experiments, probably as a consequence of a broad internal field distribution (large $\Delta$) due to the large magnetic moment of Dy$^{3+}$ of the order of 8-10 $\mu_B$ [@Fennell2014].
At low temperatures, [SrDy$_2$O$_4$]{} and Dy$_2$Ti$_2$O$_7$ show a very different muon spin relaxation. While all the muon spin is mostly depolarized below $T\approx60$ K, Dy$_2$Ti$_2$O$_7$ features a recovery of about one third of the spin polarization below $T\approx40$ K. This was explained by the dominance of slow magnetic fluctuations that appear static in the time window of the muon decay [@Lago2007]. Firstly, this leads to a large field distribution at the muon sites and the associated fast relaxation of two thirds of the muon polarization. Secondly, this also leads to a pinning of the muon spin parallel to the magnetic field at the muon site, recovering one third of the muon polarization. This recovered muon polarization decays on a much longer time scale with a relaxation rate directly proportional to magnetic fluctuations frequency.
In contrast, the muon spin polarization in [SrDy$_2$O$_4$]{} features a fast relaxation in excess of 150 MHz at all temperatures below $T=60$ K, showing the presence of fast magnetic fluctuations. The origin of these magnetic fluctuations may be thermal excitations to the low-lying crystal-field levels at somewhat intermediate temperatures, and short-range magnetic correlations at lower temperatures, also observed by neutron powder diffraction [@Fennell2014]. The longitudinal field measurements also confirms that fluctuations are present for $\mu_0H\leq1$ T at $T=20$ mK, where thermal fluctuations are not expected to play any role.
For a longitudinal field of $\mu_0H=2$ T, the non-relaxing polarization emerging below $T=6$ K reaches about one tenth of the initial polarization at $T=20$ mK, corresponding to a sample fraction of $\sim35\%$ with static moments. These static moments could be ordered or disordered but field-induced phases evidenced by magnetization plateaus [@J.Hayes2012] suggest the former. The fact that only part of the sample appears static is probably the result of the highly anisotropic properties of [SrDy$_2$O$_4$]{} [@J.Hayes2012].
In summary, we present the results of a $\mu$SR study on [SrDy$_2$O$_4$]{} indicating the presence of fluctuations down to the $T=20$ mK and the emergence of a static fraction in longitudinal field of $\mu_0H=2$ T. Due to the large moments of Dy$^{3+}$, broad field distributions are expected at the muon sites leading to a very fast muon spin depolarization. In the present study, this depolarization becomes too fast to be measured accurately below $T=60~$K in zero field. The absence of a slowly-relaxing muon spin component on the order of one-third of the initial polarization at low temperatures is evidence that fast fluctuations remain the dominant mechanism for the muon spin relaxation in [SrDy$_2$O$_4$]{}, suggesting a spin liquid ground state. The authors acknowledge useful discussions with Hubertus Luetkens and Daniel G. Mazzone. This research received support from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (Canada).
References {#references .unnumbered}
==========
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We propose a method for general-purpose quantum computation and simulation that is well suited for today’s pre-threshold-fidelity superconducting qubits. This approach makes use of the $n$-dimensional single-excitation subspace (SES) of a system of $n$ tunably coupled qubits. It can be viewed as a nonscalable special case of the standard gate-based quantum computing model, but allows many operations in the unitary group SU($n$) to be implemented by a single application of the Hamiltonian. Our approach bypasses the need to decompose the evolution operator into elementary gates, making large, nontrivial computations possible without error correction. The method is especially well suited for universal quantum simulation, specifically simulation of the Schrödinger equation with a real but otherwise arbitrary $n \! \times \! n$ Hamiltonian. We argue that a 1000-qubit SES processor, which would require no known improvements in superconducting device technology and which could be built today, should be capable of achieving quantum speedup relative to a petaflop supercomputer. We speculate on the utility and practicality of such a universal quantum simulator.'
author:
- 'Michael R. Geller'
- 'John M. Martinis'
- 'Andrew T. Sornborger'
- 'Phillip C. Stancil'
- 'Emily J. Pritchett'
- Andrei Galiautdinov
bibliography:
- '/Users/mgeller/Desktop/group/publications/bibliographies/MRGpre.bib'
- '/Users/mgeller/Desktop/group/publications/bibliographies/MRGbooks.bib'
- '/Users/mgeller/Desktop/group/publications/bibliographies/MRGgroup.bib'
- '/Users/mgeller/Desktop/group/publications/bibliographies/MRGqc-josephson.bib'
- '/Users/mgeller/Desktop/group/publications/bibliographies/MRGqc-architectures.bib'
- '/Users/mgeller/Desktop/group/publications/bibliographies/MRGqc-general.bib'
- '/Users/mgeller/Desktop/group/publications/bibliographies/MRGqc-TSC.bib'
- '/Users/mgeller/Desktop/group/publications/bibliographies/MRGqc-algorithms.bib'
- '/Users/mgeller/Desktop/group/publications/bibliographies/MRGqc-QS.bib'
- 'endnotes.bib'
title: 'Universal quantum simulation with pre-threshold superconducting qubits: Single-excitation subspace method'
---
INTRODUCTION AND MOTIVATION {#introduction section}
===========================
The quest for quantum speedup
-----------------------------
In the standard gate-based model of quantum computation with $n$ qubits, the initial state of the (closed) system is represented by a $2^n$-dimensional complex vector $\psi$, and the computation is described by unitary time-evolution operator $U$. Running the quantum computer implements the map $$\psi \rightarrow U \psi.
\label{time evolution map}$$ A key feature here is the exponential classical information storage capacity of the wave function $\psi$. However, the number of one- and two-qubit gates required to implement an arbitrary element of the unitary group ${\rm SU}(2^n)$ is at least $2^{2n}-1$, making the construction of an arbitrary $U$ inefficient (using elementary gates). The primary goal of quantum algorithm design is to implement interesting cases of $U$ with a polynomial number of elementary gates (it is also necessary that the desired answer be obtained with high probability upon measurement, possibly after a polynomial number of repetitions). The class of problems that can be solved with success probability $> \frac{1}{2}$ by a quantum circuit with depth bounded by a polynomial in the length of the input is called BQP. Two important algorithms in the BQP complexity class are the quantum algorithms for order finding [@ShorSIAMJC97] and weak simulation of local (or sparse) Hamiltonians [@LloydSci96; @ZalkaProcRoySocLondA98; @LidarPRE99; @BerryCMP07; @KassalPNAS08; @KassalARPC11]. Although these algorithms are technically efficient, the number of gates required for interesting applications is still large [@BeckmanPRA96; @AspuruSci05; @ClarkPRA09; @YouPre12] and an error-corrected quantum computer is therefore required.
A major milestone for the field of quantum computation will be to achieve quantum speedup relative to the most powerful classical supercomputer (itself a rapidly moving target). Here we assume a general-purpose or universal quantum computer, in contrast with analog quantum simulators and other special purpose approaches where the simulated Hamiltonian or problem type is restricted to a certain family. Analog quantum simulation [@GreinerNat02; @LewensteinAdvPhys07; @SmirnovEPL07; @BlochRMP08; @BulutaSci09; @HouckNatPhys12; @BrittonNat12] is already a highly developed and successful approach to quantum computation, and only 50 or so degrees-of-freedom become classically intractable [@breakevenestimateNote] (fewer for analog open-system simulators [@MostamePre11], where decoherence is considered part of the problem to be simulated). In fact, the break-even point, where the classical and quantum computation times are equal, has probably already been achieved with analog simulators. We will not attempt to identify these examples here, which would require a sharp degree-of-controllability criterion to distinguish a “proper" analog quantum simulation from a more traditional experiment, which also has a number of control parameters and which can rarely be simulated classically. Currently, the best performing approach to universal fault-tolerant quantum computation (in terms of threshold value and hardware scalability) appears to be the surface code [@BravyiPre98; @RaussendorfPRL07; @FowlerPRA09; @FowlerPre12]. Conservative estimates of the number $n$ of physical qubits required for break-even with a 99.9% fidelity (superconducting) surface code quantum computer range from $10^5$ for quantum simulation to $10^7$ for factoring. Even running a long, error-corrected computation with a only a few logical qubits appears to require more than a thousand physical qubits. Thus, the break-even point for fault-tolerant universal quantum computation is likely to take some time to achieve.
Pre-threshold quantum computation {#prethreshold section}
---------------------------------
The single-excitation subspace (SES) method described here is not intended to replace the standard model of scalable, fault-tolerant quantum computation outlined above. Rather, it provides an alternative approach to general-purpose quantum computation that can be implemented with today’s pre-threshold hardware, especially superconducting circuits. We use the term “pre-threshold” to refer to qubits and architectures with insufficient fidelity to enable fault-tolerant quantum computation. State-of-the-art demonstrations of quantum algorithms with pre-threshold qubits are necessarily restricted to no more than about 10 qubits [@VandersypenNat01; @PengPRA05; @NegrevergnePRA05; @DiCarloNat09; @LanyonNatChem10; @BarreiroNat11; @LuPRL11; @OspelkausNat11; @LanyonSci11; @MariantoniSci11; @ReedNat12; @FengPre12]. With superconducting circuits, this restriction is not a consequence of a limitation of fabrication (it is already possible to make devices with hundreds of qubits), but instead that the available coherence time inhibits their application to larger problem sizes, which would require larger circuit depth and longer computation times. The SES method bypasses the need to use one- and two-qubit gates, allowing larger computations to be carried out within the available coherence time.
small system SES method analog/spec purp
-------------------- -------------- ------------ ------------------
[*scalable*]{} $\times$ $\times$ $\surd$
[*universal*]{} $\surd$ $\surd$ $\times$
[*speedup*]{} $\times$ $\surd$ $\surd$
[*arb accuracy*]{} $\times$ $\times$ $\times$
[*arb runtime*]{} $\times$ $\times$ $\times$
: Three approaches to pre-threshold quantum computation and simulation. The left column lists attributes achievable by a universal, fault-tolerant quantum computer.
\[prethreshold comparison table\]
Table \[prethreshold comparison table\] compares three broad approaches to quantum computation with pre-threshold-fidelity qubits. “Small system" refers to gate-based computations with a few qubits, which have been used to test fundamental concepts of quantum information processing, demonstrate hardware functionality, and assess qubit and gate performance. The SES method is also general purpose, but enables quantum speedup; however neither approach is scalable. Analog quantum simulation and other scalable, special-purpose approaches trade universality for a faster route to speedup. We are not aware of any pre-threshold approaches that would allow computations of arbitrary accuracy or runtime.
QUANTUM COMPUTATION IN THE SES
==============================
Hardware model
--------------
Consider the following model of an array of $n$ coupled superconducting qubits, $$\begin{aligned}
H_{\rm FQC} = \sum_{i} \epsilon_i c_i^\dagger c_i
+ \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i i'} g_{ii'} \, \sigma^x_i\otimes\sigma^x_{i'},
\label{FQC model}\end{aligned}$$ written in the basis of uncoupled-qubit eigenstates. Here $ i,i' = 1, 2, \dots, n,$ and $$c \equiv
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 \\
0 & 0 \\
\end{pmatrix}.$$ The $\epsilon_i$ are qubit transition energies and $g_{ii'}$ are qubit-qubit interaction strengths; both are assumed to be tunable. $g_{ii'}$ is a real, symmetric matrix with vanishing diagonal elements. We also require microwave pulse control of at least one qubit, and simultaneous readout (projective measurement of $\sigma^z$) of every qubit. Model (\[FQC model\]) describes a fully connected network of qubits, which we refer to as a fully connected quantum computer (FQC). The FQC model should be contrasted with local quantum computer (LQC) models that have coupling only between nearby qubits (nearest neighbors, for example). The SES method can be applied to a wide variety qubit-qubit interaction types (see appendix), but without loss of generality we restrict ourselves to the simple $\sigma^x \otimes \sigma^x$ coupling of (\[FQC model\]). Although we assume an architecture based on superconducting qubits, our approach might apply to other architectures as well.
The FQC model (\[FQC model\]) is usually considered to be unscalable, because of the $O(n^2)$ tunable coupling circuits and wires, a position that we also adopt here [@scalabilitydefinitionNote]. In gate-based universal quantum computation, the FQC and LQC models are actually equivalent in the sense that any quantum circuit implemented by a FQC can be implemented by a LQC after adding chains of SWAP gates, which only introduce polynomial overhead. However, this equivalence is restricted to the standard gate-based approach and does not apply here.
Device parameters
-----------------
Superconducting qubits have been reviewed in Refs. [@YouPT05; @ClarkeNat08; @MartinisQIP09; @HouckQIP09]. Although the model (\[FQC model\]) can be realized with several qubit designs, the transmon qubit [@KochPRA07] currently has the best performance. (We note that frequency tunability is required here, which will increase sensitivity to flux noise). For concreteness we assume a qubit frequency $\epsilon/2\pi$ in the range of $5$ - $6 \, {\rm GHz}$ and coupling strength $g/2\pi$ in the range $-100$ to $100 \, {\rm MHz}$.
Processor layout
----------------
A fully connected quantum computer of $n$ qubits operating in the SES mode requires $n(n-1)/2$ coupler circuits and associated wires. A variety of tunable couplers can be used for this purpose [@vanderPloegPRL07; @NiskanenSci07; @YamamotoPRB08; @AllmanPRL10; @PintoPRB10; @BialczakPRL11]. For definiteness, we consider the tunable inductive coupler [@BialczakPRL11] demonstrated with superconducting phase qubits and show a processor layout that avoids excessive crossovers.
Circuit diagrams for a single phase qubit “q" and single coupler “c" are illustrated in Fig. \[coupler circuit figure\], where the crossed boxes represent Josephson junctions. In terms of these elements, a possible layout for a fully connected $n\!=\!5$ array is shown in Fig. \[processor layout figure\]. If we assume a qubit size of $10{\rm \mu m} \times 10{\rm \mu m}$ and a $10{\rm nm}$ spacing of the coupler wires (blue vertical lines in Fig. \[processor layout figure\]), then a 1000-qubit processor would require about a $1{\rm cm} \times 1{\rm cm}$ chip.
![Superconducting phase qubit and tunable inductive coupler circuits.[]{data-label="coupler circuit figure"}](fig1.eps){width="5.0cm"}
![(color online) SES processor layout.[]{data-label="processor layout figure"}](fig2.eps){width="6.0cm"}
Single-excitation subspace
--------------------------
The idea we explore here is to perform a quantum computation in the $n$-dimensional single-excitation subspace of the full $2^n$-dimensional Hilbert space. This is the subspace spanned by the computational basis states $$\big| i \big) \equiv c_i^\dagger \big|00 \cdots 0 \big\rangle = \big|0 \cdots 1_i \cdots 0\big\rangle,
\label{SES states}$$ with $i=1,2,\dots,n.$ Experimentally, it is possible to prepare the quantum computer in the SES, and it will remain there with high probability if the following conditions are satisfied:
1. The coupling strengths $|g_{ii'}|$ are much smaller than the $\epsilon_i$, which is usually well satisfied in superconducting architectures. (This condition is the same as that for the applicability of the rotating-wave approximation.)
2. Single-qubit operations such as $\pi$ and $\pi/2$ pulses are not used during the computation. However, $2 \pi$ pulses are permitted and turn out to be extremely useful (these can be implemented as $z$ rotations, which do not require microwaves). $\pi$ pulses are of course used to prepare SES states from the system ground state $|00 \cdots 0\rangle$.
3. The quantum computation time $t_{\rm qu}$ is much less than the single-qubit energy relaxation time $T_1$.
A general SES state is of the form $$| \psi ) = \sum_{i=1}^n a_i \,| i ) , \ \ \ \sum_{i=1}^n|a_i |^2 = 1,
\label{general SES state}$$ which corresponds to a point on the sphere $S^{2n-1}$. For example, the states (\[general SES state\]) include the maximally entangled $W$-type state $$\begin{aligned}
\big|{\rm unif} \big) &\equiv&
\frac{| 1 ) + | 2) + \cdots + | n)}{\sqrt{n}} \nonumber \\
&=& \frac{|10\cdots0\rangle + |01\cdots0\rangle+ \cdots + |00\cdots1\rangle}{\sqrt{n}}.
\label{unif state}\end{aligned}$$
SES Hamiltonian
---------------
The advantage of working in the SES can be understood from the following expression for the SES matrix elements of model (\[FQC model\]), $${\cal H}_{ii'} \equiv \big( i \big| H_{\rm FQC} \big| i' \big) = \epsilon_i \, \delta_{ii'} + g_{ii'}.
\label{SES hamiltonian}$$ Because the diagonal and off-diagonal elements are directly and independently controlled by the qubit energies and coupling strengths, respectively, we have a high degree of control over the SES component of the quantum computer’s Hamiltonian. This property allows many $n$-dimensional unitary operations to be carried out in a single step, bypassing the need to decompose into elementary gates, and also enables the direct quantum simulation of real but otherwise arbitrary time-dependent Hamiltonians (a preliminary account of this application is given in Ref. [@PritchettPre10]).
There are two reasons why the SES Hamiltonian (\[SES hamiltonian\]) is not completely controllable:
1. ${\cal H}_{ii'}$ is real, whereas the most general Hamiltonian is complex Hermitian. The experimentally available control parameters, consisting of $n$ qubit energies and $n(n-1)/2$ coupling strengths, are sufficient to control $n(n+1)/2$ independent paramaters of an $n \! \times \! n$ symmetric matrix that is real.
2. There are experimental limitations on the range of values that the $\epsilon_i$ and $g_{ii'}$ can take. We define $g_{\rm max}$ to be the magnitude of the largest coupling available in a particular experimental realization (a realistic value is $100 \, {\rm MHz}$).
We will leave the discussion of possible generalizations to complex Hamiltonians for future work.
APPLICATIONS
============
Entangled state preparation
---------------------------
It is simple, for example, to generate the entangled state (\[unif state\]) in a single step: Consider the $n \! \times \! n$ real Hamiltonian $${\cal H} = g
\begin{pmatrix}
2 & 1 & 1 & \cdots & 1 \\
1& 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 \\
1& 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
1& 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 \\
\end{pmatrix},
\label{uniform state prep H}$$ where qubit 1 is symmetrically coupled to all other qubits, which are themselves uncoupled (a star network). Only two of the eigenfunctions—call them $|\psi_\pm)$—have overlap with $|1)$, so the evolution of the $|1)$ state is effectively a two-channel problem. The spectrum is as follows: States $|\psi_\pm)$ have energy $\varepsilon_\pm = g (1\pm \sqrt{n})$; all other eigenfunctions are degenerate with energy $\varepsilon= 0$. Evolution for half a period corresponding to the splitting $2 \sqrt{n}g$, namely $$t_{\rm qu} = \frac{\pi}{2 \sqrt{n}g},
\label{t unif state prep}$$ leads to the desired operation $$\big|{\rm unif}\big) = \exp \! \left[ -i \frac{\pi}{2 \sqrt{n}}
\begin{pmatrix}
2 & 1 & \cdots & 1 \\
1 & 0 & \cdots & 0 \\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
1 & 0 & \cdots & 0 \\
\end{pmatrix}
\right]
\big| 1 \big).$$ This can be implemented in a few ns with superconducting circuits.
Grover’s search algorithm
-------------------------
Although we have argued that the SES method is probably most useful for universal quantum simulation, it is also interesting to consider a traditional quantum algorithm. Here we apply the SES method to Grover’s search [@GroverPRL97] for a single marked state $|i)$ in a database of size $n$, which takes the form $$\big( W O_i \big)^{K} |{\rm unif}) \approx |i), \ \ {\rm with} \ \
K = \frac{\pi}{4} \sqrt{n}.
\label{grover identity}$$ Here $$\begin{aligned}
W &\equiv& 2 \big|{\rm unif} \big)\big({\rm unif}\big| - I \nonumber \\
&=& \frac{1}{n}
\begin{pmatrix}
2-n & 2 & 2 & \cdots & 2 \\
2 & 2-n & 2 & \cdots & 2 \\
2 & 2 & 2-n & \cdots & 2 \\
\vdots & \vdots &\vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
2 & 2 & 2 & \cdots & 2-n \\
\end{pmatrix},
\label{inversion operator}\end{aligned}$$ is the inversion operator, $$O_i \equiv
\begin{pmatrix}
1 & & & & & \\
& 1 & & & & \\
& & \ddots & & & \\
& & & -1 & & \\
& & & & \ddots & \\
& & & & & 1 \\
\end{pmatrix},
\label{oracle operator}$$ is the oracle (a diagonal matrix with the $i$th element equal to $-1$ and the others equal to $1$), and $|{\rm unif})$ is the uniform superposition (\[unif state\]). The operator (\[inversion operator\]) can be implemented in a single step using $${\cal H} = g
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 & 1 & \cdots & 1 \\
1 & 0 & 1 & \cdots & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 0 & \cdots & 1 \\
& & \vdots & & \\
1& 1 & 1 & \cdots & 0 \\
\end{pmatrix},
\label{inversion operator H}$$ which describes a completely symmetric, fully coupled array, for a time $$t_{\rm qu} = \frac{\pi}{ng}.
\label{t inversion operator}$$ This leads to the desired operation $$W = \exp \! \left[ -i \, \frac{\pi}{n}
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 & \cdots & 1 \\
1 & 0 & \cdots & 1 \\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
1& 1 & \cdots & 0 \\
\end{pmatrix}
\right],$$ up to a multiplicative phase factor. The oracle (\[oracle operator\]) can be generated by a $2\pi$ rotation on qubit $i$. Each iteration of the search can be implemented in a few ns, allowing SES processors of even modest sizes to perform computations that would otherwise require thousands of elementary gates.
Time-independent Schrödinger equation solver
--------------------------------------------
Finally, we consider wave function propagation by a real but otherwise arbitrary time-independent $n \! \times \! n$ Hamiltonian $H$, $$\big|\psi\big) \rightarrow e^{-i H t} \big|\psi\big).$$ Here $t$ is the length of simulated time (for example, the duration of some physical process to be simulated). To map this to the SES processor we first find the smallest positive constant $\lambda$ such that every matrix element of $$H_{\rm qc} \equiv
\frac{H - {\rm const} \times I }{\lambda}$$ is beween $-g_{\rm max}$ and $g_{\rm max}$. With the SES processor we then simulate the equivalent evolution $$\big|\psi \big)_{\rm qc} \rightarrow e^{-i H_{\rm qc} t_{\rm qc}} \big| \psi \big)_{\rm qc},
\label{scaled evolution}$$ where $$t_{\rm qc} \equiv \lambda \, t.
\label{tqc definition}$$ The time $ t_{\rm qu}$ required to perform a single run of the quantum computation is therefore $$t_{\rm qu} = t_{\rm qc} + t_{\rm meas},$$ where $t_{\rm meas}$ is the (projective) qubit measurement time, which for superconducting qubits we can assume to be about $100 \, {\rm ns}$ [@JohnsonPRL12].
How long does the corresponding classical simulation take? This depends on the particular Hamiltonian, through the value of $\lambda$. However, it is possible to assess the possibility of quantum speedup by finding the time required to classically simulate a typical run of the SES processor, where $H_{\rm qc}$ is an $n \! \times \! n$ random symmetric matrix with elements bounded by $g_{\rm max}$. The optimal algorithm used to perform this classical simulation depends on the value of $t_{\rm qc}$: When $t_{\rm qc}$ is less than a parameter $t^*$ that depends on $n$, the fastest way to classically simulate (\[scaled evolution\]) is to solve the Schrödinger equation $$\partial_t |\psi )_{\rm qc} = -i H_{\rm qc} |\psi )_{\rm qc}$$ as a set of $n$ coupled ordinary differential equations. In this regime the classical simulation time scales linearly with $t_{\rm qc}$. When $t_{\rm qc}> t^*$ the fastest way to simulate (\[scaled evolution\]) is by matrix exponentiation or diagonalization, and the classical simulation time is independent of $t_{\rm qc}.$
Next we specialize to the case $$n=1000 \ \ \ {\rm and} \ \ \ \frac{g_{\rm max}}{2\pi} = 100 \, {\rm MHz}.$$ In this case it can be shown that (with a single core) $$t^*\approx 1 \, {\rm ns},
\label{t crossover value}$$ and in what follows we consider an evolution with $t_{\rm qc}$ longer than $t^*$. The result (\[t crossover value\]) is only weakly dependent on the particular algorithms used to integrate the ordinary differential equations and diagonalize the Hamiltonian. Although a precise value of $t^*$ is not needed here, it is important that it is sufficiently less than the coherence time of the quantum computer. The classical (single core) simulation time is then equal to the matrix exponentiation or diagonalization time, which is about 1s for a $1000 \times 1000$ real, symmetric matrix. Thus we would obtain speedup relative to a single core if we can perform a 1000 qubit simulation, and read out the result, in less than about 1s.
Our objective is to achieve speedup relative to a state-of-the-art supercomputer, not a single core. The classical simulation time (matrix diagonalization time) then needs to be evaluated on a supercomputer, using an optimally distributed parallel algorithm. However, we can bound the parallel performance by using the single-core result and assuming perfect parallelization efficiency. If we approximate a petaflop supercomputer by $10^6$ gigaflop cores, we conclude that the classical calculation time can be no shorter than $10^{-6}$ times the single-core time. For the $n=1000$ case considered above the classical simulation is therefore no shorter than $t_{\rm cl} =1 \, \mu {\rm s},$ while the quantum simulation (including readout) can be performed in a few hundred ns. Thus we would achieve a genuine quantum speedup for Schrödinger evolution with a 1000-qubit SES simulator.
CONCLUSIONS {#conclusion section}
===========
It is tempting to conclude that by working in an exponentially small (approximately invariant) subspace of the full $n$-qubit Hilbert space, any computational power that quantum physics has over classical is sacrificed, but this is not the case. Any BQP computation necessarily accesses only exponentially small subspaces (polynomially larger than the SES, but still exponentially small) [@PoulinPRL11]. This is because a quantum computer starts in a product state and then implements a polynomial number of two-qubit entangling gates.
It is also interesting to compare the space resource requirement (number of physical qubits) of the SES method relative to a fault-tolerant quantum computer. Because approximately $10^4$ physical qubits are required per ideal qubit in the surface code (this includes $10$ logical qubits per ideal for magic state distillation), the logical Hilbert space simulated has dimension $$\sim 2^{10^{-4} n},$$ which is smaller than $n$ when $n< 1.7 \! \times \! 10^{5}.$ This shows that for a superconducting quantum computer with fewer than about a hundred thousand physical qubits, an SES processor will simulate a higher dimensional Hilbert space than the surface code will, although the fault-tolerant computer will of course run for a much longer time.
We have argued here that the 1000-qubit SES quantum simulator should be capable of speedup relative to a petaflop supercomputer. However, there are important limitations of the SES method:
1. We require a fully connected network with tunable coupling between every qubit, which therefore has $n(n-1)/2$ coupling circuits and wires. This may make the SES approach unscalable beyond a few thousand qubits.
2. We require an exponentially large number of physical qubits relative to the standard model. However, because of the large physical qubit overhead required by error correction, the SES method will be simulating a larger Hilbert space until there are about a hundred thousand physical qubits.
3. The maximum computation time is limited by the coherence time of the hardware and calculations cannot run indefinitely. This applies to all known pre-threshold approaches, including analog quantum simulators.
4. Computations have fixed accuracy and cannot be made arbitrarily accurate. This also applies to all known pre-threshold approaches, including analog simulators. Error sources include decoherence, leakage out of the SES, readout errors, as well as pulse control errors.
5. In the present SES approach the simulated Hamiltonian must be real.
6. In our estimates of classical simulation time, we have not included the time needed to store the Hamiltonian in memory or perhaps compute it from a separate procedure. Similarly, for the quantum simulation time estimates we have not included the time required to send the $n(n+1)/2$ voltage signals to the qubits and couplers before the simulation, and to reset the readout circuitry afterwards.
7. It is important to emphasize that the SES method implements a [*weak*]{} simulation (providing a single sample from the distribution of possible measurement outcomes), not the probability distributions themselves as is normally provided classically. This is of course also a limitation of the conventional approaches designed for error-corrected quantum computers, and is usually a limitation of analog quantum simulation as well.
8. We have argued here that a quantum speedup is possible with 1000 qubits, but not every 1000-qubit simulation will possess this speedup (this depends on the particular simulated Hamiltonian, the value of $\lambda$, and the desired accuracy).
9. The SES method is unsuitable for applications (including Shor’s) requiring enormous Hilbert spaces.
We note, however, that in contrast to efficient gate-based simulation intended for a scalable quantum computer [@LloydSci96; @ZalkaProcRoySocLondA98; @BerryCMP07], the SES approach is not restricted to local (or sparse) Hamiltonians.
The quantum simulation application discussed here is restricted to time-independent Hamiltonians. The time-dependent case, discussed previously in Ref. [@PritchettPre10], is perhaps even more interesting. However, the estimates of both $t_{\rm cl}$ and $t_{\rm qu}$ in the time-dependent case are somewhat more subtle, and for the purpose of establishing speedup it is simpler to treat the time-independent case.
The SES method appears to be distinct from previously investigated approaches to quantum computation. Like analog quantum simulation, it is tied to a very specific hardware model and cannot be implemented on any architecture. However, it enables (almost) universal quantum computation and simulation, and might make practical a first-generation universal quantum simulator capable of achieving genuine quantum speedup.
This work was supported by the National Science Foundation under CDI grant DMR-1029764. It is a pleasure to thank Alan Aspuru-Guzik, Joydip Ghosh, Matteo Mariantoni, Hao You, and Zhongyuan Zhou for useful discussions.
General coupling types
======================
Here we discuss the generalization of the SES method to FQC models of the form $$\begin{aligned}
H = \sum_{i} \epsilon_i c_i^\dagger c_i + \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i i'}
g_{ii'} \sum_{\mu \nu} \, J_{\mu \nu} \, \sigma^\mu_i\otimes\sigma^\nu_{i'},
\label{general interaction model}\end{aligned}$$ where the $\sigma^\mu$ (with $\mu=x,y,z$) are Pauli matrices and $J_{\mu \nu}$ is a fixed, real, dimensionless tensor determined by the hardware. In this case the SES matrix elements are $$\begin{aligned}
\big( i \big| H \big|i' \big) &=& \bigg[ \epsilon_i
- 2 \big( \sum_{j} g_{ij} \big) J_{zz}
+ \big(\sum_{j<j'} g_{jj'}\big) J_{zz} \bigg] \delta_{ii'} \nonumber \\
&+& \bigg[J_{xx} + J_{yy} - i (J_{xy}-J_{yx}) \bigg] g_{ii'}.
\label{general matrix elements}\end{aligned}$$ Note that the term proportional to $(\sum_{j<j'} g_{jj'})\delta_{ii'}$ is an energy shift and can be dropped. The results given in the main body of the paper apply when $$J_{xx} + J_{yy} \neq 0
\label{exchange condition}$$ and $$J_{xy}=J_{yx} \, .
\label{J symmetry condition}$$ The condition (\[exchange condition\]) means that the interaction has an exchange or transverse component, and (\[J symmetry condition\]) ensures that $g_{ii'}$ is purely real.
Further generalizations are possible, including cases where the coupling introduces both single-qubit and two-qubit terms, and cases where $g_{ii'}$ is complex, but these will not be considered here.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We investigate a system of multiple Majorana states at the end of a topological superconducting wire coupled to a normal lead. For a minimum of three Majorana fermions at the interface, we find nontrivial renormalization physics. Interface tunneling processes can be classified in terms of spin-$1/2$ and spin-$3/2$ irreducible representations of the SU(2) group. We show that the renormalization of the tunneling amplitudes belonging to different representations is completely different in that one type is suppressed, whereas the other is enhanced, depending on the sign of the Kondo-type interaction coupling. This results in distinct temperature dependencies of the tunneling current through the interface and different spin polarizations of this current.'
author:
- Oleksiy Kashuba
- Carsten Timm
bibliography:
- 'mlcoupling.bib'
title: |
Topological Kondo Effect in Transport through a Superconducting Wire\
with Multiple Majorana End States
---
*Introduction*.—Majorana fermions were first proposed as hypothetical elementary particles that are their own antiparticles [@Majorana:1937]. The possibility of Majorana states at the surfaces of triplet superconductors has been discussed for a long time [@Lieb:1961; @Kopnin:1991; @Volovik:1999; @Senthil:2000; @Read:2000; @Beenakker:2013]. The realization that they are related to topological properties of the system [@Kitaev:2001] has generated a lot of interest in Majorana states at the surfaces of topological superconductors (TSs) [@Schnyder:2008; @Lutchyn:2010; @Oreg:2010; @Qi:2011; @Alicea:2012; @Schnyder:2012; @Schnyder:2013; @Beenakker:2013].
The first signatures of Majorana states at the ends of a TS wire were found in transport measurements involving the interface between the wire and a normal lead [@Mourik:2012; @Deng:2012]. These experiments have so far been compared to a model with a single Majorana state coupled to the normal lead [@Bolech:2007; @Lutchyn:2010; @Oreg:2010], which cannot contain any interaction between the Majorana state and the lead since the (single) Majorana operator $\gamma$ squares to unity. The theory has already advanced to more sophisticated noninteracting systems, such as Josephson junctions between TSs, where the tunneling takes place between Majorana states [@Sticlet:2013], and setups with one or several quantum dots mediating the electron transfer between the leads and the TS [@Lu:2012; @Cao:2012; @Li:2013]. The study of interaction processes in such systems is of interest since interactions generically lead to strong renormalizations in low dimensions. However, so far only on-dot interactions have been studied for these setups [@Golub:2011; @Lee:2013]. The implementation of Majorana-lead interactions requires the presence of several Majorana modes. Multiple Majorana states and the renormalization of interaction couplings have been studied in Refs.[@Beri:2012; @Zazunov:2013; @Altland:2014; @Eriksson:2014]. Each Majorana end state is either coupled by a tunneling term to its own normal lead or is not coupled at all [@Beri:2012; @Zazunov:2013; @Altland:2014; @Eriksson:2014]. We consider a different situation: multiple Majorana states hybridizing with a single lead.
Our goal is to understand the interplay between multiple tunneling channels and the electron-Majorana interaction, which we find to induce strong renormalization. This research is meant to help in interpreting, regardless of microscopic details, the results of transport measurements by studying the temperature dependence and spin polarization of the current. We show that these observables exhibit clear signatures of the presence of Majorana fermions and of their coupling to the leads. A TS wire coupled to a normal lead is modeled by $N$ Majorana fermions localized at one end of the wire and a Fermi sea of spinful electrons, coupled by general tunneling and interaction terms. The minimal nontrivial case of $N=2$ gives nothing new since the two Majorana states make up a spinless fermion and the interaction in the system is equivalent to the one in the interacting resonant-level model, leading to the same renormalization flow, which has been studied extensively [@Tsvelick:1983; @*Schlottmann:1982a; @*Schlottmann:1982b; @*Schlottmann:1982c; @Andergassen:2011; @*Kashuba:2013]. Systems with $N\geq3$ are fundamentally different: unlike $N=2$ system, their interaction couplings get strongly renormalized, similarly to the Kondo model [@Eriksson:2014]. Here, we will demonstrate that interesting renormalization physics occurs already for $N=3$. The predictions made in this work are unique for this system, which supports both Kondo and tunneling couplings, whose interplay leads to the non-trivial discrimination of the tunneling processes depending on the sign of the interaction.
In the general case of $N$ Majorana states, the sets of $N$ Majorana operators before and after some symmetry transformation are related by $\gamma_{i}'=\sum_{j=1}^{N}R_{ij}\gamma_{j}$, where $R$ is a real (since $\gamma^{\dagger}_{i}=\gamma_{i}$) orthogonal matrix belonging to the group SO($N$). A candidate for this symmetry transformation is the electron spin rotation. In this case Majorana states transform into each other according to a representation of the SU(2) group, which also has to be a subgroup of SO($N$). The case of three Majorana states is particularly interesting since the whole SO(3) group is equivalent to the spin-1 representation of SU(2). An experimental realization of a set of three Majorana states transforming under SO(3) is still unknown, but there is already a proposal assuming the existence of such sets in vortex cores in TS [@Yasui:2011]. As we shall see, for the N–TS interface the tunneling terms inevitably break the SU(2) spin symmetry.
In this paper, we derive the renormalization-group (RG) flow equations for the electron-Majorana interaction strengths and tunneling amplitudes within the framework of poor man’s scaling for arbitrary $N$. We solve the RG equations for the simplest nontrivial case $N=3$ and demonstrate that the tunneling amplitudes can be classified according to the irreducible representations of the SU(2) group and that the components belonging to different representations obey different RG equations. In practice, this means that starting from arbitrary tunneling parameters, the interaction will lead to the suppression of one set of parameters and the enhancement of the other. Moreover, depending on the initial value of the interaction, a different tunneling type will dominate in the scaling limit, leading to a different temperature dependence of the current through the interface.
*Model*.—The investigated system consists of a noninteracting normal lead with a Fermi sea of electrons coupled to three Majorana states localized at the same end of a TS wire, which are described by the Hermitian fermionic operators $\gamma_{i}$. The Hamiltonian of the lead is $H_{L}= \sum_{\alpha\mathbf{p}} \epsilon_{\mathbf{p}}\,
a^{\dagger}_{\alpha\mathbf{p}}a_{\alpha\mathbf{p}}$, where $a^\dagger_{\alpha\mathbf{p}}$, $a_{\alpha\mathbf{p}}$ are creation and annihilation operators of electrons with spin $\alpha={\uparrow}$, ${\downarrow}$ and momentum $\mathbf{p}$. It is assumed that the electronic band with the dispersion relation $\epsilon_{\mathbf{p}}$ approximately covers the energy interval $[-D,\,D]$ and has a constant normalized density of states $\rho(E)\equiv\mathcal{N}^{-1}\sum_{\mathbf{p}}
\delta(E-\epsilon_{\mathbf{p}})\approx\nu$ for $E\ll D$ (here $\mathcal{N}$ is a total number of states in the lead). Henceforth, we take $\hbar=k_B=1$.
The couplings between the states localized at opposite ends of the wire are exponentially suppressed with the distance between them. If the SO($N$) symmetry of the Majorana states $\gamma_{i}$ at the same end is broken, a coupling of the form $H_{D}=i\sum_{ij}E_{ij}\gamma_{i}\gamma_{j}$ is allowed. However, as we will discuss later, $H_D$ does not affect the RG equations as long as the flow parameter satisfies $\Lambda\gg |E_{ij}|$.
The N–TS coupling consists of a bilinear tunneling part and an interaction part. Assuming that the coupling is local in real space, the most general tunneling term is $$H_{T} = \sum_{i\alpha} t_{i\alpha}\, \gamma_{i}\, a_{\alpha}^{\dagger}
+ \text{H.c.},
\label{eq:Htunneling}$$ where $a_{\alpha}=\mathcal{N}^{-1/2}\sum_{\mathbf{p}}a_{\alpha\mathbf{p}}$ and the $t_{i\alpha}$ are tunneling amplitudes. The leading interaction terms are of fourth order in fermionic operators. We focus on terms that are quadratic in Majorana operators [^1]. Due to the anticommutation relation $\{\gamma_{i},\gamma_{j}\}=2\delta_{ij}$ only $N(N-1)/2$ combinations exist. Thus, the most general local biquadratic interaction term reads $$H_{V}= \frac{1}{2}\sum_{ij\alpha\beta} V^{ij}_{\alpha\beta}\,
\gamma_{i}\gamma_{j} a^{\dagger}_{\alpha}a_{\beta},
\label{eq:Hinteraction}$$ where $V^{ij}_{\alpha\beta}=-V^{ji}_{\alpha\beta}$ are coupling parameters. If there is any interaction between the TS and the leads, we expect an expansion in the order of vertices to generate $H_V$. While the direct Coulomb interaction vanishes for the neutral Majorana fermions, an exchange-type interaction emerges naturally since the zero-energy Majorana surface states of nodal TSs with strong spin-orbit coupling typically carry a large spin [@Brydon:2013; @Schnyder:2013; @Brydon:2014]. An interaction $H_V$ can also be realized in a small superconducting island with large charging energy hybridized with normal leads [@Beri:2012; @Altland:2014]. $H_V$ is here obtained by integrating out charge fluctuations, which removes the tunneling term $H_T$. More generally, the coupling of Marojana states and normal electrons to any additional modes, such as phonons, will typically introduce an effective interaction of this form when these modes are integrated out.
*RG and symmetry analysis*.—To study the renormalization effects, we employ the poor man’s scaling approach [@Wilson:1975; @Borda:2007]: the RG flow parameter $\Lambda$ denotes the maximal energy of the electron modes, $|\epsilon_{\mathbf{p}}|<\Lambda$; the electron modes are divided into *fast* modes $a_{\alpha\mathbf{k}}$ with energies in the thin shell $\Lambda-\Delta\Lambda < |\epsilon_{\mathbf{k}}| < \Lambda$ and *slow* modes $a_{\alpha\mathbf{p}'}$ with $|\epsilon_{\mathbf{p}'}|<\Lambda-\Delta\Lambda$; integration over the fast modes results in corrections to the slow-mode terms in the Hamiltonian. Repeating this step, we integrate out all electron degrees of freedom, obtaining an effective low-energy Hamiltonian. Taking the N–TS coupling as the perturbation and $H_{0}=H_{L}+H_{D}$ as the bare Hamiltonian, the correction to the interaction for excitations with small energy $E$, from a single RG step, reads $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta H_{V} &\approx& \langle
H_{V}(E-H_{0})^{-1}H_{V}\rangle
= - \frac{1}{4\mathcal{N}^{2}} \!\!\!\! \sum_{ii'jj',\alpha\beta\eta \atop \mathbf{p'q';k}} \!\!
V_{\alpha\eta}^{ij}V_{\eta\beta}^{i'j'} \nonumber \\
&\times& \!\left(\!
\gamma_{i}\gamma_{j}\gamma_{i'}\gamma_{j'} \frac{1-n_{\mathbf{k}}}{\epsilon_{\mathbf{k}}}
+ \gamma_{i'}\gamma_{j'}\gamma_{i}\gamma_{j} \frac{n_{\mathbf{k}}}{\epsilon_{\mathbf{k}}}
\!\right)\!
a^{\dagger}_{\alpha \mathbf{p}'}a_{\beta \mathbf{q}'},\qquad
\label{eq:rg.DeltaHV}\end{aligned}$$ where $\mathbf{p}'$, $\mathbf{q}'$ denote slow modes, $\mathbf{k}$ refers to a fast mode, angular brackets denote the integration over the fast modes only, $\Delta H \equiv H(\Lambda-\Delta\Lambda)-H(\Lambda)$ is the difference between the values after and before the RG step, and $n_{\mathbf{k}}\equiv n_{F}(\epsilon_{\mathbf{k}})$ is a Fermi distribution function. $\Lambda$ is of the order of the band width, which is assumed to be large compared to the other energy scales of the problem, in particular the energy $E$ and the inter-Majorana couplings $E_{ij}$. Therefore, these terms do not affect the RG flow to leading order and can be neglected. The terms relevant for the RG flow decay as $\Lambda^{-1}$. For the assumed constant and symmetric density of states we drop the sum $\mathcal{N}^{-1} \sum_{\mathbf{\mathbf{k}}}1/\epsilon_{\mathbf{\mathbf{k}}}$ and approximate $\mathcal{N}^{-1} \sum_{\mathbf{k}}(1/2-n_{\mathbf{k}})/\epsilon_{\mathbf{k}}\approx \nu\,
\Delta\Lambda/\Lambda$, and find the RG equation $$\frac{d V_{\alpha\beta}^{ij}}{d\Lambda} = \frac{2\nu}{\Lambda}
\sum_{l,\eta}\left(V_{\alpha\eta}^{il}V_{\eta\beta}^{lj}
- V_{\alpha\eta}^{jl}V_{\eta\beta}^{li}\right) .
\label{eq:rgsV}$$ The corresponding correction to the tunneling term is $$\begin{aligned}
\lefteqn{ \Delta H_{T} \!\approx\!\langle
H_{V}(E \!-\! H_{0})^{-1}H_{T}\rangle \!+\! [T\leftrightarrow V] \!=\! - \frac{1}{2\mathcal{N}^{3/2}} }
\nonumber \\
&& \!\!\times\!\!\! \sum_{ijj',\eta\beta \atop \mathbf{p}';\mathbf{k}} \!\!
V_{\alpha\beta}^{ij} t_{j'\beta} \!\left(\!
\gamma_{i}\gamma_{j}\gamma_{j'} \frac{1 \!-\! n_{\mathbf{k}}}{\epsilon_{\mathbf{k}}}
\!+\! \gamma_{j'}\gamma_{i}\gamma_{j} \frac{n_{\mathbf{k}}}{\epsilon_{\mathbf{k}}}
\!\right)\! a_{\alpha\mathbf{p}'}^{\dagger} \!+\! \text{H.c.} \quad
\label{eq:rg.DeltaHT}\end{aligned}$$ Keeping only the RG-relevant contribution, we obtain $$\frac{d t_{i\alpha}}{d\Lambda} = \frac{2\nu}{\Lambda} \sum_{j,\beta} V_{\alpha\beta}^{ij}t_{j\beta}.
\label{eq:rgsT}$$ The obtained equations couple $2N(N-1)$ quantities $V^{ij}_{\alpha\beta}$ and $2N$ quantities $t_{i\alpha}$. To simplify the analysis but preserve the interesting renormalization physics, we restrict ourselves to $N=3$.
*The case of three Majorana states*.—The special feature of the SO(3) group is that its irreducible representations are equivalent to integer-spin representations of SU(2). This feature allows us to classify the elements $V^{ij}_{\alpha\beta}$ and $t_{i\alpha}$ in terms of the irreducible representations of SU(2). The products of two Majorana operators, which form vectors belonging to the spin-1 representation $\Gamma_{1}$, can be split into the irreducible representations $\Gamma_{1}\otimes\Gamma_{1}\cong\Gamma_{0}\oplus\Gamma_{1}\oplus\Gamma_{2}$. Since expressions belonging to the scalar ($\Gamma_{0}$) representation, $\sum_{i}\gamma_{i}^{2}=3$, and to the spin-2 ($\Gamma_{2}$) representation, $\gamma_{i}\gamma_{j}+\gamma_{j}\gamma_{i}=0$, are just numbers, the only non-trivial combination is the Majorana pseudospin operator $s^{M}_{i}=-(i/2)\sum_{jj'}\epsilon_{ijj'}\gamma_{j}\gamma_{j'}$ (here $\epsilon_{ijj'}$ is the three-dimensional Levi-Civita tensor), which belongs to the $\Gamma_{1}$ representation of SU(2). The operators $s^M_i$ play the role of pseudospin components; they satisfy the algebra $[s_{j}^{M},s_{j'}^{M}]=2i\sum_i\epsilon_{ijj'}s_{i}^{M}$ and $[s^{M}_{j},\gamma_{j'}]=2i\sum_i\epsilon_{ijj'}\gamma_{i}$. Expressed in these terms, the interaction term in Eq. takes the form $$H_{V}=\sum_{i}M_{i}\, s^{M}_{i} n^{L} + \sum_{ij}V_{ij}\, s^{M}_{i}s^{L}_{j} ,
\label{eq:Hintsplit}$$ where $n^{L}=\mathcal{N}^{-1}\sum_{\alpha,\mathbf{pq}}
a_{\alpha\mathbf{p}}^{\dagger} a_{\alpha\mathbf{q}}$ is the local lead-electron number operator and $s^{L}_{i}=\mathcal{N}^{-1}\sum_{\alpha\beta,\mathbf{pq}}
a_{\alpha\mathbf{p}}^{\dagger}\sigma_{\alpha\beta}^{i}a_{\beta\mathbf{q}}/2$ the corresponding spin operator, where $\sigma^{i}$ are Pauli matrices. The first term, when substituted into Eq. , is not renormalized and just leads to a renormalization of the tunneling amplitudes through Eq. , similar to the interacting resonant-level model [@Andergassen:2011]. Setting the vector $M_{i}$ to $(0,0,M_{z})$ by choosing an appropriate basis, we find that the $z$-component of the tunneling amplitude does not change, $t_{\alpha z}(\Lambda)=t_{\alpha z}$, while the others are renormalized as $t_{\alpha,\pm}(\Lambda)=t_{\alpha,\pm}(D/\Lambda)^{\pm
2\nu M_{z}}$, where $t_{\alpha,\pm}=t_{\alpha x}\pm i\, t_{\alpha y}$ [@Zazunov:2013]. The second term in Eq. contains the product of two vectors, so it can be decomposed as $V_{ij} =
\delta_{ij} J+ \sum_{k} \epsilon_{ijk} J^{k} + J^{ij}$, where $J$ is a scalar ($\Gamma_{0}$), which describes the Kondo-type interaction between the lead electrons and the effective Majorana spin, $J^{i}$ is a vector ($\Gamma_{1}$), and the symmetric matrix $J^{ij}$ with zero trace corresponds to the spin-2 representation $\Gamma_{2}$.
Since the main goal of this paper is to demonstrate the possibility of interesting renormalization physics, we restrict ourselves to the simplest case with unbroken SU(2) symmetry in the interaction between normal lead and TS, choosing $V_{ij}=\delta_{ij}J$. Then Eq. leads to the well-known RG flow equation for the Kondo coupling [@Wilson:1975; @Beri:2012; @Zazunov:2013], $$\frac{dJ}{d\Lambda}=-\frac{2\nu J^{2}}{\Lambda}.
\label{eq:rgJ}$$ The solution depends on the sign of the initial unrenormalized coupling $J_{0}$ (we denote initial values by a subscript $0$): The coupling is enhanced for $J_{0}>0$ and suppressed for $J_{0}<0$, depending on $\Lambda$ as $$J = \frac{1}{2\nu\, \ln(\Lambda/T_{K})},
\label{eq:rgJsolution}$$ where $T_{K}=D\, e^{-1/2\nu J_{0}}$ is the Kondo temperature. The poor man’s scaling approach, however, breaks down when $\Lambda$ reaches the largest of the low-energy scales of the problem, $\Lambda_{c}$, which plays the role of an infrared cutoff. For the antiferromagnetic case ($J>0$) this means that $J$ actually saturates and does not diverge at $\Lambda=T_{K}$, as Eq. would predict [@Andergassen:2011; @Pletyukhov:2012; @Wilson:1975]. In the context of a possible implementation utilizing spin-polarized Majorana surface states, it is plausible that either sign of $J$ can be realized since model calculations find Majorana states in pairs with opposite spin expectation value [@Schnyder:2013; @Brydon:2014].
The tunneling term in Eq. contains a product of a vector and a spinor. Thus the tunneling amplitudes can be classified by the irreducible representations of SU(2), $\Gamma_{1} \otimes \Gamma_{1/2} \cong
\Gamma_{1/2} \oplus \Gamma_{3/2}$, and split into spin-1/2 and spin-3/2 terms according to $t_{i\alpha}=\sum_{S,m}t^{S,m} \tau_{i\alpha}^{S,m}$, where $m=\pm1/2$ for $S=1/2$ and $m=\pm1/2,\pm3/2$ for $S=3/2$. The Clebsch-Gordon coefficients for $S=1/2$ read $$\tau^{\frac{1}{2},+\frac{1}{2}}_{i\alpha} \!=\! \tfrac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\!
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & 0 & 1 \\
1 & i & 0
\end{pmatrix}_{\!\!\alpha i} \!, \,
\tau^{\frac{1}{2},-\frac{1}{2}}_{i\alpha} \!=\! \tfrac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\!
\begin{pmatrix}
1 & -i & 0 \\
0 & 0 & -1
\end{pmatrix}_{\!\!\alpha i} \!,
\label{eq:matr12}$$ which are basically Pauli matrices with swapped indices, $\tau_{i\alpha}^{1/2,+1/2}=\sigma^{i}_{\alpha,\uparrow}$, $\tau_{i\alpha}^{1/2,-1/2}=\sigma^{i}_{\alpha,\downarrow}$. The Clebsch-Gordon coefficients for $S=3/2$ are $$\begin{split}
&
\tau^{\frac{3}{2},+\frac{3}{2}}_{i\alpha} =
\begin{pmatrix}
\frac{1}{2} & \frac{i}{2} & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0
\end{pmatrix}_{\!\!\alpha i}\!, \,
\tau^{\frac{3}{2},+\frac{1}{2}}_{i\alpha} =
\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{3}}
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & 0 & -1 \\
\frac{1}{2} & \frac{i}{2} & 0
\end{pmatrix}_{\!\!\alpha i}\!,
\\
&
\tau^{\frac{3}{2},-\frac{1}{2}}_{i\alpha} =
\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{3}}
\begin{pmatrix}
-\frac{1}{2} & \frac{i}{2} & 0 \\
0 & 0 & -1
\end{pmatrix}_{\!\!\alpha i}\!, \,
\tau^{\frac{3}{2},-\frac{3}{2}}_{i\alpha} =
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & 0 & 0 \\
-\frac{1}{2} & \frac{i}{2} & 0
\end{pmatrix}_{\!\!\alpha i} .
\end{split}
\label{eq:matr32}$$ The absence of the scalar representation for the tunneling amplitudes between spin-1/2 electrons and triplets of Majorana states signifies that the SU(2) is always broken, as mentioned in the introduction.
According to Eq. , the tunneling coefficients obey the RG equations $$\frac{dt^{1/2,m}}{d\Lambda} = -\frac{4\nu J t^{1/2,m}}{\Lambda} , \quad
\frac{dt^{3/2,m}}{d\Lambda} = \frac{2\nu J t^{3/2,m}}
{\Lambda}.
\label{eq:rgt}$$ Together with Eq. , the solutions read $$t^{1/2,m} = t^{1/2,m}_0\, \frac{J^2}{J_0^2} , \quad
t^{3/2,m} = t^{3/2,m}_0\, \frac{J_0}{J} .
\label{eq:rgtsolution}$$ For antiferromagnetic coupling, spin-3/2 tunneling is suppressed, whereas spin-1/2 tunneling rapidly increases as $\Lambda$ approaches $T_K$, together with the Kondo coupling $J$. Ferromagnetic coupling leads to the opposite behavior: spin-3/2 tunneling increases, while spin-1/2 tunneling decreases. The physical values of the renormalized parameters are obtained at the end of the RG flow. Although Eqs. and generally break down at the infrared cutoff $\Lambda_{c}$, if the temperature $T$ is much larger than all other low-energy scales (but still much smaller than ultraviolet cutoff $D$), the renormalized coupling parameters can be obtained by substituting the flow parameter by the temperature, $\Lambda=T$.
*Results and discussion*.—The results in Eq. demonstrate that antiferromagnetic coupling at the interface enhances the transport with smaller total spin, while ferromagnetic coupling enhances the tunneling transport with larger total spin. In the general case when the initial Hamiltonian contains all possible tunneling amplitudes, the presence of a Kondo interaction leads to a strong renormalization, which manifests itself by an instability of the tunneling amplitudes. Independently of the coupling sign, the total tunneling probability is enhanced. However, if the initial interaction is antiferromagnetic the system is dominated by spin-1/2 tunneling, while for ferromagnetic interaction it is dominated by spin-3/2 tunneling. The type of coupling thus manifests itself in transport processes. One of its signatures is the temperature dependence of the current through the N–TS interface. For voltages $U$ much larger than the temperature but smaller than the superconducting gap, the current $I$ is proportional to the tunneling probability, $I\propto |t|^{2}$ [@Bolech:2007]. According to Eqs. and , the current thus depends on temperature as $I\propto \ln^{-4} (T/T_{K})$ for the antiferromagnetic case and as $I\propto \ln^2 (T_{K}/T)$ for the ferromagnetic case. This provides us with a criterion for the detection of multiple Majorana states and for determining the type of interaction between normal lead and TS.
The dominant renormalized spin-$S$ tunneling also leads to a distinctive spin dependence of the current through the interface. For spin-1/2 tunneling (antiferromagnetic case), two of the three Majorana fermions can be combined into one conventional (Dirac) fermion $d=\frac{1}{2}(\gamma_{x}+i\gamma_{y})$ so that the tunneling Hamiltonian becomes $$\begin{aligned}
H_{T} &=& \sum_{i\alpha m} t^{1/2,m} \tau^{1/2,m}_{i\alpha} \gamma_i\,
a^\dagger_\alpha + \mathrm{H.c.} \nonumber \\
&=& t'_1\, (- \gamma_z a^\dagger_\downarrow
+ 2d^\dagger a^\dagger_\uparrow)
+ t'_2\, ( \gamma_z a^\dagger_\uparrow
+ 2d a^\dagger_\downarrow ) + \mathrm{H.c.} ,\qquad
\label{eq:Hd12}\end{aligned}$$ where $t'_1 \equiv t^{1/2,-1/2}/\sqrt{3}$, $t'_2 \equiv
t^{1/2,1/2}/\sqrt{3}$. The tunneling amplitudes $t^{1/2,\pm 1/2}$ form a spinor, so their component values depend on the choice of basis in spin space. By an appropriate choice one can always set one of the elements $t_{n}'$ to zero. Upon setting $t_{1}'=0$, the system decomposes into two noninteracting parts. The first one consists of spin-up electrons bound to the $\gamma_z$ Majorana state, while the second is a resonant-level model made up of spin-down electrons and the additional fermion $d$. We now discuss the contributions of the two parts to the tunneling current under a bias voltage. The first part allows a nonzero stationary current, as we can see as follows: The Majorana operator can be expressed in terms of Dirac operators as $\gamma_z = d'+(d')^\dagger$. Thus the combined particle number $a^\dagger_\uparrow a_\uparrow + (d')^\dagger d'$ is not conserved. If we assume, to be specific, a positive bias voltage to be applied to the TS, spin-up electrons will tunnel into the TS alternatingly creating and annihilating the $d'$ fermion. Physically, this represents Andreev tunneling [@Bolech:2007]; the charge conservation is restored by the creation of Cooper pairs in the superconducting condensate. On the other hand, the second part of the model does conserve the combined particle number $a^\dagger_\downarrow a_\downarrow + d^\dagger d$ and the $d$ fermion is not connected to any other lead. Thus the stationary current for the spin-down electrons vanishes. In conclusion, the spin-1/2 coupling results in a fully spin-polarized current in the basis defined by the tunneling-amplitude spinor.
For spin-3/2 tunneling (ferromagnetic case), the tunneling Hamiltonian can analogously be written as $$\begin{aligned}
H_{T} &=&
-t^{\prime\prime}_{1} d^{\dagger} a^{\dagger}_{\downarrow}
-t^{\prime\prime}_{2}\, (d^{\dagger}a^{\dagger}_{\uparrow}
+ \gamma_{z}a^{\dagger}_{\downarrow})
\nonumber\\&&
{}+t^{\prime\prime}_{3}\, (-\gamma_{z} a^{\dagger}_{\uparrow}
+ da^{\dagger}_{\downarrow})
+ t^{\prime\prime}_{4} d a^{\dagger}_{\uparrow}
+\text{H.c.},
\label{eq:Hd32}\end{aligned}$$ where $t''_1\equiv t^{3/2,-3/2}$, $t''_2\equiv t^{3/2,-1/2}/\sqrt{3}$, $t''_3\equiv t^{3/2,1/2}/\sqrt{3}$, $t''_4\equiv t^{3/2,3/2}$. The tunneling amplitudes $t^{3/2,m}$ form a spin-$3/2$ spinor. By an appropriate choice of spin basis we can again set one of the $t^{3/2,m}$ (and thus the corresponding $t''_n$) to zero. However, no matter which tunneling amplitude is set to zero, both spin channels remain coupled through the $d$ fermion and thus, directly or indirectly, to the Majorana fermion $\gamma_z$. Under a bias, the current is non-zero for all electron-spin states. Therefore, in general the current for spin-3/2 tunneling can only be partially spin polarized.
*Summary*.—The presence of the Kondo interaction between the electrons in the normal lead and Majorana fermions at the ends of a TS wire results in a strong renormalization of the tunneling processes through the interface. The tunneling amplitudes can be classified according to the irreducible representations of the SU(2) group. The amplitudes belonging to different representations obey different scaling laws. Depending on the sign of the interaction, one component is enhanced, while the other is suppressed so that only one type of tunneling survives. Ferromagnetic interaction favors a spin-3/2 tunneling with parallel electron spin and Majorana pseudospin, whereas antiferromagnetic coupling enhances spin-1/2 tunneling with opposite spin and pseudospin. The temperature dependence and spin polarization of the current through the N–TS interface reflects the presence of multiple Majorana states and the type of interaction, and therefore can be used as a tool for the search of a topological system with multiple edge states and for the determination of their interaction type.
Financial support by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft through Research Training Group GRK 1621 is gratefully acknowledged. We would like to thank M. Vojta for useful discussions.
[^1]: In principle, there are also N–TS interaction terms of the form $\gamma_{i} a_{\uparrow}a_{\downarrow}a_{\alpha}^{\dagger}+\mathrm{H.c.}$ and $\gamma_{i}\gamma_{j}\gamma_{k} a_{\alpha}^{\dagger}+\mathrm{H.c.}$, which can be interpreted as interaction corrections to tunneling, and $\gamma_{i}\gamma_{j}a_{\uparrow}a_{\downarrow}+\mathrm{H.c.}$, which is an Andreev tunneling term. These more exotic terms can be treated in the same manner. We find that these terms are generally renormalized and produce corrections to the tunneling and the biquadratic interaction, but we assume these couplings to be small for simplicity.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
We consider the smoothed multiplicative noise stochastic heat equation $${{\rm d}}u_{{\varepsilon},t}=
\frac 12 \Delta u_{{\varepsilon},t} {{\rm d}}t+
\beta {\varepsilon}^{\frac{d-2}{2}}\, \, u_{{\varepsilon}, t} \, {{\rm d}}B_{{\varepsilon},t} ,
\;\;u_{{\varepsilon},0}=1,$$ in dimension $d\geq 3$, where $B_{{\varepsilon},t}$ is a spatially smoothed (at scale ${\varepsilon}$) space-time white noise, and $\beta>0$ is a parameter. We show the existence of a $\bar\beta\in (0,\infty)$ so that the solution exhibits weak disorder when $\beta<\bar\beta$ and strong disorder when $\beta > \bar\beta$. The proof techniques use elements of the theory of the Gaussian multiplicative chaos.
address:
- 'Courant Institute, NYU and WIAS Berlin'
- 'Weizmann Institute of Science.'
- 'Weizmann Institute of Science and Courant Institute.'
author:
- Chiranjib Mukherjee
- Alexander Shamov
- Ofer Zeitouni
date: 'January 7, 2015'
title: 'Weak and strong disorder for the stochastic heat equation and continuous directed polymers in $d\geq 3$'
---
[^1]
*Courant Institute and WIAS Berlin, Weizmann Institute, Weizmann Institute and Courant Institute*
Motivation and introduction {#sec-intro}
===========================
We consider the stochastic heat equation (SHE) with multiplicative noise, written formally as $$\label{stheateq}
\partial_t u(t,x)= \frac 12 \Delta u(t,x) + u(t,x) \, \eta (t,x).$$ Here $\eta$ is the “space-time white noise", which formally is the centered Gaussian process with covariance function ${\mathbb{E}}(\eta(s,x) \eta(t,y))= \delta_0(t-s)\delta_0(x-y)$ for $s,t>0$ and $x,y \in {\mathbb{R}}^d$. We emphasize that is a formal expression, and in attempting to give it a precise meaning one is immediately faced with the problem of multiplication of distributions.
Besides the intrinsic interest in the SHE, we recall that the Cole-Hopf transformation $h:= -\log u$ formally transforms the SHE to the non-linear Kardar-Parisi-Zhang (KPZ) equation, which can be written as $$\label{KPZ}
\partial_t h(t,x)= \frac 12 \Delta h(t,x)-
\frac 1 2 (\partial_ x h(t,x))^2 + \eta,$$ and appears in dimension $d=1$ as the limit of front propagation in certain exclusion processes ([@BG97], [@ACQ11]). While a-priori the equation is not well posed due to the presence of products of distributions, much recent progress has been achieved in giving an intrinsic precise interpretation to it in dimension $d=1$ ([@H13])
As discussed in [@AKQ] and [@CSZ15], the equations and share close analogies to the well-studied [*[discrete directed polymer]{}*]{}, which can be defined as the transformed path measure $$\label{discretepolym}
\mu_n({{\rm d}}\omega)= \frac 1{Z_n} \exp\bigg\{\beta \sum_{i=1}^n \eta(i,\omega_i)\bigg\} {{\rm d}}P_0.$$ Here the white noise (the [*[disorder]{}*]{}) is replaced by i.i.d. random variables $\eta=\{\eta(n,x)\colon n\in{\mathbb{N}}, x\in {\mathbb{Z}}^d\}$, $P_0$ denotes the law of a simple random walk starting at the origin corresponding to a $d$-dimensional path $\omega_n=(\omega_i)_{i\leq n}$, while $\beta>0$ stands for the strength of the disorder. It is well-known that, when $d\geq 3$ the normalized partition function $Z_n / {\mathbb{E}}Z_n$ converges almost surely to a random variable $Z_\infty$, which, when $\beta$ is small enough, is positive almost surely (i.e., [*[weak disorder]{}*]{} persists [@IS88; @B89]), while for $\beta$ large enough, $Z_\infty=0$ (i.e., [*[strong disorder holds]{}*]{} [@CSY04]). Related results for a continuous directed polymer in a field of random traps appear in [@CY13]. We return to the study of the stochastic heat equation in the continuum ${\mathbb{R}}^d$, written as a stochastic differential equation $$\label{stheateqSDE}
{{\rm d}}u_t= \frac 12 \Delta u_t {{\rm d}}t+ \beta\, u_t\, {{\rm d}}B_t,$$ where $B_t$ is a cylindrical Wiener process in $L^2({\mathbb{R}}^d)$. Since the solution to is not well defined, a standard approach to treat this equation is to introduce a regularization of the process $B_t$, followed by a suitable rescaling of the coupling coefficients and subsequently passing to a limit as the regularization is turned off. In one space dimension $d = 1$, this task was carried out by Bertini-Cancrini ([@BC95]) by expressing the regularized process by a Feynman-Kac formula; after a simple renormalization ([*[the Wick exponential]{}*]{}), a meaningful expression was obtained when the mollification was removed. The renormalized Feynman-Kac formula defines a process with continuous (in space and time) trajectories and it solves the equation (when the stochastic differential is interpreted in the Ito sense). Extending this procedure to $d = 2$ (where small scale singularities coming from the noise are stronger), Bertini-Cancrini ([@BC98]) introduced a rescaling of the coupling constant $$\beta=\beta({\varepsilon})= \left( \frac{2\pi}{\log {\varepsilon}^{-1}}+ \frac {C}{(\log {\varepsilon}^{-1})^2} \right)^{1/2} \qquad C\in {\mathbb{R}}$$ which vanishes as ${\varepsilon}\to 0$. It turned out that the covariance ${\mathbb{E}}[Z_{\varepsilon}(t,x) Z_{\varepsilon}(t,y)]$ of the regularized field $Z_{\varepsilon}$ converges to a non-trivial limit as the mollification is removed, but the limiting law of $Z_{\varepsilon}$ was not identified in [@BC98]. The latter identification was recently carried out by Caravenna, Sun and Zygouras ([@CSZ15]) and by Feng [@Feng], who proved that, in $d=2$, if $\beta_{\varepsilon}$ is chosen to be $\beta \sqrt{2\pi\,\,[\log(1/{\varepsilon})]^{-1}}$, then for $\beta<1$, $Z_{\varepsilon}$ converges in law to a random variable with an explicit distribution, while for $\beta\geq 1$, $Z_{\varepsilon}$ converges in law to $0$.
The results of this article concern related statements for $d\geq 3$ pertaining to the smoothened and rescaled equation $$\begin{aligned}
& {{\rm d}}u_{{\varepsilon},t}= \frac 12 \Delta u_{{\varepsilon},t}+ \beta\, {\varepsilon}^{\frac{d-2}2}\, \, u_{{\varepsilon},t} \, {{\rm d}}B_{{\varepsilon},t}\\
& u_{{\varepsilon},0}= 1
\end{aligned}$$ Write $u_{\varepsilon}(x):=u_{{\varepsilon},1}(x)$. Our main result shows that for every $x\in {\mathbb{R}}^d$, for any $\beta$ small enough $u_{\varepsilon}(x)$ converges in distribution to a non-degenerate random variable $Z_\infty=Z_\infty(\beta)$, i.e., [*[weak disorder]{}*]{} prevails, while for $\beta$ large enough, $u_{\varepsilon}(x)$ converges in probability to $0$, i.e., [*[strong disorder]{}*]{} takes place. We also show that for $\beta$ small enough and any suitable test function $f$, $u_{\varepsilon}(f)=\int f(x) u_{\varepsilon}(x){{\rm d}}x$ converges in probability to $\int f(x) \ {{\rm d}}x$. We remark that our results, unlike [@CSZ15], do not charaterize the limiting non-degenerate random variable $Z_\infty(\beta)$, nor do they identify the exact critical threshold for the value of $\beta$ (which happens to be $1$ in $d=2$), where the departure from weak disorder to strong disorder takes place.
Main results. {#sec-results}
=============
Preliminaries.
--------------
We consider a complete probability space $(\Omega,\mathcal F, {\mathbb{P}})$ and a cylindrical Wiener process $B=(B_t)_{t\geq 0}$ on $L^2({\mathbb{R}}^d)$. The latter is defined as the centered Gaussian process with covariance $${\mathbb{E}}\bigg(B_s(f)B_t(g)\bigg) = \big(s\wedge t\big) \, \int_{{\mathbb{R}}^d} f(x) g(x){{\rm d}}x \qquad f,g \in \mathcal S({\mathbb{R}}^d).$$ Here $\mathcal S=\mathcal S({\mathbb{R}}^d)$ is the Schwartz space of rapidly decreasing functions in ${\mathbb{R}}^d$. To define $B$ pointwise in ${\mathbb{R}}^d$, we need the regularization $$B_{{\varepsilon},t}(x)= B_t\big(\phi_{\varepsilon}(x- \cdot)\big),$$ with respect to some mollifier $$\phi_{\varepsilon}= {\varepsilon}^{-d} \phi(x/{\varepsilon}).$$ Here $\phi$ is some smooth, non-negative, compactly supported and even function such that $\int_{{\mathbb{R}}^d} \phi(x){{\rm d}}x =1$. Then $\int_{{\mathbb{R}}^d} \phi_{\varepsilon}(x){{\rm d}}x =1$, and $\phi_{\varepsilon}\Rightarrow\delta_0$ weakly as probability measures. Furthermore, for any ${\varepsilon}>0$, $B_{\varepsilon}=(B_{{\varepsilon},t})_{t\geq 0}$ is also a centered Gaussian process with covariance $${\mathbb{E}}\big(B_{s,{\varepsilon}}(x)B_{t,{\varepsilon}}(y)\big)= \big(s\wedge t\big) V_{\varepsilon}(x-y)$$ where we introduced $$\label{thursday1}
V=\phi\star \phi, V_{{\varepsilon},\delta}=
\phi_{\varepsilon}\star \phi_\delta,
V_{\varepsilon}=V_{{\varepsilon},{\varepsilon}}.$$ Note that $V_{\varepsilon}(x)={\varepsilon}^{-d}V(x/{\varepsilon})$.
For any $\beta>0$ and ${\varepsilon}>0$, we consider the stochastic differential equation $$\label{regspde}
\begin{aligned}
&{{\rm d}}u_{{\varepsilon},t}= \frac 12 \Delta u_{{\varepsilon},t} {{\rm d}}t+ \beta {\varepsilon}^{\frac{d-2}{2}}\, \, u_{{\varepsilon}, t} \, {{\rm d}}B_{{\varepsilon},t} \\
&u_{{\varepsilon},0}=1,
\end{aligned}$$ where the stochastic differential is interpreted in the classical Ito sense (since our smoothing of $B$ was done in space only, the well-defined solution $u_{{\varepsilon},t}$ is adapted to the natural filtration $\mathcal{G}_t=
\sigma(\{B_{{\varepsilon},s}(x), x\in {\mathbb{R}}^d, s\leq t\}$). Our goal is to study the behavior of $u_{{\varepsilon},1}(x)$ as the mollification parameter ${\varepsilon}$ is turned off. For this, we will use a convenient Feynman-Kac representation of $u_{{\varepsilon},t}(x)$, which we introduce in Section \[sec-FK-rep\] after stating our main results.
Main results: Weak and strong disorder.
---------------------------------------
Henceforth we fix $d\geq 3$ and set $u_{\varepsilon}(x):=u_{{\varepsilon},1}(x)$ and, for any $f\in \mathcal S({\mathbb{R}}^d)$, we write $u_{{\varepsilon}}(f)= \int_{{\mathbb{R}}^d} u_{\varepsilon}(x) f(x){{\rm d}}x$. Here is the statement of our first main result.
\[thm1\] There exists $\beta_\star\in(0,\infty)$ such that for all $\beta<\beta_\star$ and any $f\in\mathcal S({\mathbb{R}}^d)$, $u_{\varepsilon}(f)$ converges in probability to $\int_{{\mathbb{R}}^d} f(x) dx$ as ${\varepsilon}\to 0$. Furthermore, for any $\beta< \beta_\star$ and any $x\in{\mathbb{R}}^d$, $u_{\varepsilon}(x)$ converges in distribution to a random variable $Z_\infty$ which is positive almost surely.
The first statement in Theorem \[thm1\] implies that $u_{\varepsilon}$ converges in the sense of distributions to the solution of the heat equation. Although for simplicity we content ourselves with the initial condition $Z_{\varepsilon}(0,x)= 1$ in , the same statement continues to hold for reasonably nice initial condition $u_{\varepsilon}(0,x)=u_0(x)$.
While we do not discuss it in detail, the Feynman-Kac representation of $u_{\varepsilon}(x)$ that we introduce in the next subsection shows that $u_{\varepsilon}(x)$ and $u_{\varepsilon}(y)$ become asymptotically independent as ${\varepsilon}\to 0$; this explains the fact that smoothing with $f$ makes $u_{\varepsilon}(f)$ deterministic.
The proof of Theorem \[thm1\] is based on an $L^2$ computation and is presented in Section \[sec-thm1\].
\[theo-UT\] There is $\beta^*>0$ such that for all $\beta>\beta^*$, $u_{\varepsilon}\to 0$ in probability.
The proof of Theorem \[theo-UT\] is presented in Section \[sec-theo-UT\]. This proof avoids the use of the well-known [*[fractional moment method]{}*]{} which pervades the proofs of strong disorder assertions in realm of the aforementioned literature on the discrete directed polymer models, and instead uses the theory of [*[Gaussian multiplicative chaos]{}*]{} (GMC). As a by-product of our arguments, we have the following corollary.
\[cor-beta\] There is a $\bar\beta\in (0,\infty)$ such that, as ${\varepsilon}\to 0$, $u_{\varepsilon}(0)$ converges to $0$ in probability for all $\beta > \bar \beta$ while $u_{\varepsilon}(0)$ converges in distribution to a non-degenerate, strictly positive random variable $Z_\infty=Z_\infty(\beta)$ when $\beta<\bar \beta$.
The constant $\bar\beta$ is given as the threshold for the uniform integrability of a certain family of martingales $Z_{{\varepsilon},\beta}$; we refer to the proof of Corollary \[cor-beta\] for details, which can also be found at the end of Section \[sec-theo-UT\]. We leave unresolved the question of what happens at $\beta=\bar\beta$.
Clearly $\bar \beta$ depends on the dimension $d\geq 3$ and the mollifier $\phi$. As mentioned in Section \[sec-intro\], it remains an open problem to determine the exact value of $\overline \beta\in (0,\infty)$ and to identify the exact distribution of the positive random variable $Z_\infty$ appearing in Corollary \[cor-beta\].
A Feynman-Kac representation. {#sec-FK-rep}
-----------------------------
For any $x\in {\mathbb{R}}^d$, let $P_x$ denote the Wiener measure corresponding to a $d$-dimensional Brownian motion $(W_t)_{t\geq 0}$ starting at $x$ and independent of the cylindrical Wiener process $B$. $E_x$ will denote the corresponding expectation. For fixed $W$, set $$\label{MIto}
M_{{\varepsilon},t}(W)= \int_0^t \int_{{\mathbb{R}}^d} \phi_{\varepsilon}(W_s- x) \,\, \dot{B}(t-s,{{\rm d}}x){{\rm d}}s$$ as a Wiener integral. For two fixed $W$ and $W^\prime$, the covariance is given by $$\label{quadvar}
{\mathbb{E}}\left(M_{{\varepsilon},t}(W)\cdot M_{\delta,t}(W^\prime)\right)=
\int_0^t \, V_{{\varepsilon},\delta}(W_s- W^\prime_s) {{\rm d}}s$$ (recall . Here and later, we write ${\mathbb{E}}$ for integration over $B$ only, keeping $W$ fixed). We also note that, for any fixed $W$, $${\mathbb{E}}\left(M_{{\varepsilon},t}^2(W)\right)=
t V_{\varepsilon}(0)= t (\phi_{\varepsilon}\star\phi_{\varepsilon})(0),$$ which diverges like ${\varepsilon}^{-d}$ as ${\varepsilon}\to 0$.
We now turn to and write its renormalized Feynman-Kac solution as $$\label{renormFK}
\begin{aligned}
u_{{\varepsilon},t}(x)&=E_x \bigg[\exp\bigg\{ \beta {\varepsilon}^{(d-2)/2}
M_{{\varepsilon},t}(W)\,\,-
\frac{\beta^2 {\varepsilon}^{d-2}}{2}
{\mathbb{E}}(M_{{\varepsilon},t}(W)^2)\bigg\}\bigg] \\
&= E_x \bigg[\exp\bigg\{{\beta {\varepsilon}^{(d-2)/2}} \int_0^t \int_{{\mathbb{R}}^d} \phi_{\varepsilon}(W_s- x) \,\, \dot{B}(t-s,{{\rm d}}x) {{\rm d}}s
- \frac {\beta^2 {\varepsilon}^{d-2}}2\,\, t V_{\varepsilon}(0)\bigg\}\bigg].
\end{aligned}$$ Note that ${\mathbb{E}}[u_{{\varepsilon},t}(x)]=1$.
For our purposes, it is convenient to introduce another representation of $u_{{\varepsilon},t}$. Note that by rescaling of time and space, ${\varepsilon}^{-1} W_s$ has the same distribution as $W_{s{\varepsilon}^{-2}}$, while $\dot{B}(s,{{\rm d}}x){{\rm d}}s$ has the same distribution as $${\varepsilon}^{d/2+1} \dot B\big(s{\varepsilon}^{-2}, {{\rm d}}{\varepsilon}^{-1} x \big) {{\rm d}}s.$$ Then, by , for a fixed $W$, $$\label{martdef}
\begin{aligned}
M_{{\varepsilon},t}(W)&\stackrel{(\mathrm d)}{=}\frac 1 {{\varepsilon}^{(d-2)/2}} \int_0^{t{\varepsilon}^{-2}} \int_{{\mathbb{R}}^d} \phi\big({y-{\varepsilon}^{-1} W_{s {\varepsilon}^2}}\big)\dot{B}(t/{\varepsilon}^2-s,{{\rm d}}y) {{\rm d}}s \\
\end{aligned}$$ Hence implies that $$\label{eq-trep}
\begin{aligned}
u_{{\varepsilon},t}(x)\stackrel{(\mathrm d)}=E_{\frac x{\varepsilon}}\bigg[\exp\bigg\{\beta \int_0^{t{\varepsilon}^{-2}} \int_{{\mathbb{R}}^d} \phi\big({y-W_s}\big)\dot B(t/{\varepsilon}^2-s, {{\rm d}}y) {{\rm d}}s - \frac {\beta^2}{2{\varepsilon}^2} t V(0)\bigg\}\bigg].
\end{aligned}$$ Recall that $u_{\varepsilon}(x)=u_{{\varepsilon},1}(x)$. Using the invariance of the distribution of $\dot B$ under time reversal, we obtain that the spatially-indexed process $\{u_{\varepsilon}(x)\}$ possesses the same distribution as the process $\{Z_{\varepsilon}(x/{\varepsilon})\}$, where $$\label{eq-ofer1}
\begin{aligned}
Z_{\varepsilon}(x)=E_{x}\bigg[\exp\bigg\{\beta \int_0^{{\varepsilon}^{-2}}
\int_{{\mathbb{R}}^d}\phi\big({y-W_s}\big)\dot B(s, {{\rm d}}y) {{\rm d}}s - \frac {\beta^2}{2{\varepsilon}^2} V(0)\bigg\}\bigg]
\end{aligned}$$
Proof of Theorem \[thm1\]: The second moment method {#sec-thm1}
===================================================
We start with an elementary computation.
\[lemma1\] If $\beta>0$ is chosen small enough, for any $x\in {\mathbb{R}}^d$, the family $\{u_{\varepsilon}(x)\}_{{\varepsilon}>0}$ remains bounded in $L^2({\mathbb{P}})$.
Let $W$ and $W^\prime$ be two independent standard Brownian motions with $P_0 \otimes P_0$ denoting their joint law. Then, writing $\eta_{\varepsilon}={\varepsilon}^{(d-2)/2}$ and $M_{\varepsilon}(W)=M_{{\varepsilon},1}(W)$, $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathbb{E}}\big[u_{\varepsilon}(0)^2\big]&= {\mathbb{E}}\bigg[\bigg\{ E_0 \exp\bigg(\beta
\eta_{\varepsilon}M_{{\varepsilon}}(W)\,\,- \frac {\beta^2 \eta_{\varepsilon}^2}2\,\,
V_{\varepsilon}(0)\bigg)\bigg\}^2\bigg] \\
&= \big(E_0\otimes E_0\big) \,\, \bigg[{\mathbb{E}}\bigg\{\exp\bigg({\beta
\eta_{\varepsilon}M_{{\varepsilon}}(W)\,\,- \frac {\beta^2 \eta_{\varepsilon}^2}2\,\,
V_{\varepsilon}(0)\bigg)\,\,\exp\bigg(\beta
\eta_{\varepsilon}} M_{{\varepsilon}}(W^\prime)\,\,- \frac {\beta^2 \eta_{\varepsilon}^2}2\,\,
V_{\varepsilon}(0)\bigg)\bigg\} \bigg]
\\
&= \big(E_0\otimes E_0\big)
\bigg[\exp\bigg\{\beta^2\eta_{\varepsilon}^2 \int_0^1
V_{\varepsilon}(W_s-W^\prime_s){{\rm d}}s\bigg\}\bigg]
=E_0 \bigg[\exp\bigg\{\beta^2\eta_{\varepsilon}^2 \int_0^1 V_{\varepsilon}(\sqrt 2W_s)
{{\rm d}}s\bigg\}\bigg]\\
\end{aligned}$$ where the third identity follows by . Hence, by , Brownian scaling and change of variables, we infer that $${\mathbb{E}}\big[u_{\varepsilon}^2(0)\big] = E_0 \bigg[\exp\bigg\{\beta^2 \int_0^{1/{\varepsilon}^2} V(\sqrt 2W_s){{\rm d}}s\bigg\}\bigg]
\leq E_0 \bigg[\exp\bigg\{\beta^2 \int_0^{\infty}
V(\sqrt 2W_s){{\rm d}}s\bigg\}\bigg].$$ Since $V$ is a bounded function of compact support, it is easy to check that for $\beta$ small enough, $$\label{P1}
\sup_{x\in {\mathbb{R}}^d} E_x\bigg\{\beta^2 \int_0^\infty V(W_s) {{\rm d}}s \bigg\} \leq \eta <1.$$ Hence, by Portenko’s lemma ([@P76]), $$\label{P2}
\sup_{x\in {\mathbb{R}}^d} E_x\bigg[\exp\bigg\{\beta^2 \int_0^\infty V(W_s) {{\rm d}}s \bigg\}\bigg] \leq \frac 1 {1-\eta}<\infty.$$ This proves the lemma.
Let us remark that $u_{\varepsilon}$ is not a Cauchy sequence in $L^2({\mathbb{P}})$ (which is the reason why the convergence in distribution in Theorem \[thm1\] cannot be upgraded to convergence in probability). A simple computation using shows that $$\begin{aligned}
&{\mathbb{E}}\big[(u_{\varepsilon}- u_\delta)^2\big]\\
&= E_0\otimes E_0\bigg[
\exp\bigg\{\beta^2\eta_{\varepsilon}^2 \, \int_0^t V_{{\varepsilon}}\big(W_s- W^\prime_s\big) {{\rm d}}s \bigg\} -
\exp\bigg\{\beta^2\eta_{\varepsilon}\eta_\delta \,
\int_0^t V_{{\varepsilon},\delta}\big(W_s- W^\prime_s\big) {{\rm d}}s\bigg\}\bigg]
\\
&+E_0\otimes E_0\bigg[\exp\bigg\{\beta^2\eta_\delta^2 \, \int_0^t V_{\delta}\big(W_s- W^\prime_s\big) {{\rm d}}s \bigg\} -
\exp\bigg\{\beta^2\eta_{\varepsilon}\eta_\delta
\, \int_0^t V_{{\varepsilon},\delta}\big(W_s- W^\prime_s\big) {{\rm d}}s \bigg\}
\bigg]
\end{aligned}$$ The difference of the two terms in the first line (and likewise, the second line) does not go to zero. For instance, if $\phi_{\varepsilon}$ is a centered Gaussian mollifier with variance ${\varepsilon}^2$, then in the first line, again by Brownian scaling, the second term (with the expectation) becomes (recall ) $$(E_0\otimes E_0) \bigg[\exp\bigg\{\beta^2 \,
\frac{\eta_{\varepsilon}\eta_\delta}{\eta_{\sqrt{{\varepsilon}^2+\delta^2}}^2}
\int_0^{t/({\varepsilon}^2+\delta^2)} V\big(W_s- W^\prime_s\big) {{\rm d}}s \bigg\}\bigg]$$ while the first term becomes $$(E_0\otimes E_0) \bigg[ \exp\bigg\{\beta^2 \, \int_0^{t/{\varepsilon}^2} V\big(W_s- W^\prime_s\big) {{\rm d}}s \bigg\}\bigg].$$ From these expressions one can see that ${\mathbb{E}}\big[ (u_\varepsilon - u_\delta)^2 \big]$ does not vanish, e.g., in the iterated limit $\lim_{\varepsilon \to 0} \lim_{\delta \to 0}$.
We turn to the proof of Theorem \[thm1\].
[**[Proof of Theorem \[thm1\].]{}**]{} Let us denote by $\widehat u_{\varepsilon}(x)= u_{\varepsilon}(x) - {\mathbb{E}}(u_{\varepsilon}(x)) = u_{\varepsilon}(x)- 1$ and $\widehat u_{\varepsilon}(f)= \int_{{\mathbb{R}}^d} f(x) \widehat u_{\varepsilon}(x) \, {{\rm d}}x $. Then ${\mathbb{E}}\big(\widehat u_{\varepsilon}(f)\big)=0$. Note that, for the proof of the first part of Theorem \[thm1\], it suffices to show that $$\label{thm1pf0}
{\mathbb{E}}\big[\widehat u_{\varepsilon}(f)^2\big] \to 0$$ as ${\varepsilon}\to 0$. Let us prove this fact. Exactly similar computations as in the proof of Lemma \[lemma1\] imply that $$\label{thm1pf}
\begin{aligned}
{\mathbb{E}}\big[\widehat u_{\varepsilon}(f)^2\big]&= \int \int_{{\mathbb{R}}^d\times{\mathbb{R}}^d} f(x) f(y) {\mathbb{E}}\big[u_{\varepsilon}(x) u_{\varepsilon}(y)\big] {{\rm d}}x {{\rm d}}y
- \bigg(\int_{{\mathbb{R}}^d} f(x){{\rm d}}x\bigg)^2\\
&= \int \int_{{\mathbb{R}}^d\times{\mathbb{R}}^d} f(x) f(y)
E_{\frac{x-y}{\varepsilon}}\, \bigg[{{\rm e} }^{\frac{1}{2} \beta^2 \int_0^{2/{\varepsilon}^2} V(W_s) {{\rm d}}s }\bigg]
{{\rm d}}x {{\rm d}}y- \bigg(\int_{{\mathbb{R}}^d} f(x){{\rm d}}x\bigg )^2
\end{aligned}$$ If $z=(x-y)/{\varepsilon}$, then, $$\label{P3}
E_z\bigg[\int_0^\infty V(W_s) \, {{\rm d}}s \bigg] = C_d \int {{\rm d}}y \, \frac{V(y)}{|y-z|^{d-2}} \to 0 \quad \mbox{as}\, |z|\to \infty.$$ By applying Portenko’s lemma again ([@P76]), we see that for $\beta$ small enough $$\label{P4}
\sup_x E_x \left[ {{\rm e} }^{\frac{\beta^2}{2} \intop_0^\infty V(W_s) {{\rm d}}s } \right] < \infty.$$ Together with , by Lebesgue’s convergence theorem, for an even smaller $\beta$ we have $$\label{P5}
E_z \left[ {{\rm e} }^{\frac{\beta^2}{2} \intop_0^\infty V(W_s) {{\rm d}}s } \right] \to 1$$ as $|z| \to \infty$. Combining , and , we use the bounded convergence theorem to conclude . This proves the first part of Theorem \[thm1\].
For the second part, note that implies that for fixed ${\varepsilon}$, $u_{{\varepsilon},1}(0)$ is equal in distribution to $Z_{\varepsilon}$. Since the process $\{Z_{\varepsilon}\}_{\varepsilon}$ is a positive martingale (with respect to a filtration indexed by $1/{\varepsilon}^2$), it converges almost surely to a limit $Z_\infty$. By Lemma \[lemma1\], $Z_{\varepsilon}$ is (uniformly in ${\varepsilon}$) $L^2({\mathbb{P}})$ bounded for $\beta$ small enough, and therefore $Z_\infty$ does not vanish identically. By the $0-1$ law as in the proof of Theorem \[theo-UT\] (see ), we conclude that $P(Z_\infty=0)=0$. We conclude that $u_{\varepsilon}(0)$ converges in distribution to $Z_\infty$. Further, since $u_{\varepsilon}(x)\stackrel{d}{=}u_{\varepsilon}(0)$ by translation invariance, the same applies to $u_{\varepsilon}(x)$.
Proof of Theorem \[theo-UT\] and Corollary \[cor-beta\]: Gaussian multiplicative chaos {#sec-theo-UT}
======================================================================================
The starting point is the representation for $Z_{\varepsilon}=Z_{{\varepsilon}}(0)$. For $d\geq 3$, which we assume throughout, we will show that there is a $\beta^*>0$ such that for all $\beta>\beta^*$, $Z_{\varepsilon}\to 0$ in probability.
In order to prove this result, we represent $Z_{\varepsilon}$ as a Gaussian Multiplicative Chaos (GMC), see [@Kahane; @shamov] for background. Let $\mathcal{E}=C_0([0,\infty); \mathbb{R}^d)$ and recall that $P_0$ denotes the standard Wiener measure on $\mathcal{E}$ corresponding to the $d$-dimensional Brownian motion $W=(W_t)_{t\geq 0}$. Set $$\Lambda_{\varepsilon}= \exp\bigg\{\beta \int_0^{{\varepsilon}^{-2}} \int_{{\mathbb{R}}^d}
\phi\big({y-W_s}\big)\dot B(s, {{\rm d}}y){{\rm d}}s
- \frac {\beta^2}{2{\varepsilon}^2} V(0)\bigg\}$$ and recall that $Z_{\varepsilon}\stackrel{(d)}{=}E_0 \Lambda_{\varepsilon}$. Introduce the random measure $M_{\varepsilon}$ with ${{\rm d}}M_{\varepsilon}=\Lambda_{\varepsilon}\, {{\rm d}}P_0$ on $\mathcal{E}$ and note that $Z_{\varepsilon}=\int_{\mathcal{E}}M_{\varepsilon}({{\rm d}}W)$.
Introduce the event $\mathcal{V}:=\{Z_{\varepsilon}\not\to_{{\varepsilon}\to 0} 0\}$. Since $\mathcal{V}$ is a tail event for the process $t\to B(t,\cdot)$, one has $$\label{0-1}
{\mathbb{P}}(\mathcal{V})\in \{0,1\}.$$
Note that ${\varepsilon}^{-1}\mapsto Z_{\varepsilon}$ is a strictly positive martingale of mean $1$. Introduce on $\Omega \times \mathcal{E}$ the measure $${{\rm d}}{\mathbb{Q}}_{\varepsilon}:= \Lambda_{\varepsilon}\, {{\rm d}}({\mathbb{P}}\otimes P_0).$$ Let the measure $\overline {\mathbb{Q}}_{\varepsilon}$ be its marginal on $\Omega$, i.e. ${{\rm d}}\overline {\mathbb{Q}}_{\varepsilon}=Z_{\varepsilon}{{\rm d}}{\mathbb{P}}$.
\[lem-increase\] If the sequence $(Z_{\varepsilon})_{\varepsilon}$ is uniformly integrable under ${\mathbb{P}}$, then under $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}_{\varepsilon}$, $(Z_{\varepsilon})_{\varepsilon}$ is uniformly bounded in probability. In other words, $$\lim_{m\to\infty}\sup_{\varepsilon}\overline{\mathbb{Q}}_{\varepsilon}(Z_{\varepsilon}>m)=0.$$
Assume that $Z_{\varepsilon}$ is uniformly integrable. Then, by the la Vallée-Poussin theorem, there exists a convex increasing function $h:{\mathbb{R}}_+\to{\mathbb{R}}_+$, such that $h(x) / x \to \infty, x \to \infty$ and $\sup_{\varepsilon}{\mathbb{E}}h(Z_{\varepsilon})=C<\infty$. Then, $$C\geq {\mathbb{E}}h(Z_{\varepsilon})=\int \frac{h(Z_{\varepsilon})}{Z_{\varepsilon}}d\overline{\mathbb{Q}}_{\varepsilon}\,.$$ The conclusion follows.
The implication in Lemma \[lem-increase\] is an “if and only if" statement; we only stated the direction that we need.
Another preparatory step that we need is the following proposition, whose statement and proof closely follow [@CY06 Prop. 3.1].
\[prop-CY06\] The sequence $\{Z_{\varepsilon}\}$ is uniformly integrable under ${\mathbb{P}}$ if and only if ${\mathbb{P}}(\mathcal{V})=1$.
If $\{Z_{\varepsilon}\}$ is uniformly integrable under ${\mathbb{P}}$ then its limit is necessarily non degenerate, i.e. ${\mathbb{P}}(\mathcal{V})>0$. Then, ${\mathbb{P}}(\mathcal{V})=1$ by . To prove the reverse implication, recall the random variables $Z_{\varepsilon}(x)$ (with $x\in {\mathbb{R}}^d$), see . With $t=1/{\varepsilon}^2$, we write $\bar Z_t(x)=Z_{\varepsilon}(x)$. It is enough to prove the uniform integrability for the sequence $\bar Z_n(0)$. Following [@CY06], Let $\bar Z_\infty(B)$ denote the limit of $\bar Z_n(0)$ (which exists a.s.) and, for $z\in {\mathbb{R}}^d$, let $X_{n,z}=\bar Z_\infty(\theta_{n,z} B)/{\mathbb{E}}\bar Z_\infty$, where $\theta_{n,z}$ denote the temporal (by $n$) and spatial (by $z$) shift of $B$. Set, for $x,z\in{\mathbb{R}}^d$, $$e_{n,x,z}(B)=
E_x\left(
\exp \left\{ \beta\int_{0}^{1}\int_{{\mathbb{R}}^d}
\phi(y-W_{s})\dot{B}(s+n-1, {{\rm d}}y) {{\rm d}}s-\frac{\beta^2 V(0)}{2}\right\}\big|
W_{1}=z\right).$$ We have that ${\mathbb{E}}X_{n,z} =1$ and $X_{n,x}\geq E_x(e_{n+1,x,W_1}\cdot X_{n+1,W_1})$ by Fatou. Denote by $\mathcal{G}_t$ the natural filtration induced by $t\to B(t,\cdot)$. By construction, $X_{n,\cdot}$ is independent of $\mathcal{G}_n$, and ${\mathbb{E}}( X_{n,z}|\mathcal{G}_n)={\mathbb{E}}X_{n,z}=1$ . Now, iterating, we get by the Markov property $$X_{0,0}\geq
E_0(e_{1,0,W_1}e_{2,W_1,W_2}\cdots e_{n,W_{n-1},W_n}X_{n,W_n})\,.$$ Thus, $${\mathbb{E}}(X_{0,0}|\mathcal{G}_n)\geq
E_0(e_{1,0,W_1}e_{2,W_1,W_2}\cdots e_{n,W_{n-1},W_n})=\bar Z_n\,.$$ It follows that the sequence $\bar
Z_n$ is uniformly integrable under ${\mathbb{P}}$.
An alternative proof of Proposition \[prop-CY06\] can be obtained by using [@KaCh Thm. 2] and an appropriate 0-1 law with respect to the Brownian path $W$.
The following proposition is the heart of the proof of Theorem \[theo-UT\].
\[prop-UT\] There exists $\beta^*$ such that for $\beta>\beta^*$ and any $m>0$, $$\overline {\mathbb{Q}}_{\varepsilon}(Z_{\varepsilon}>m)\to_{{\varepsilon}\to 0} 1.$$
We first complete the proof of Theorem \[theo-UT\], and then provide the proof of Proposition \[prop-UT\].
[**[Proof of Theorem \[theo-UT\]]{} (assuming Proposition \[prop-UT\]):**]{} Assume that $Z_{\varepsilon}$ does not converge to $0$ almost surely. Then, by Proposition \[prop-CY06\], it is uniformly integrable and, by Lemma \[lem-increase\], it is uniformly bounded in probability under $\overline {\mathbb{Q}}_{\varepsilon}$. In particular, there exists $K>0$ such that $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}_{\varepsilon}(Z_{\varepsilon}>K)<1/2$. This contradicts Proposition \[prop-UT\].
Before providing the proof of Proposition \[prop-UT\], we need to introduce some notation and prove some preparatory lemmas. Introduce the stopping times $\tau_\delta(W,W')=\inf\{t>0: |W_t-W'_t|\geq \delta\}$. We need an estimate on the tail of $\tau := \tau_\delta$ conditionally on $W$, presented in the next lemma; in its statement and in its proof, $P_0^{\otimes 2}$ denotes the measure $P_0\otimes P_0$ on $(W,W')$
\[L4.4\] \[lem-tau\] There exists a random variable $\chi=\chi(W)$ and a constant $\kappa>0$, such that for $t$ large enough, $$P_0^{\otimes 2}
\big(\tau\geq t|W\big) \geq \chi(W)e^{-\kappa t}\,.$$
Define $$\label{kappa1}
\kappa_1 =\liminf_{t\to\infty} \frac1t\log P_0^{\otimes 2}
\big(\tau\geq t|W\big).$$ Note that since $\kappa_1$ is measurable with respect to the tail $\sigma$-field of $W^\prime$, it is deterministic, possibly equal to $-\infty$. We will show that $\kappa_1>-\infty$. Taking then $\kappa= - 2\kappa_1$ then proves the lemma.
With $|\cdot|$ denoting the Euclidean norm in ${\mathbb{R}}^d$, let $$W^{1,2}_t=\bigg\{\varphi: \varphi(0)=0, \int_0^t |\dot{\varphi}(s)|^2 {{\rm d}}s<\infty\bigg\},$$ where $\dot{\varphi}$ denotes the time-derivative of $\varphi$. We also use the notation $\|\varphi\|_{\infty,t}=\sup_{s\in [0,t]} |\varphi(s)|$. Fix a (possibly random, but independent of $W'$) function $\varphi\in W^{1,2}_t$. Then, by an application of the Cameron-Martin theorem in classical Wiener space, $$\begin{aligned}
\nonumber
P_0(\|W^\prime-\varphi\|_{\infty,t}\leq \delta/2)&=&
\int {{\rm e} }^{\int_0^t \dot{\varphi}(s){{\rm d}}W^\prime(s)-\frac12 \int_0^t |\dot{\varphi}(s)|^2 {{\rm d}}s}
{\1}_{\{\|W^\prime\|_{\infty,t}\leq \delta/2\}} {{\rm d}}P_0(W^\prime)\\
&=&
\nonumber
{{\rm e} }^{-\frac12 \int_0^t |\dot{\varphi}(s)|^2 {{\rm d}}s}
\int {{\rm e} }^{\int_0^t \dot{\varphi}(s) {{\rm d}}W^\prime(s) }
{\1}_{\{\|W^\prime\|_{\infty,t}\leq \delta/2\}} {{\rm d}}P_0(W^\prime)\\
&=&
\nonumber
{{\rm e} }^{-\frac12 \int_0^t |\dot{\varphi}(s)|^2 {{\rm d}}s} \,\,
P_0\big(\|W'\|_{\infty,t}\leq \delta/2\big)
\,\, E_0\bigg[ {{\rm e} }^{\int_0^t \dot{\varphi}(s)\, {{\rm d}}W^\prime(s) }
\big| \big\{\|W^\prime\|_{\infty,t}\leq \delta/2\big\}\bigg]
\\
&\geq &
e^{-\frac12 \int_0^t |\dot{\varphi}(s)|^2 {{\rm d}}s}
P_0\big(\|W'\|_{\infty,t}\leq \delta/2\big),
\label{eq-OM}\end{aligned}$$ where the last inequality used Jensen’s inequality and invariance of the set $\|W'\|_{\infty,t}\leq \delta/2$ with respect to the map $W'\mapsto -W'$.
Introduce the random field $$Y_{s,t}(W)=
\inf\bigg\{\int_s^t |\dot{\varphi}(u)|^2 \,\, {{\rm d}}u: \varphi(s)=W_s,\varphi(t)=W_t,
\sup_{u\in [s,t]} |W(u)-\varphi(u)|\leq \delta/2\bigg\}.$$ Since $Y$ is subadditive in the sense that $Y_{s,t}\leq Y_{s,u}+Y_{u,t}$ for $u\in (s,t)$, Kingman’s subadditive ergodic theorem implies that $$\label{kappa2}
t^{-1} Y_{0,t} \to_{t\to \infty} \kappa_2,\quad a.s.$$ for a deterministic $\kappa_2$. We claim that $\kappa_2$ is finite. This follows from the fact that $\kappa_2$ is smaller than $EY_{0,1}$; since $Y_{0,1}$ is finite almost surely and $X:=\sqrt{Y_{0,1}}$ is Lipshitz as a map on $\mathcal{E}$, denoting by $\mbox{\rm med} (X)$ the median of $X$ we have by the Borell–Tsirelson-Ibragimov-Sudakov inequality [@AT07] that $X-\mbox{\rm med}(X)$ possesses Gaussian tails, and therefore $E X^2=EY_{0,1}<\infty$.
We can now conclude. Let $\varphi^{(t)}=\varphi^{(t)}(W)$ be such that $\varphi^{(t)}(0)=0$, $\varphi^{(t)}(t)=W(t)$ and $Y_{0,t}=\int_0^t |\dot{\varphi}(s)|^2 ds$. (Such $\varphi^{(t)}$ exists by lower-semicontinuity of the $L^2$ norm, although this is not essential to our argument and we could just assume that the last integral is smaller than $2Y_{0,t}$.) We have, by , $$\begin{aligned}
P^{\otimes 2}_0\big(\tau\geq t |W \big)=
P^{\otimes 2}_0\big(\|W'-W\|_{\infty,t}\leq \delta |W\big)
&\geq P^{\otimes 2}_0\big(\|W'-\varphi^{(t)}\|_{\infty,t}\leq \delta/2\big) \\
&\geq
{{\rm e} }^{-\frac12 Y_{0,t} }
P_0(\|W^\prime\|_{\infty,t}\leq \delta/2\big) .
\end{aligned}$$ Thus, by and , $$\kappa_1 =\liminf_{t\to\infty} \frac1t\log P^{\otimes 2}(\tau\geq t|W)
\geq
-\frac {\kappa_2} 2
+
\lim_{t\to\infty} \frac1t\log
P_0(\|W'\|_{\infty,t}\leq \delta/2).$$ The last probability on the right hand side is $P_0(\sigma >t)$, where $\sigma$ denotes the first exit time of the standard Brownian motion $W^\prime$ from the ball of radius $\delta/2$ around the origin. It is well-known (for example, by the spectral theorem for $-\frac 12 \Delta$) that $\lim_{t\to\infty}\frac 1t \log P_0\{\sigma>t\}=-\lambda_1$, where $\lambda_1>0$ is the principal eigenvalue of $-\frac 12 \Delta$ with Dirichlet boundary conditions on the same ball. It follows that $\kappa_1 >-\infty$ and Lemma \[L4.4\] is proved.
Henceforth, we set $t={\varepsilon}^{-2}$. Next, on $\mathcal{E}\times \mathcal{E}$, introduce the kernels $$K_{\varepsilon}(W,W')=\int_0^{1/{\varepsilon}^2}\int_{{\mathbb{R}}^d} \phi(x-W_s)\phi(x-W'_s) {{\rm d}}x \, {{\rm d}}s.$$ Note that $K_{\varepsilon}(W,W')\leq V(0) t$.
\[lem-comp\] There exists $\delta>0$ such that on the event $\{\tau_\delta(W,W')\geq t\}$, one has $K_{\varepsilon}(W,W')\geq 2V(0)t/3$.
Note that $V(0)=\int_{{\mathbb{R}}^d} \phi^2(y) {{\rm d}}y$. On the other hand, for $\theta$ small enough, $$\inf_{f: \,\, \forall s, \,\,|f(s)|\leq \theta}\,\, \int_0^t \int_{{\mathbb{R}}^d}
\phi(y) \phi\big (y+f(s)\big ) {{\rm d}}y {{\rm d}}s\geq t\big (V(0)-O(\theta)\big ).$$ This completes the proof.
Finally we turn to the proof of Proposition \[prop-UT\].
*Proof of Proposition \[prop-UT\]:* Since we will use two independent copies $W,W'$ of Brownian motions, we write throughout $\Lambda_{\varepsilon}=\Lambda_{\varepsilon}(W)$, $\Lambda_{\varepsilon}(W')$ to emphasize which Brownian motion participates in the definition of $\Lambda_{\varepsilon}$. The starting point of the proof is the remark that by the Cameron-Martin change of measure [@Bogachev], the law of $\dot B(x,s)$ under ${\mathbb{Q}}_{\varepsilon}$ is the same as the law of $\dot B(x,s)+\beta \phi(x-W_s)$ under ${\mathbb{P}}\otimes P_0$. In particular, for any measurable $A\subset \mathcal{E}$, the law under $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}_{\varepsilon}$ of $\int_A \Lambda_{\varepsilon}(W^\prime){{\rm d}}P_0(W^\prime)$ is the same as the law under ${\mathbb{P}}\otimes P_0$ of $\int_A {{\rm e} }^{\beta^2 K_{\varepsilon}(W,W^\prime)}
\Lambda_{\varepsilon}(W') {{\rm d}}P_0(W^\prime)$.
Let $f:{\mathbb{R}}_+\to {\mathbb{R}}_+$ be an increasing concave function. Then, by the above remark, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{array-1}
\int f(Z_{\varepsilon}) {{\rm d}}\overline{\mathbb{Q}}_{\varepsilon}&= & \int f(Z_{\varepsilon}) {{\rm d}}{\mathbb{Q}}_{\varepsilon}=
\int f\bigg (\int \Lambda_{\varepsilon}(W^\prime) {{\rm d}}P_0(W^\prime)\bigg)\; \,
{{\rm d}}{\mathbb{Q}}_{\varepsilon}\nonumber\\
&\geq &
\int f\bigg(\int \Lambda_{\varepsilon}(W^\prime)\,\, {\1}_{\{\tau(W,W')\geq t\}}\,\,
{{\rm d}}P_0(W^\prime)\bigg) {{\rm d}}{\mathbb{Q}}_{\varepsilon}\nonumber\\
&= &
\int f\bigg (\int \Lambda_{\varepsilon}(W^\prime) {{\rm e} }^{\beta^2 K_{\varepsilon}(W,W^\prime)}\,\, {\1}_{\{\tau(W,W')\geq t\}}
\,\,{{\rm d}}P_0(W^\prime)\bigg ) {{\rm d}}({\mathbb{P}}\otimes P_0) \nonumber \\
&\geq &
\int f\bigg(\int \Lambda_{\varepsilon}(W^\prime) {{\rm e} }^{2\beta^2 V(0) t/3}\,\,
{\1}_{\{\tau(W,W')\geq t\}} \,\,
{{\rm d}}P_0(W^\prime)) {{\rm d}}({\mathbb{P}}\otimes P_0) \nonumber \\
&= &
\int f\bigg({{\rm e} }^{2\beta^2 V(0)t/3}\int \Lambda_{\varepsilon}(W^\prime) \,\,
{\1}_{\{\tau(W,W')\geq t\}} \,\,
{{\rm d}}P_0(W')\bigg) \,\,{{\rm d}}({\mathbb{P}}\otimes P_0),
\end{aligned}$$ where in the first inequality we used that $f$ is increasing, and in the last inequality we used the same together with Lemma \[lem-comp\] (recall $t={\varepsilon}^{-2}$). On the other hand, $f$ is concave and on the set $\{\tau \ge t\}$ the covariance kernel $K_{\varepsilon}$ is bounded from above by the constant kernel $\widehat K_{\varepsilon}(W, W^\prime) := V(0) t$. Using Kahane’s comparison inequality with kernels $K_{\varepsilon}$ and $\widehat K_{\varepsilon}$ (see [@Kahane] – it is stated there for *convex* functions, with the opposite sign; see also [@shamov Theorem 28]), we get: $$\label{eq-Kahane}
\int f(Z_{\varepsilon}) {{\rm d}}\overline{\mathbb{Q}}_{\varepsilon}\geq
E_{G,W} \bigg[f\bigg({{\rm e} }^{2\beta^2 V(0) t/3}\,\,\big(P_0\otimes P_0\big)
\big(\tau(W,W')\geq t|W\big)\,\,{{\rm e} }^{\beta (V(0) t)^{1/2} G-
\beta^2 V(0) t / 2}\bigg)\bigg],$$ where $G$ is a standard centered Gaussian random variable which is independent of $W$, and the expectation $E_{G,W}$ is taken over both $G$ and $W$. In particular, $$\label{eq-Kahane-1}
\begin{aligned}
\int f(Z_{\varepsilon}) {{\rm d}}\overline{\mathbb{Q}}_{\varepsilon}&\geq
E_{G,W} \bigg[f\bigg({{\rm e} }^{\beta^2 V(0)t/6}\,\,\big(P_0\otimes P_0\big)
\big(\tau(W,W')>t|W\big){{\rm e} }^{\beta (V(0)t)^{1/2} G}\bigg)\bigg] \\
\\
&\geq
E_{G,W}\bigg[f\bigg(\chi(W) e^{-\kappa t}
{{\rm e} }^{\beta^2 V(0)t/6}e^{\beta \sqrt{V(0)t} G}\bigg)\bigg].
\end{aligned}$$ Note that the argument of $f$ goes to infinity as $t\to\infty$ for almost every $(G,W)$, if $\beta>\sqrt{6\kappa}$. Using $$f(x)=f_\alpha(x)= \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
\alpha^{-1} x, & x\leq \alpha\\
1,& x\geq \alpha,
\end{array}\right.$$ we conclude that $$\lim_{\alpha\to\infty} \liminf_{{\varepsilon}\to 0}
\int f_\alpha(Z_{\varepsilon}) {{\rm d}}\overline{\mathbb{Q}}_{\varepsilon}=1.$$ This completes the proof.
*Proof of Corollary \[cor-beta\].* Recall the random variable $$Z_{\varepsilon}=Z_{{\varepsilon},\beta}(B)= E_0\bigg[
\exp\bigg\{\beta \int_0^{{\varepsilon}^{-2}} \int_{{\mathbb{R}}^d} \phi\big({y-W_s}\big)\dot B(s, {{\rm d}}y)
{{\rm d}}s - \frac {\beta^2}{2{\varepsilon}^2} V(0)\bigg\}\bigg].$$ Let $$\overline \beta=\sup\bigg\{\beta>0: \big\{Z_{{\varepsilon},\beta}\big\}_{{\varepsilon}>0}
\; \mbox{\rm is uniformly integrable}\bigg\}.$$ In view of Theorem \[thm1\] and Theorem \[theo-UT\], we have $\overline\beta\in (0,\infty)$. Thus, the corollary will follow from the following fact. $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq-cor1}
&\mbox{\rm If $Z_{{\varepsilon},\beta}$ is uniformly
integrable for some $\beta>0$,
then
so is $Z_{{\varepsilon},\beta'}$ for $\beta'<\beta$.}\end{aligned}$$
To see , let $B,B'$ be independent copies of $B$ and let $\beta'=\rho \beta$ with $\rho<1$. To emphasize the dependence of $Z_{{\varepsilon},\beta}$ on $B$, we write $Z_{{\varepsilon},\beta}=Z_{{\varepsilon},\beta}(B)$. Note that $$Z_{{\varepsilon},\beta^\prime}(B)=Z_{{\varepsilon},\rho \beta}(B)=
{\mathbb{E}}\left[Z_{{\varepsilon},\beta}(\rho B+\sqrt{1-\rho^2} B')\left|B\right.\right]$$ Since $\big\{Z_{{\varepsilon},\beta}(B)\}_{{\varepsilon}>0}$ is uniformly integrable, there exists a positive increasing convex function $f$ with $f(x)/x\to_{x\to\infty} \infty$ so that $\sup_{\varepsilon}{\mathbb{E}}f(Z_{{\varepsilon},\beta}(B))<\infty$. However, by Jensen’s inequality and the last display, $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathbb{E}}[f(Z_{{\varepsilon},\beta'}(B))]&=
{\mathbb{E}}\bigg[f\left({\mathbb{E}}\left(Z_{{\varepsilon},\beta}(\rho B+
\sqrt{1-\rho^2} B')\left|\right.B\right)
\right)\bigg]\\
&\leq {\mathbb{E}}\big[f(Z_{{\varepsilon},\beta}(\rho B+\sqrt{1-\rho^2} B'))\big]
=
{\mathbb{E}}[f(Z_{{\varepsilon},\beta}(B))]\,.
\end{aligned}$$ It follows that $\sup_{{\varepsilon}>0} {\mathbb{E}}[f(Z_{{\varepsilon},\beta'}(B))]<\infty$, which in turn implies the uniform integrability of $\big\{Z_{{\varepsilon},\beta'}\big\}_{{\varepsilon}>0}$. This completes the proof.
[**[Acknowledgments.]{}**]{} The first author would like to thank Herbert Spohn (Munich) for suggesting a problem that led to this study, and for inspiring discussions.
[WWW98]{}
and [J. E. Taylor]{}, New York, 2007
, [K. Khanin]{} and [J. Quastel]{}, , 305-326, 2014
, [I. Corwin]{} and [J. Quastel]{}, , Issue 4, 466-537, 2011
, , 529-534 (1989)
and [N. Cancrini]{}, , Nos. 5/6, 1995
and [N. Cancrini]{}, 615, 1998
and [G. Giacomin]{}, , Issue 3, (1997), 571-607
, (1998), American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI.
, [T. Shiga]{} and [N. Yoshida]{}, , [Adv. Stud. Pure Math.]{} [**39**]{}, 115–142, 2004
and [N. Yoshida]{}, , 1746–1770, 2006.
and [N. Yoshida]{}, , 417-447, 2013.
, [R. Sun]{} and [N. Zygouras]{}, (2015).
, (2015).
, , 559-664, (2013)
and [T. Spencer]{}, , nos. 3/4, 1988
, , no. 2, 105-150 (1985).
, , no. 1, 1-12 (1987).
, , 27-31 (1976).
, (2014).
[^1]: Partially supported by a grant from the Israel Science Foundation and by a US-Israel BSF grant
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- Pierre Le Doussal and Kay Jörg Wiese
title: 'Fluctuation force exerted by a planar self-avoiding polymer'
---
=1
What is the force exerted by a polymer on a small object, such as a mesoscopic disk or a molecule? Simply because the object cannot be penetrated by the polymer it constrains its thermal fluctuations and feels an entropic force. This question is relevant in view of the recent surge of interest in fluctuation-induced forces, such as Casimir forces, triggered by beautiful experiments in critical systems [@criticalcasimirexp]. Apart from Gaussian fluctuations, calculation of Casimir forces is difficult, and it is useful to obtain exact results for non-trivial theories [@criticalcasimirtheo].
[![Left: Geometry ${\cal A}$: A self-avoiding polymer fixed at the origin and constrained to remain left of the point $z$. Right: Geometry ${\cal B}$: same as ${\cal A}$, the polymer being fixed at the top of a wedge of exterior angle $\phi$.[]{data-label="f:1"}](./figures/geom4N "fig:"){width="\columnwidth"}]{}
[![Geometry ${\cal C}$: A self-avoiding polymer constrained to depart from $x=-L$, reaching $x=L$, and encircling both the origin and point $z$.[]{data-label="f:2"}](./figures/geom2 "fig:"){width="0.65\columnwidth"}]{}
While there are many results available in 2-dimensional critical systems, some recent originating from stochastic Löwner evolution (SLE) [@schramm00] (see [@Cardy2005; @sleBernardBauerRev06] for review), their implications in terms of fluctuation-induced forces has to our knowledge not been discussed.
In this Letter, we consider a polymer restricted, e.g. by plates or through absorption [@ErcoliniValleAdamcikWitzMetzlerRiosRocaDietler2007], to a planar geometry, modeled by a self-avoiding walk (SAW) of $N$ steps on a 2d lattice of spacing $a$. In the limit of large $N$ and small $a$ it is described by a continuum model. Start with a polymer with [*one endpoint fixed*]{}. Geometry $\cal A$ represented on the left of Fig. \[f:1\] is a half plane where the polymer’s end is fixed at the origin and free to wander to infinity. Then place a mesoscopic object, modeled by a disk of size $\ell$, at point $z=x+i y$. The object is impenetrable to the polymer, which is hence constrained to remain on the left of point $z$. We are interested in the free energy $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal F} = - k T \ln {\cal P}(z,\bar z) \ .\end{aligned}$$ ${\cal P}(z,\bar z) = Z(z,\bar z)/Z$ where $Z$ is the partition sum of the polymer in the absence of the object and $Z(z,\bar z)$ is the constrained one. Since the SAW in the continuum limit is conjectured to be described by SLE with parameter $\kappa=8/3$ [@SchrammSAW; @Kennedy], we can use ${\cal P}(z,\bar z) ={\cal P}_0(\theta)$ as given by Schramm’s formula (for $\kappa=8/3$) ${\cal P}_0(\theta) = \cos^2(\theta/2)$, where $\theta$ is the angle with the real axis (see Fig. \[f:1\]). From this we obtain the force exerted by the polymer on the impenetrable object: $$\vec f = - \vec \nabla F= kT \frac{\vec n_\theta} r \frac{\partial }{\partial \theta} \ln {\cal P}_0(\theta) = - kT \frac{\vec n_\theta} r \tan \left(\frac{\theta }{2}\right) \label{single}$$ This result is valid in the (critical) limit $a ,\ell \ll r$, of object- and monomer-size small compared to $r$. Note that when approaching the boundary on the $x<0$ side, the object is repelled by a force diverging as $2 k T/y$, with $y$ the distance from the wall.
We can now use conformal invariance to obtain results in various geometries. The simplest one is the wedge geometry $\cal B$, see right of Fig. \[f:1\], with exterior angle $\phi$, the polymer being attached at the top of the wedge. Under the map $w=g(z)=z^{\pi/\phi}$ the wedge geometry (in coordinate $z=x+i y$) is mapped back to the half plane (in coordinate $w$). The case $\phi=2 \pi$ corresponds to the full plane with impenetrable positive real axis. Conformal invariance means that ${\cal P}(z,\bar z)={\cal P}_0(g(z),\overline{g(z)})$ where ${\cal P}_0$ is the upper-half plane result given above. We find for the free energy and force $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal F}_{\cal B} &=& - kT\left[ \ln ( 1 + \cos(\alpha \theta)) - \ln2\right] \\
\vec f_{\cal B}&=&- k T \frac{\vec n_\theta}{r} \frac{\pi}{\phi} \tan(\pi \theta/2 \phi)\ .\end{aligned}$$ Let us now study a polymer with [*two endpoints fixed*]{} as shown in Fig. \[f:2\] (geometry ${\cal C}$). Note that since SLE describes the continuum limit of the SAW with fixed endpoints but fluctuating number of steps $N$ at the critical chemical potential [@SchrammSAW; @Kennedy], a possible setting for an experiment is to consider the real axis as impenetrable, fix one endpoint at $x=-L$ and place a hole at $x=L$, through which the self-avoiding polymer passes. Note that it is also possible to use two symmetric holes. Assuming equilibrium for an infinitely long polymer ensures that the chemical potential is at its critical value. We can now use $w=g(z)= \frac{z+L}{L-z}$ which maps geometry $\cal C$ back to $\cal A$. It maps the half plane onto itself, preserves the real axis, and maps $z=-L$ to $w=0$ and $z=L$ to infinity, hence back to Fig. 1. Note that the segment $[-L,L]$ is mapped to the real positive $w$ axis. Conformal invariance yields $${\cal F}_{\cal C} = -k T \left[ \ln \left( \frac{\epsilon(L^2-r^2)}{\sqrt{r^4-2 \cos (2 \theta ) r^2 L^2+L^4}}{+}1\right)-\ln 2\right]$$ with $\epsilon=1$ if the object is inside the area encircled by the polymer and $\epsilon=-1$ if it is outside. Computing the force one finds that for $\theta=\pi/2$ the force is radial $f_r=- 2\epsilon k T/[r (1+r^2/L^2)]$ and crosses over from $1/r$ to $L^2/r^3$ as $r$ increases, being attractive if the object is inside, repulsive if it is outside.
Instead of a half-plane one can compute the force in any singly connected domain, as e.g. a disk, or a strip. We consider two distinct infinite strip geometries $z=x+ i y$. In the first, $\cal D$, presented on Fig. \[f:3\], the strip is $0\le y\le L$ and the polymer is attached at $z=0$ and $z= i L$ (in the sense defined above, i.e. passing through a hole at $Z=iL $). Using $w=\tanh(\pi z/(2 L))=(e^{\pi z/L}-1)/(e^{\pi z/L}+1)$ to map it to geometry $\cal A$ of Fig. \[f:1\], one finds the free energy in geometry $\cal D$: $${\cal F}_{\cal D} = - k T \ln \left[ \frac12 + \frac12 \frac{\sqrt 2 \sinh (\pi x/L)}{\sqrt{\cosh(2\pi x/L)-\cos (2\pi y/L)}} \right]$$ On the symmetric line $y=L/2$ the force is directed along $x$ and equal to $
f_x = \frac{k T}L \frac{2 \pi }{1+e^{2 \pi x/L}},
$ which has a finite limit at large negative $x$.
(100,41) (0,38) (0,0)[[![Left: Strip geometry ${\cal D}$: A self-avoiding polymer constrained to depart from $x=0$, passing through $x=i L$, and staying left of point $z$. Right: Mapping of the strip to the plane.[]{data-label="f:3"}](./figures/geom3 "fig:"){width="0.44\columnwidth"}]{}]{} (48,30)[$\to$]{} (48,9)[$\to$]{}
[![Top: Strip geometry ${\cal E}$: A self-avoiding polymer constrained to depart from $x=-\infty$, going to $x=+\infty$, and passing at the top of point $z$. Bottom: Mapping of the strip to the plane.[]{data-label="f:5"}](./figures/geom5 "fig:"){width="0.75\columnwidth"}]{}
$\to$$\to$
In the second strip geometry, $\cal E$ on figure \[f:5\], the polymer is attached infinitely far away on each side and the object is below it. Using the map $w=e^{\pi z/L}$, one finds the free energy and force (with $f_x=0$): $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal F}_{\cal E} &=& - kT \left[\ln \left( 1 + \cos(\pi y/L)\right) - \ln2\right] \\
f^{\cal E}_{y} &=& - \frac{\pi}{L} \tan\!\left({\pi y\over 2 L}\right)\ . \label{strip2} \end{aligned}$$ In all cases considered above the force tends to bring the object towards a portion of the boundary. One can ask whether it is possible to levitate the object into a stable equilibrium away from the boundaries. For this one needs (at least) two polymers. This more difficult problem was solved when the two polymers start at the same point or nearby on the real axis and both go to infinity [@GamsaCardy2005]. We use their extension of Schramm’s formula to two SLEs conditioned not to merge before reaching infinity. One defines ${\cal P}_l$, ${\cal P}_m$ and ${\cal P}_r=1-{\cal P}_m-{\cal P}_l$ the relative weights of configurations such that the object is constrained to lie on the left of both polymers (l), in the middle (m) or to the right (r). Then ${\cal P}_m= \frac{4}{5} \sin^2(\theta)$, hence the free energy is: $${\cal F}_m = - k T \left[ 2 \ln (\sin \theta) + \ln(4/5)\right]\ .$$ More complicated formula hold for ${\cal P}_r$ and ${\cal F}_r$. We obtain for the force exerted on a point which remains to the left of the two polymers (l), in the middle (m) or to the right (r) as $\vec f= f^\theta \vec n_\theta$ with: $$\begin{aligned}
f^\theta_{{l}} &=& -\frac{k T}{r}
\frac{8 \sin (\theta ) [-12 \theta \cos (\theta )+9 \sin (\theta )+\sin (3 \theta )]}{-24 \cos (2 \theta ) \theta -36 \theta +28 \sin (2 \theta
)+\sin (4 \theta )} {\nonumber}\\
f^\theta_{{m}} &=& \frac{k T}{r} 2 \cot (\theta ) \label{middlef}
\end{aligned}$$
(100,35) (0,0)[[![Top left: Force along $\vec n_\theta$ exerted by 2 self-avoiding polymers on a point object, if the object is left of the two polymers (solid), between them (dashed) or right of them (dotted), in geometry ${\cal A}$. Top right: geometry ${\cal C}$. Two self-avoiding polymers fixed at $-L$, passing through a hole at $L$, and constrained to remain above and below the point $z$. Bottom: Equal probability lines (solid) and force flow lines (dashed) for geometry ${\cal F}$; plot-units are $L$.[]{data-label="f:6"}](./figures/2polyforce2 "fig:"){width="0.48\columnwidth"}]{}]{} (52,0)[[![Top left: Force along $\vec n_\theta$ exerted by 2 self-avoiding polymers on a point object, if the object is left of the two polymers (solid), between them (dashed) or right of them (dotted), in geometry ${\cal A}$. Top right: geometry ${\cal C}$. Two self-avoiding polymers fixed at $-L$, passing through a hole at $L$, and constrained to remain above and below the point $z$. Bottom: Equal probability lines (solid) and force flow lines (dashed) for geometry ${\cal F}$; plot-units are $L$.[]{data-label="f:6"}](./figures/geom2bis "fig:"){width="0.48\columnwidth"}]{}]{} (46,18.5)[$\theta$]{} (0,32)[$f$]{}
and $ f^\theta_{\mathrm{r}}(\theta)= - f^\theta_{\mathrm{l}}(\pi-\theta)$. This is plotted on Fig. \[f:6\]. Note that when the object is trapped in the middle of the two polymers, the symmetry line $\theta=\pi/2$ is a line of equilibrium points, stable in the angular direction and neutral in the radial one. Hence the object is brought back to the symmetry line and force flow lines are circles $r=cst$ heading towards $\theta=\pi/2$. A remarkable property holds: $$\label{11}
{\cal P}_m(z,\bar z)= \frac{16}{5} {\cal P}^{(1)}_{l}(z,\bar z) {\cal P}^{(1)}_r(z,\bar z)\ ,$$ where ${\cal P}^{(1)}_{l/r}$ is the (Schramm) probability for a single self-avoiding polymer to pass left/right of the point. Hence, if the point is in the middle, the fluctuation force is [*the same*]{} as for two independent polymers, i.e. mutual avoidance does not change the result, as can be checked on (\[middlef\]). This is [*not true*]{} if the polymers are on the same side of the object.
Let us consider again the geometry of Fig. \[f:2\] with now both polymers attached at $x=-L$, and both passing through a hole at $x= L$, see top right of figure \[f:6\]. An object trapped in the middle acquires a free energy: $${\cal F}_m=
-k T \log \left(\frac{16 r^2 L^2 \sin ^2(\theta )}{5 \left(r^4-2 \cos (2 \theta ) r^2L^2+L^4\right)}\right)\ .$$ The equipotential lines are given on the bottom of figure \[f:6\], with the minimum on the circle of radius $L$, passing through $\pm L$ (bold red). This leads to a force $$\begin{aligned}
\vec f_{{m}} = \frac{2 kT}{r} \frac{(L^4-r^4) \vec n_r + (r^2-L^2)^2 \cot(\theta) \vec n_\theta}{L^4 + r^4 - 2 r^2 L^2 \cos(2 \theta)}\ .\end{aligned}$$ which due to (\[11\]) is the sum of the forces of two independent SAWs. There is now a semi-circle of equilibrium points $r=L$, which is the image of the vertical straight line passing through 0 of geometry $\cal A$. Note that there is no force on the line, thus no [*stable*]{} equilibrium.
(100,35) (0,0)[[![Mapping of self-avoiding walks constrained to pass left and right of disks from geometry $\cal A$ to geometry $\cal C$: all disk drawn correspond to the same probability, i.e. same free energy[]{data-label="f:beau"}](./figures/origcircles "fig:"){width="0.317\columnwidth"}]{}]{} (32,17)[$\to$]{} (37.3,0)[[[![Mapping of self-avoiding walks constrained to pass left and right of disks from geometry $\cal A$ to geometry $\cal C$: all disk drawn correspond to the same probability, i.e. same free energy[]{data-label="f:beau"}](./figures/mappedcircles "fig:"){width="0.627\columnwidth"}]{}]{}]{} (15,21)[$\phi$]{}
We now argue that trapping occurs in two cases (i) a finite-size object, e.g. a small disk; and (ii) a point submitted to a thermal bath. From scale invariance the probability ${\cal P}_m(\phi)$ that two SAWs starting at $0$ avoid a disk with center on the imaginary axis and pass one left, one right, depends only on the angle $\phi$ of the cone drawn on the left of Fig. \[f:beau\] and is clearly a decreasing function of $\phi$, with ${\cal P}_m(0)={\cal P}_m$ and ${\cal P}_m(\pi)=0$. Hence a disk of fixed size will be pushed to infinity along the imaginary axis. Under conformal mapping of geometry $\cal A$ to $\cal C$, discs map to discs and the cone to the space between two circular arcs. Assuming conformal invariance of the probabilities, all disks shown in Fig. \[f:beau\] have the same free energy. The center of a disk will thus be pushed to the stable equilibrium point above the origin, where the largest disk is drawn. A quantitative result is possible for small radius $\rho$. E.g. in the geometry ${\cal A}$ the no-hit probability for a disk centered at $x+i y$ reads $p \approx 1 - c (\frac{\rho}{2 y})^{2/3} \sin^2(\theta)$ to lowest order in powers of $\rho/y$, as extracted from [@beffara; @bauer; @Cardy2005], with an unknown constant $c$. This gives the force $k T \vec \nabla \ln p$. In the symmetric case $\theta=\pi/2$, the force along the radial direction is $$\label{14}
f_r \approx \frac{2 c k T}{3} \frac{1}{r} \left(\frac{\rho}{2 r}\right)^{2/3}$$ which decays as $1/r^{5/3}$ at large distances.
Consider now a point-like object subjected to the Casimir force above plus a thermal bath at temperature $T'$. The equilibrium Gibbs measure for the object is ${\cal P}={\cal P}(z,\bar z)^{T/T'}/{\cal Z}$, and the partition sum of polymer plus object is ${\cal Z} = \int {{\mathrm{d}}}^2 z\, {\cal P}(z,\bar z)^{T/T'}$. Here ${\cal P}$ is either Schramm’s probability ${\cal P}_0$ for a single polymer, given above Eq. (\[single\]), or ${\cal P}_m$ in Eq. (\[11\]) for an object caught between two SAWs. For the latter case, equiprobability lines are plotted at the bottom of Fig. \[f:6\] for $T'=T$. Depending on the geometry and $T/T'$, ${\cal Z}$ is either infinite, and the object diffuses to the region where the integral is divergent, or finite and the object is bound. The latter occurs for any $T'<T$ in geometry ${\cal C}$ (top right of Fig. \[f:6\]), since at large $r$, ${\cal P} {{\mathrm{d}}}^2 z\, \sim {{\mathrm{d}}}\theta\, r {{\mathrm{d}}}r (\sin^2(\theta)/r^2)^{T/T'}$. For $T=T'$, a natural choice when the two polymers and the object are in mutual thermal equilibrium, this geometry is critical, hence the object diffuses to infinity. Other geometries however exhibit a bound state for $T=T'$. E.g. the strip geometry ${\cal D}$ has a normalizable distribution, $${\cal P}_m = \frac{\pi}{L^2 \ln 2} \frac{\sin^2(\pi y/L)}{\cosh(2 \pi x/L)-\cos(2 \pi y/L)}$$ and an exponentially localized bound state, with the length set by the strip width. An algebraic bound state is obtained if, in Fig. \[f:6\] with the two polymers going through $-L$ and $L$, one rotates the real negative axis around $0$ clockwise to form a wedge with angle $\phi<\pi$. Then: $${\cal P}_m(r,\theta) = {\cal N}_a \frac{L^{2 a-2} r^{2 a} \sin^2(a \theta)}{L^{4 a}+ r^{4 a} - 2 (r L)^{2 a} \cos(2 a \theta)}$$ with $a=\pi/\phi>1$ (the formula remains true for $a<1$ as a non-normalizable density) and $\pi {\cal N}_a=4 a^2/(
\psi(\frac{1}{2 a})-\psi(\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{2 a})+a+ (\pi / \sin(\frac{\pi }{ a}))$. Let us compare the force exerted by one and by two polymers. Let us choose the simplest geometry $\cal E$, the infinite strip with the two polymers attached at both ends (Fig. \[f:5\]), where the force is along $y$. For an object in the middle, one has a restoring force towards the neutral axis $y=L/2$ $$f^{\mathrm{m}}_y = \frac{2 kT \pi}{L} \cot\!\Big({\pi y \over L}\Big)\ ,$$ while the force exerted by two polymers is $f_y = k T \partial _y \ln {\cal P}$, $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal P} &=& \textstyle 24 \pi \cos(\frac{2 \pi y}{L})
(1-\frac{y}{L})+36 \pi (1-\frac{y}{L})+28
\sin(\frac{2 \pi y}{L}){\nonumber}\\
&& \textstyle +\sin(\frac{4 \pi
y}{L}) \label{18}\end{aligned}$$ Its ratio to the force (\[strip2\]) exerted by a single polymer increases monotonically from $\frac{16}5$ (at $y=0$) to $\frac{7}2$ (at $y=L$). For an interpretation of the first number see below.
We can now compute the force exerted by a single polymer on an object placed on the boundary of the system (e.g. the upper half plane $H$). We use the nice result of [@SchrammSAW] arising from the so-called restriction property obeyed by SAWs. It states that the probability that a SAW (from $0$ to infinity) does not visit a subdomain $A$ is $|g'_A(0)|^{5/8}$, where $g_A$ is the map from $H\setminus A$ to $H$, which removes $A$ and has $g_A(0)=0$, and $g_A(z) \sim z$ at infinity. Note that $H\setminus A$ must be singly connected, hence the object connected to the boundary. For a general domain $D$ and endpoints $a$ and $b$ on the boundary the probability is $|g'_A(a)|^{5/8} |g'_A(b)|^{5/8}$ with $g_A(a)=a$ and $g_B(b)=b$. Note that a similar result holds for a Brownian excursion, i.e. a Brownian from $a$ to $b$ conditioned not to hit the boundary, with the exponent $5/8$ replaced by $1$. Finally let us mention that for a SAW from point $a$ on the boundary to point $b$ in the bulk (radial SLE) the probability becomes $|g'_A(a)|^{5/8} |g'_A(b)|^{5/48}$. In CFT language $h_{1,2}$ (with $h_{1,2}=5/8$ for $\kappa=8/3$) is the dimension of the operator $\Phi_{12}$ creating a curve on the boundary, $2 h_{0,1/2}=5/48$ is the dimension of the bulk operator $\Phi_{0,1/2}$ creating a curve in the bulk. $\Phi_{1,3}$ with $h_{1,3}=2$ creates two curves on the boundary conditioned not to annihilate. When generalized, this implies that the force exerted by $n$ polymers with identical endpoints on a given subdomain $A$ connected to the boundary is proportional to $h_{1,n+1}=n(3 n+ 2)/8$, which explains the ratio $h_{1,3}/h_{1,2}=16/5$ found above, see Eq. (\[18\]), for small $y$ (point close to the boundary)[^1].
The simplest example for an object $A$ connected to the boundary is a vertical segment $z=a+i y$ with $y \in [0,h]$, which is removed by the map $g_A(z) = \sqrt{(z-a)^2+h^2} + {{{\mathrm{sign}}}}(a) \sqrt{a^2+h^2}$. The no-hit probability is ${\cal P} = \big( \frac{a^2}{h^2+a^2}\big) ^{ 5/ {16}}$, and the total force $\vec f=k T \vec \nabla \ln {\cal P}$ is: $$\label{19}
f_x = \frac{5}{8} k T \frac{h^2}{a(a^2+h^2)}\ , \quad f_y = - \frac{5}{8} k T \frac{h}{(a^2+h^2)} \ .$$ To obtain the force when the polymer starts at $0$ and ends at $z_0=x_0+i y_0$ in the half plane, one uses the map $v=\tilde g_A(z)$ which preserves $z_0$ rather than $\infty$. Composing $g_A$ with a Moebius map which maps $H$ to $H$, $0$ to $0$ and $g(z_0)$ back to $z_0$, one finds a complicated formula which simplifies for $x_0=a$ to ${\cal P}= (\frac{a^2}{a^2 + h^2})^{\frac{5}{16}} y_0^{-5/12} (y_0^2-h^2)^{5/24}$. This gives for the force on the wall $f_y=-\frac{5k T }{24}(\frac{3h}{a^2+h^2}+\frac{2h}{y_0^2-h^2})$ which diverges as $y_0 \to h^+$.
Another example is a half disk of radius $r$ centered at $x=a>0$. The uniformizing map is $g(z)=z+\frac{r^2}{a}+\frac{r^2}{z-a}$. Hence the-no hit probability is ${\cal P}=(1 - \frac{r^2}{a^2})^{5/8}$, and the object is repelled with a force $f_x=\frac{5 kT}{4 a} r^2/(a^2-r^2)$.
The [*polymer piston*]{} is interesting for [*extreme-value statistics*]{}. Consider the strip geometry ${\cal D}$ on Fig. \[f:3\] and add an impenetrable region ${\sf P}$ (the piston) for $x>a$. The map $h_a(z)= [\cosh(\frac{\pi}{L}a)-\cosh(\frac{\pi}{L}(z-a))]/[\cosh(\frac{\pi}{L}(z-a))+\cosh(\frac{\pi}{L}a)]$ maps the strip minus ${\sf P}$ to the upper half plane, and both axes $y=0$ and $y=L$ to $0$. Hence the map which removes the piston is $g_A(z)=h_{\infty}^{-1}(h_a(z)) =(L/\pi) \ln(\cosh(\pi(z-a)/L)/\cosh(a \pi/L)) $ while leaving $0$ and $i L$ fixed. The no-hit probability is $${\cal P} = |g'_A(0)|^{5/8} |g'_A( i L )|^{5/8} = [\tanh(a \pi/L)]^{5/4}$$ Note that this is also the cumulative distribution of $x_{\max}=a$, the [*maximum excursion of a SAW*]{}. The total force exerted on the piston is $f_x = 5 \pi/[2 L \sinh(2 a \pi/L)]$.
Consider now the “door” geometry, i.e. a segment $z=a+ t e^{i \alpha}$ with $t \in [0,h]$, of angle $\alpha=b \pi$. The relevant map $w=g(z)$ has an explicit form in terms of its inverse map $z=f(w)$ with $f(w)=a+(w-x_1)[(w-x_3)/(w-x_1)]^b$, $0<x_1<x_3$ with $a=x_1(x_3/x_1)^b$ and $h=b^b(1-b)^{1-b}(x_3-x_1)$. The no-hit probability is $$\begin{aligned}
\label{21}
{\cal P} &=&\big[ \mu^{b} (1-b(1-\mu^{-1})) \big]^{-5/8} \\
h/a &=& b^b(1-b)^{1-b} \mu^{-b} (\mu-1) \ ,
\label{22}\end{aligned}$$ where $\mu=x_3/x_1>1$ is solution of Eq. (\[22\]). The numerical solution is given on figure \[f:door\]. An interesting limit is represented in Fig. \[f:N1\], where $h=1/\sin(\pi k)$, $a=\ell + \cot(\pi k)$ and $k=1-b$ tends to zero. One finds that $\mu=\frac{1}{w k} + O(k^0)$ with $w=W(e^{\ell \pi-1})$ the product-log function $W(z)$ solution of $z= W e^W$. This gives the no-hit probability of the horizontal half-line $i + x$ with $x>\ell$, plotted on Fig. \[f:N1\], $$\begin{aligned}
\label{magic}
{\cal P} &=& \Big[1+\frac{1}{W\left(e^{\ell\pi - 1}\right)}\Big]^{-5/8}\ .\qquad
$$
[[![The probability to avoid a wall starting from $(\ell,1)$ to $(\infty,1)$. Inset: the geometry in question.[]{data-label="f:N1"}](./figures/Pparallelwall "fig:"){width="\columnwidth"}]{}]{}
Let us now consider the fluctuation force between two objects, here two identical slits, [*mediated by the polymer*]{}, here in the symmetric position (see figure \[f:2slits\]). Following [@SchwarzChristophel], the map which produces two slits is for $x_1<x_2<x_3$: $
f'(w) = \frac{w^2-x_2^2}{\sqrt{w^2-x_1^2} \sqrt{w^2-x_3^2}}$, $ f(w)={ \textstyle E\left(\arcsin ({\frac{w}{x_1})|\frac{x_1^2}{x_3^2}}\right) x_3}
+{F\left(\arcsin(\frac{w}{x_1})|\frac{x_1^2}{x_3^2}\right)(x_2^2-x_3^2)}/{x_3}$, where $E$, $F$ and $K$ (below) are the elliptic $E$, $F$ and $K$ functions, and our choice is $g(0)=0=f(0)$. The condition that $f(x_1)=f(x_3)$, or equivalently that $\Im f(x_3)=0$ yields a non-trivial condition. Define $\alpha:= x_1/x_3$, $\beta:=x_2/x_3$. Then for $0 < \alpha < \beta< 1$: $
\beta(\alpha)=\sqrt{\frac{E\left(\alpha ^2\right)-E\left(\arcsin \left(\frac{1}{\alpha }\right)|\alpha
^2\right)}{F\left(\arcsin \left(\frac{1}{\alpha }\right)|\alpha ^2\right)-K\left(\alpha
^2\right)}+1}
$. The walls have position $\pm a$ and height $h$ (see figure \[f:2slits\]): $$\begin{aligned}
a=f(x_1)&=& \left(E\left(\alpha ^2\right)+\left(\beta ^2-1\right) K\left(\alpha
^2\right)\right)x_3 \\
{h}=\Im {f(x_2)} &=&\Im \Big[ \textstyle E\left(\arcsin(\frac{\beta }{\alpha })|\alpha
^2\right) {\nonumber}\\&& \textstyle +\left(\beta ^2-1\right) \textstyle F\left(\arcsin(\frac{\beta }{\alpha
})|\alpha ^2\right)\Big] x_3\end{aligned}$$
[![Image of the upper half plane, and of lines parallel to the real axis (in thick), resp. imaginary (dotted), under the map $f(w)$ discussed in the text, which creates two slits, with $x_1=1$, $x_2=1.991$, and $x_3$=3. []{data-label="f:2slits"}](./figures/2slits "fig:"){width="\columnwidth"}]{}
The probability is $
{\cal P} = |f'(0)|^{-\frac 5 8} = |\frac \alpha{\beta^2}|^ {\frac 5 8}
$. Fig. \[f:2slitsprobaN\] shows a parametric plot of ${\cal P}$, and of the interaction energy, as function of $h/a$.
Consider now a small smooth object described by $z=x+ i y$, $0 < y \leq Y (x)$, away from the origin, i.e. $Y(0)=Y(\infty)=0$. If we find a function $f(t)$ with only positive fourier components $f_k$, such that $x=x(t)=\Re f(t)$, $Y(x)=\Im f(t)$ describes the boundary for $t$ real, then $f(z)=z+\int_{k>0} f_k e^{i k z}=z+{ \frac1\pi}\int_t \frac{Y(x(t))}{t-z} $ is the inverse uniformizing map. In an expansion in powers of $Y(x)$ [*and its derivatives*]{} one finds $f(z)=\tilde f(z)-\tilde f(0)$ with $\tilde f(z)=
z + {\frac1\pi}\int_t \frac{Y(t)}{t-z} - \frac{1}{{2} \pi^2} \int_{t,t'} Y'(t) Y'(t') (\frac{1}{t-z} + \frac{1}{t'-z}) \ln|t-t'| +...$. This yields the free energy $$\label{expansion}
{\cal F} = k T \frac{5}{8 \pi} \Big[ \int_t \frac{Y(t)}{t^2} - \int_{t,t'} {\cal G}(t,t') Y'(t) Y'(t') +\ldots \Big]\ ,$$ where ${ 2} \pi {\cal G}(t,t')=(t^{-2}+t^{\prime -2}) \ln|t-t'| + { 1/(tt')}$. For a single object centered at position $a$, $Y(t)=h(t-a)$, the repulsive force $f_x=-\partial_a \cal F$ decays as $f_x \approx 5 k T A/(4 \pi a^3)$ at large distances, with a prefactor $A=\int_t Y(x(t))=\int_t h(t) - \frac{1}{\pi} \int_{tt'} h'(t)h'(t') \ln|t-t'| +O(h^3)$. In the case of two objects, (\[expansion\]) yields their interaction, to lowest order, mediated by the polymer. For small objects one finds ${\cal F}_{\mathrm{int}}= - k T {\frac{5}{4 \pi}} \partial_{a}\partial_b {\cal G}(a,b) \int_t h_a(t) \int_{t'} h_b(t')$. The interaction of a small object at $z$ in the bulk with an arbitrary object on the boundary removed by the map $g(z)$ is obtained from the left passage probability $\cal P$, generalizing Schramm’s formula to ${\cal P} = |g'(0)|^{\frac58}\frac12 \big[ 1+ \frac{\Re g(z)}{|g(z)|} \big]$.
The previous calculations can be extended to fluctuation forces for an object impenetrable to the interface described by SLE for any $\kappa$. For illustration, the force in geometry $\cal A$ at $\theta = \pi/2$ reads $$\vec f =
- k T \frac{\vec n_\theta} r
\frac{2 \Gamma \left(\frac{4}{\kappa }\right)}{\sqrt{\pi } \Gamma \left(\frac{4}{\kappa
}-\frac{1}{2}\right)}\ .$$ Extension to Ising at $T_c$ assumes that the object interacts only with the interface induced by changes in boundary conditions, not the bubbles proliferating at criticality, which seems artificial. Physically meaningful is the polymer at the $\Theta$ point [@DuplantierSaleur1987], conjectured to correspond to $\kappa=6$. Further results follow from recent works: (i) from [@hagendorf] one obtains the force exerted by a loop-erased random walk ($\kappa=2$) on an object of arbitrary shape. (ii) from the [*double*]{} left-passage probability of a SAW [@SimmonsCardy] around points $z_1,z_2$ one computes the Casimir interaction between two points. Interestingly, when they are close and away from the boundary the interaction force is [*attractive*]{} and diverges for $y\approx y_1\approx y_2$, $\theta\approx \theta_1\approx \theta_2$ as $|f| \sim k T A (1-\cos \theta) y^{-2/3} |z_1-z_2|^{-1/3}$ with $A=- \sqrt{3 \pi} \Gamma(5/6)/(3 \Gamma(-2/3))=0.287457...$. Near the boundary for small $y_1=y_2=y$, ${\cal F}_{\mathrm{int}} = -k T y^4/(5 x_1 x_2 (x_1-x_2)^2)+ O(y^6)$, a [*repulsive*]{} interaction for $x_1<x_2/3$.
[![Left: The probability that a polymer does not touch two slits, as a function of $h/a$ for the geometry of figure \[f:2slits\]. Right: The free energy in units of $kT$ (solid line), compared to the sum of the free energies for a slit left and a slit right (dashed line), as a function of $h/a$. The difference is the interaction free energy mediated by the polymer.[]{data-label="f:2slitsprobaN"}](./figures/proba2slits "fig:"){width="0.49\columnwidth"}]{} [![Left: The probability that a polymer does not touch two slits, as a function of $h/a$ for the geometry of figure \[f:2slits\]. Right: The free energy in units of $kT$ (solid line), compared to the sum of the free energies for a slit left and a slit right (dashed line), as a function of $h/a$. The difference is the interaction free energy mediated by the polymer.[]{data-label="f:2slitsprobaN"}](./figures/2slitsF "fig:"){width="0.49\columnwidth"}]{}
We thank M. Bauer, D. Bernard, T. Emig, C. Hagendorf, Y. Kantor and M. Kardar for useful discussions. This work was supported by ANR under program 05-BLAN-0099-01, and in part through NSF grant PHY05-51164 during the program Fluctuate08 at KITP.
[100]{}
R. Garcia and M. H. W. Chan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 1187 (1999); [*ibid*]{} 88, 086101 (2002). A. Ganshin, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 075301 (2006). A. Mukhopadhyay and B. M. Law, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 772 (1999)T. Ueno, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 116102. R. Ishiguro and S. Balibar, J. Low Temp. Phys. 140, 29 (2005).
M. E. Fisher and P. G. de Gennes, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Ser. B 287, 207 (1978). M. Krech, [*The Casimir Effect in Critical Systems*]{}, (World Scientific, Singapore, 1994); J. Phys. Condens. Matter 11, R391 (1999); M. P. Nightingale and J. O. Indekeu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 1824 (1985); M. Krech and S. Dietrich, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 345 (1991); ibid 67, 1055 (1991).
O. Schramm, Israel J. Math. [**118**]{}, 221, (2000). J. Cardy, Annals of Physics [**318**]{} (2005) 81–118. M. Bauer and D. Bernard, Phys. Rep. [**432**]{} (2006) 115.
E. Ercolini, et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. [**98**]{} (2007) 058102.
T. Kennedy, J. Stat. Phys. 114, 51-78 (2004).
G. F. Lawler, O. Schramm, and W. Werner, arXiv:math/0204277, Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., 72, Part 2, p. 339–364, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2004, and arXiv:math/0209343, J. Amer. Math. Soc. vol. 16, no. 4, 917–955, 2003.
A. Gamsa and J. Cardy, J. Stat. Mech. (2005) P12009.
B. Duplantier and H. Saleur, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**59**]{} (1987) 539; (1988) 1521; F. Seno et al. [*ibid*]{} [**61**]{} (1988) 1520.
V. Beffara, arXiv:math/0211322
R. O. Bauer, arXiv:math/0602391.
L.V. Ahlfors, [*Complex Analysis*]{}, McGraw-Hill, New York (1979). C. Hagendorf, arXiv:0810.4503.
J.H. Simmons and J. Cardy, arXiv:0811.4767.
Appendix A: Radial SLE
======================
Here we give details about a polymer starting at 0, and ending at $z_0$, and the force it exerts on the slit with height $h$ above $a$. We use the formula above Eq. (\[19\]) that removes the slit, $g_A(z) = \sqrt{(z-a)^2+h^2} + {{{\mathrm{sign}}}}(a) \sqrt{a^2+h^2}$. Note that the cut of the square root must be such that $g(z) \sim z$ at infinity, hence $g(x)<0$ for $x<a$, and $g(x)>0$ for $x>a$. Thus the cut is the real positive axis with $g_A(x+i \epsilon)=- \sqrt{(x-a)^2+h^2}$ for $x<a$. In other words, one defines in the full plane minus the real positive axis $\sqrt{x+i y}:=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( {{{\mathrm{sign}}}}(y) \sqrt{\sqrt{x^2+y^2}+x} + i \sqrt{\sqrt{x^2+y^2}-x}\right)$.
To obtain the force when the polymer starts at $0$ and ends at $z_0=x_0+i y_0$ in the half plane, one has to use the map $w=\tilde g_A(z)$ which preserves $z_0$ rather than $\infty$. It can be constructed, by composing $g_A$ with a second Moebius map. The latter maps $H$ to $H$, $0$ to $0$ and $g(z_0)$ back to $z_0$. We claim that $w$ and $z$ are related by $$\frac{1}{w} - \Re \frac{1}{z_0} = \frac{\Im(1/z_0)}{\Im(1/g(z_0))} \left[\frac 1{g(z)} - \Re \frac{1}{g(z_0)}\right]\ ,$$ where $\Re$ and $\Im$ indicate real and imaginary parts. First, all $\Re$ and $\Im$ appearing above are real numbers. Thus, $w$ is a Moebius transform of $g(z)$ with real parameters. Second, $z=0$, i.e. $g(z)=0$ is mapped onto $w=0$. Third, $z_0$ is mapped to $w=z_0$. Using this, we find $$\begin{aligned}
\left| \tilde g_A'(0)\right| &=&\left| \frac{a z_0^2 \,\Im g_A(z_0)}{ \sqrt{a^2+h^2} y_0 g_A(z_0)^2} \right| \\
\left| \tilde g_A'(z_0)\right| &=& \left|\frac{y_0 g_A'(z_0)}{\Im g_A(z_0)}\right|\end{aligned}$$ This leads to $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal P}=\left|\frac{a}{\sqrt{a^2 + h^2}} \frac{z_0^2}{g_A(z_0)^2}\right|^{\frac{5}{8}} \left| \frac{\Im g_A(z_0)}{\Im(z_0)} \right|^{\frac{5}{8}-\frac{5}{48}} \nonumber
\left|g'_A(z_0) \right |^{\frac{5}{48}}\end{aligned}$$ The correct definition of the square root is: $$\begin{aligned}
\sqrt{x+i y}&=&\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}( {{\mathrm{sign}}}(y) \sqrt{r+x} + i \sqrt{r-x}) \\
r &=& \sqrt{x^2+y^2}\end{aligned}$$ Hence the true map $g_A(z)$ reads for $z=x+i y$, $y \geq 0$: $$\begin{aligned}
{\nonumber}g_A(z) &=& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}( {{\mathrm{sign}}}(x-a) \sqrt{\rho+t} + i \sqrt{\rho-t}) \\
&& + {{{\mathrm{sign}}}}(a) \sqrt{a^2+h^2} \\
\rho &=& \sqrt{((x-a)^2-y^2+h^2)^2+4 (x-a)^2 y^2}\qquad \\
t &=& (x-a)^2-y^2+h^2\end{aligned}$$ One finds: $$\begin{aligned}
|g'_A(z)|^2 &=& \frac{(x-a)^2+y^2}{\sqrt{h^4 + 2 h^2 ((x-a)^2-y^2)+((x-a)^2+y^2)^2}}{\nonumber}\\
& =& \frac{(x-a)^2+y^2}{\rho} \end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal P} = \left|\frac{a^{5/8} z_0^{5/4}
\Im(g_A(z_0))^{25/48}
g_A'(z_0)^{5/48}}{\left(a^2+h^2\right)^{5/16}
y_0^{25/48} g_A(z_0)^{5/4}}\right|\end{aligned}$$ This simplifies considerably for $x=a$ $$\begin{aligned}
p= \left(\frac{a^2}{a^2 + h^2} \right)^{{5}/{16}} \left(\frac{y^2-h^2}{y^2}\right)^{5/24} \ ,\end{aligned}$$ which is the result given in the main text.
Appendix B: Force on a disk
===========================
Let us recall [@bauer] that the probability that a SAW from $1$ to $e^{i \phi}$ on the unit disk avoids a disk centered at $0$ of radius $\rho\ll 1$ is $${\cal P}(\rho,\phi) \approx 1 - c \rho^{2/3} \sin^2(\phi/2) \ ,$$ where $c$ is still elusive. Consider the map $z=z_0 \frac{1-w}{1 - \frac{z_0}{\bar z_0} w}$, equivalent to ${w=\frac{\bar z_0}{z_0} \frac{z_0-z}{\bar z_0-z}}$ from the upper half plane in $z$, to the unit disk in $w$, with $w(0)=1$, $w(z_0)=0$ and $w(\infty)=\bar z_0/z_0=e^{i \phi}$. We note $z_0=x_0+ i y_0=r_0 {{\mathrm{e}}}^{i \theta_0}$ with $\theta_0=-\phi/2$. One finds that the circle of radius $\rho$ centered at $w=0$ is mapped to a circle in the upper half plane of center $z_c=x_c+ i y_c$ with $x_c=x_0$ and $y_c=y_0 \frac{1+\rho^2}{1-\rho^2}$ and radius $R=2 \rho y_0/(1-\rho^2)$. Hence $y_0=\sqrt{y_c^2-R^2}$ and the no-hit probability of the circle in the upper half plane is $$\begin{aligned}
\label{40}
{\cal P}^{\text{half-plane}}\approx 1- c\left[\frac{y_c- \sqrt{y_c^2{-}R^2}}{R}\right]^{\frac23} \frac{y_c^2-R^2}{x_c^2+y_c^2-R^2}\end{aligned}$$ For small $R$, $\rho \approx \frac{R}{2 y_c}$, $z_c = r e^{i \theta} \approx z_0$ hence $\theta=\theta_0=-\phi/2$ one finds the formula given in the text.
Another interesting limit studied in [@bauer] is $y_c-R \ll R$. There the no-hit probability in the unit disk for $0 \geq \phi \geq \pi$ is $${\cal P}(\rho,\phi) \approx \exp\left(- \frac{5 \pi}{8} \frac{\phi}{1-\rho}\right) \ .$$ In that limit, the leading free energy is $${\cal F} \approx k T \frac{5 \pi}{8} \phi \sqrt{\frac{R}{2(y_c-R)}}$$ with $\phi=\phi(x_c^2/(2 R (y_c-R))$, $\phi(v)=2 \text{arcsin}{ \big(\sqrt{1/(1+v)}\big)}$, hence $\phi(0)=\pi$ and $\phi \sim 2 \sqrt{2 R (y_c-R)}/x_c$ for large $x_c$. Along the symmetry direction $x_c=0$ the force is $$\label{43}
f_y \approx k T \frac{5 \pi^2}{16} \frac{\sqrt{R}}{\sqrt{2} (y_c-R)^{3/2}} \ .$$ Note that the exponents of the $y_c$ dependence matches $-3/2$ for $y_c-R\ll R$, see Eq. (\[43\]) and $-5/3$ at $R\ll y_c$, see Eqs. (\[40\]) and (\[14\]).
[^1]: For $n$ polymers ending in the bulk the exponent $5/48$ is replaced by $2 h_{0,n/2}=\frac{3}{8} (\frac{n^2}{4} - \frac{1}{9})$.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We introduce a one-parameter family, $0 \leq H \leq 1$, of pair potential functions with a single relative energy minimum that stabilize a range of vacancy-riddled crystals as ground states. The “quintic potential” is a short-ranged, nonnegative pair potential with a single local minimum of height $H$ at unit distance and vanishes cubically at a distance of ${{\sqrt{3}}}$. We have developed this potential to produce ground states with the symmetry of the triangular lattice while favoring the presence of vacancies. After an exhaustive search using various optimization and simulation methods, we believe that we have determined the ground states for all pressures, densities, and $0 \leq H \leq 1$. For specific areas below $3{{\sqrt{3}}}/2$, the ground states of the “quintic potential” include high-density and low-density triangular lattices, kagomé and honeycomb crystals, and stripes. We find that these ground states are mechanically stable but are difficult to self-assemble in computer simulations without defects. For specific areas above $3{{\sqrt{3}}}/2$, these systems have a ground-state phase diagram that corresponds to hard disks with radius ${{\sqrt{3}}}$. For the special case of $H=0$, a broad range of ground states is available. Analysis of this case suggests that among many ground states, a high-density triangular lattice, low-density triangular lattice, and striped phases have the highest entropy for certain densities. The simplicity of this potential makes it an attractive candidate for experimental realization with application to the development of novel colloidal crystals or photonic materials.'
author:
- 'Robert D. Batten'
- 'David A. Huse'
- 'Frank H. Stillinger'
- Salvatore Torquato
bibliography:
- 'VacancyGS.bib'
title: 'Novel Ground-State Crystals with Controlled Vacancy Concentrations: From Kagomé to Honeycomb to Stripes '
---
Introduction
============
The field of self-assembly provides numerous examples of using atoms, molecules, colloids, and polymers as building blocks in the development of self-organizing functional materials. For example, researchers have used nanoparticles to create stacked rings and spirals using DNA linkers,[@sharma2009control] to construct photonic crystals using binary systems of colloids,[@hynninen2007self] and to prototype a self-organzing colloidal battery.[@cho2007self]
Recently, there have been significant efforts to design pair potentials that yield self-assembly of targeted ground-state (potential energy minimizing) structures using “inverse methods.”[@torquato2009inverse; @cohn2009algorithmic] With an inverse approach, one chooses a targeted structure or property and uses optimization methods to develop a robust pair potential function. We envision that colloids will be the experimental testbed for the optimized interactions because colloids offer a significant range of repulsive and attractive interactions that can be tailored in the laboratory.[@russel1989colloidal] For these models, the many-body interactions of a system are reduced to pair interactions. For a pair potential $v(r)$, where $r$ is the distance between two particles, the potential energy per particle $u$ of a many-body configuration ${\bf r}^N$ of $N$ particles reduces to $u({\bf r}^N) = \frac{1}{N}\sum_{i<j}v(r_{ij})$.
Inverse approaches have been applied to produce low-coordinated ground states such as honeycomb,[@rechtsman2005optimized] square,[@rechtsman2006designed] simple cubic,[@rechtsman2006self] diamond and wurtzite crystals[@rechtsman2007synthetic] as well as many-body configurations on a sphere.[@cohn2009algorithmic] In addition to targeting material structures, the inverse approach has been applied to material properties including negative Poisson’s ratio,[@rechtsman2008negative] negative thermal expansion,[@rechtsman2007negative] and scattering characteristics of many-particle systems.[@batten2008classical] The ability to control vacancy concentrations and arrangements in ground-state structures is one property yet to be achieved via inverse methods. We expect the design of vacancy-riddled crystals to have important technological applications and may provide fundamental insight into certain physical phenomena. The scattering of light,[@joannopoulos2008photonic] ionic conductivity,[@agrawal1999superionic] transport processes in heterogeneous materials,[@torquato2002rhm] and possibly supersolid behavior in quantum systems[@andreev1969soviet; @kim2004probable] are directly related to vacancies in a material structure.
In this paper, we introduce the “quintic potential” as a pair interaction function that yields vacancy-riddled lattices and low-coordinated crystals as ground states at high density and striped patterns as ground states at low-density. Although not a result of a true inverse method, this family of potential functions arose through a selection process so that vacancy-riddled and low-coordinated lattices are energetically degenerate or possibly favorable to the triangular lattice for certain densities. Each quintic potential function curve, illustrated in Fig. \[fig:potential\], is steeply repulsive for small $r$, has a local minimum at $r=1$ so that $v(1)=H$, is nonnegative, and is smoothly truncated to be zero at $r={{\sqrt{3}}}$ and beyond. The algebraic form of the potential is given in Sec. \[sec:potential\]. The understanding of the phase behavior associated with the quintic potential is the first step toward developing a more comprehensive inverse approach to controlling vacancies in ground-state structures.
![(Color online) Quintic potential, Eq. \[eq:potential\] for various $H$ values. The scales of energy and length are dimensionless.[]{data-label="fig:potential"}](vr_publication.eps){width="60.00000%"}
We find that ground states can vary from a high-density triangular lattice, the kagomé and honeycomb crystals, a striped phase, a low-density triangular lattice, and a hard-disk-like fluid as the pressure decreases. The positivity of the local relative minimum is a key feature that allows vacancies to be stabilized in the ground state. Consider a system of particles arranged in a triangular lattice at a specific area (area per particle) $a ={{\sqrt{3}}}/2$ so that each of the particle’s first neighbors lie at $r=1$ and second neighbors at $r={{\sqrt{3}}}$. Because the local minimum in $v(r)$ is at positive energy, the removal of a particle will lower the total potential energy of the system. However, to maintain the constraint on $a$, the lattice spacing must decrease, which increases the total potential energy. This family of potentials is designed so that the creation of a vacancy and the subsequent reduction in lattice spacing yields a net decrease in the potential energy per particle.
However, the general control of vacancies is a challenging task due to long-ranged vacancy-vacancy interactions. For the Lennard-Jones and many short-ranged repulsive potentials, vacancies arise in equilibrium solids at positive temperature due to their entropic contribution to the free energy.[@ashcroft1976ssp] At $T=0$, they can be “frozen in” during cooling, though they are not present in the equilibrium ground states of these systems. For typical potentials whose ground states are ordered, some pair potentials, such as the Lennard-Jones interaction, vacancies cost energy due to missing “bonds” of negative energy, while with repulsive potentials and the electron crystal, vacancies cost energy due to strain energy in the crystal.
If a vacancy is introduced into an otherwise perfect crystal at positive pressure, strains will arise so that the system can reduce its potential energy and achieve mechanical stability. In typical materials such as Lennard-Jones systems, these relaxations cannot reduce the energy below that of the ground state. When more than one vacancy is present, the strain fields interact and subsequently mediate long-ranged vacancy-vacancy interactions. These interactions are highly nontrivial even in the case of two vacancies in a crystal. In two dimensions, several studies have examined these effective interaction energies between two vacancies as a function of separation distance for a number of potentials including the electron crystal (Coulombic potential with positive background charge),[@fisher1979defects; @cockayne1991energetics; @candido2001single] Lennard-Jones,[@modesto2008interaction] Gaussian core,[@lechner2009point] and a repulsive $r^{-3}$ potential.[@lechner2009defect]
In the two-dimensional electron crystal, vacancy-vacancy interactions are attractive and fall off as $r_v^{-3}$,[@cockayne1991energetics] where $r_v$ is the separation distance between two vacancies, which agrees with continuum elasticity theory.[@fisher1979defects] For the Lennard-Jones potential, vacancy-vacancy interactions are also attractive at least for short distances.[@modesto2008interaction] These effective vacancy interaction potentials are not necessarily monotonic as a function of lattice spacing.[@candido2001single; @modesto2008interaction] The displacement fields can be highly anisotropic near a vacancy.[@lechner2008displacement; @lechner2009point] In the vicinity of the vacancy, the atomistic details account for the discrepancy between numerical results for the displacement fields and those predicted by continuum elasticity theory. Beyond fifteen lattice spacings, this continuum theory accurately reproduced the results of numerical studies under some boundary conditions.[@lechner2009point]
The arrangement of low concentrations of vacancies may not simply be controllable because of the nontrivial coupling between the pair potential function, the local deformations that it produces when a vacancy is introduced into a perfect crystal, and the effective vacancy-vacancy interactions. However, a number of pair potential functions have been found to give rise to ground states with high concentrations of vacancies. For example, the “honeycomb potential” was developed via inverse methods to yield the honeycomb crystal as a robust ground-state structure.[@rechtsman2005optimized; @rechtsman2006designed] At positive temperatures, the honeycomb structure remained stable for a large temperature and pressure region of the phase diagram.[@hynninen2006global] This double-well potential was generalized as the Lennard-Jones-Gaussian potential, which showed a number of complex crystal structures including pentagonal, hexagonal, nonagonal, and decagonal unit cells as the depths and locations of the energy wells were varied.[@engel2007self; @engel2009structural] Colloidal particles with three “patches,” or attractive interaction sites on the surface of a particle, have recently been shown to yield a honeycomb structure for some pressures at $T=0$ in addition to other low-coordinated crystal structures.[@doppelbauer2010self] In addition, the square-shoulder potential, a hard-core potential with a soft corona of variable length, shares some of the same ground-state features as the quintic potential. In particular, low-coordinated structures such as a honeycomb-like trivalent configuration and lanes are ground-state features[@fornleitner2008lane; @fornleitner2010pattern] that are shared with the quintic potential. Such a potential can also form lamellar and micellar phases for relatively long-ranged coronas as was shown theoretically.[@glaser2007soft]
Lastly, we note that several potentials qualitatively similar to the quintic potential have been studied in other contexts. For example, a potential that gives rise to quasiperiodic order and the square lattice in two dimensions has one local minimum and local maximum and finite cutoff,[@quandt1999formation] as does the Dzugutov potential[@dzugutov1992glass] which gives rise to a number of complex local clusters in three dimensions.[@doye2001global] However, both of these potentials have a local attractive minimum ([*i.e.*]{} negative potential energy). A piecewise linear potential with a hard core, single local minimum, and single local maximum showed the formation of chains and labyrinths at positive temperature, though the ground state is not fully characterized.[@haw2010growth] However, in contrast to the above potentials, the quintic potential is short-ranged, positive, isotropic, continuous and differentiable, which may be beneficial to experimentalists hoping to realize this potential in a laboratory setting. We find that with this potential, a number of low-coordinated structures arise as ground states including the honeycomb and kagomé crystals as well as a “striped” phase. This represents a significant achievement and a first step toward controlling vacancies in ground-state structures.
The remainder of this paper is as follows. The quintic potential is defined and detailed in Sec. \[sec:potential\] while our methodology is detailed in Sec. \[sec:methods\]. In Sec. \[sec:phases\], we define the phase diagram in the specific area-$H$ plane and in the pressure-$H$ plane. We discuss the characteristics of the phases, the results of simulation, and their mechanical stability. In Sec. \[sec:cases\], we focus on the special case where $H=0$. This case yields anomalous behavior because the potential energy vanishes inside and outside the energy barrier. Lastly, we discuss the implications of this potential and identify extensions to this work in Sec. \[sec:discussion\].
Quintic Potential {#sec:potential}
=================
The generalized quintic potential consists of a fifth-order polynomial that is truncated beyond ${{\sqrt{3}}}$ to be zero. It has the form $$f(r) = \left[ L(m) \left(r-\sqrt{3}\right)^5 + K(m)\left(r-\sqrt{3}\right)^4- \left(r-\sqrt{3}\right)^3\right], \quad r\leq{{\sqrt{3}}}$$ and zero otherwise, where $m$ is an unscaled height of the local minimum. The coefficients $L(m)$ and $K(m)$ are chosen so that $r=1$ is a local minimum and $f(1) = m$, and, as a function of $m$, are given respectively as $$\begin{aligned}
L(m) &=& 4m\left(\sqrt{3}-1\right)^{-5} - \left(\sqrt{3}-1\right)^{-2},\\
K(m) &=& 5m\left(\sqrt{3}-1\right)^{-4}-2\left(\sqrt{3}-1\right)^{-1}. \end{aligned}$$ The condition that $f''(1) >0 $ ensures that the stationary point is a relative minimum, and therefore the parameter $m$ must be constrainted to $$m < \frac{\left(\sqrt{3} - 1\right)^3}{10} \approx 0.0392304845.$$ The position of the energy barrier (the relative maximum) occurs at $$r_{b} = \sqrt{3} - \frac{3\left(\sqrt{3} - 1\right)}{5\left[1-4m\left(\sqrt{3}-1\right)^{-3}\right]}.$$ The generalized pair potential is rescaled so that $v(r_{b})= 1$ to set a uniform energy scale, $$v(r) = f(r)/f(r_{b}).
\label{eq:potential}$$ Upon rescaling, the height of the relative minimum $H$ is defined so that $v(1)=H$ and varies from zero to unity. When $H=1$, the potential is monotonically decreasing and is flat at $r=1$. In this case, there is no local minimum or maximum. These soft potentials are repulsive for small $r$, and the first and second derivatives vanish at $r={{\sqrt{3}}}$. We construct the potential such that the first and second derivatives vanish at $r={{\sqrt{3}}}$ so that the second-order expansions of the potential energy required for stability calculations ([*e.g.*]{} phonons) are well-defined. Examples from the family of quintic potentials are shown in Fig. \[fig:potential\]. Because developing a simple expression relating $m$ and $H$ is difficult, a table relating $m$ and $H$ was used. The relation between $m$ and $H$ is shown in Fig. \[fig:mvh\].
![ The relationship between $m$ and $H$ for the quintic potential.[]{data-label="fig:mvh"}](mvh.eps){width="40.00000%"}
Methods {#sec:methods}
=======
At $T=0$, the free energy per particle $g$ is identical to the enthalpy per particle and is related to the average potential energy per particle $u$ via $g=u+pa$. To map the ground-state phase diagram as a function of specific area $a$, pressure $p$, and $H$, we utilized the double-tangent construction method to find the lowest free-energy structure among candidate ground-state configurations. The double-tangent construction is demonstrated in Fig. \[fig:latticesums-h0.5\].
We considered several crystal structures as candidate ground states including the triangular lattice (TRI), square lattice (SQ), honeycomb crystal (HC), kagomé crystal (KAG), and its close relative, the “anti-kagomé” crystal (AKG). Whereas the kagomé crystal has vacancies located on a triangular lattice separated by two nearest neighbor spacings, the anti-kagomé crystal has vacancies located on a rectangular lattice. For all densities, the anti-kagomé has a potential energy greater than or equal to the kagomé lattice due to the differing local coordination numbers. We considered these crystal structures because they are relative simple crystal structures with varying degrees of local coordination. The construction of the potential, with a well at $r=1$ and vanishing energy at $r={{\sqrt{3}}}$ would intuitively favor such geometries. We use other techniques to systematically explore other crystals with a small number of particles in the unit cell. With these crystal structures, we performed lattice sums over the relevant range of specific area.
We also performed an exhaustive search for energy-minimizing $n$-particle crystals, periodic configurations containing $n$ particles per unit cell, while allowing for shape deformation of the unit cell. For example, consider a two-particle crystal with lattice vectors $[d_1, 0]$ and $[d_2, d_3]$ and a basis where particle ${\bf 0}$ is at $(0, 0)$ and particle ${\bf 1}$ is located at $(x_1, y_1)$. For this system, the potential energy per particle is given as $$u = v({\bf r_{01}}) + \frac{1}{2}\sum_{\bf i} \left[v({\bf r_{00'}}) + v({\bf r_{11'}}) + v({\bf r_{01'}})+ v({\bf r_{10'}})\right],$$ where the summation is over all lattice sites except the origin site and ${\bf 0}'$ represents particle ${\bf 0}$ in a cell other than the origin cell (and likewise for particle ${\bf 1}$). Minimizing $u$ for a fixed area per particle $a$ and eliminating $d_3 = na/d_1$ casts this as an unconstrained minimization that is function of $d_1$, $d_2$, $x_1$ and $y_1$. The function is minimized using the conjugate gradient algorithm. It is straightforward to generalize this to a larger number of particles in the unit cell.
To ensure that we obtain globally optimal solutions, we use a large number of initial conditions slowly and systematically varying $d_1$, $d_2$, $x_1$ and $y_1$ from zero to $n{{\sqrt{3}}}$. After each minimization, we ensure that the unit cell is not significantly sheared. A highly sheared unit cell requires summation over a large number of unit cells to ensure that all interactions are accounted for and therefore we discard those solutions with angles less than 10$^\circ$. This procedure is repeated for nearly two thousand values of $a$ on the range $0.7 \leq a \leq 3{{\sqrt{3}}}/2$ so that a smooth $u$ versus $a$ curve is generated.
These minimizations are a function of $2n$ variables, and therefore many minimizations at a fixed area per particle can be performed easily. However, as the number of particles per unit cell grows, the number of initial conditions required to ensure global optimality grows as $2^{n}$. We performed these minimizations systematically for up to four particles per unit cell, beyond which it becomes too intense to systematically explore thousands of initial conditions for thousands of specific areas.
We also used slow cooling via molecular dynamics (MD) to obtain candidate ground-state structures for larger and possibly disordered systems. With a system of 800 particles in a periodic box, the system was simulated using the Verlet algorithm and Andersen thermostat.[@frenkel2001understanding] The system was initialized as a high-temperature liquid and slowly cooled according to a linear temperature schedule from $T=0.4$ to 0.025 over the course of 1.6$\times10^7$ time steps. After the simulation was terminated, the system was quenched to a potential energy minimum using the conjugate gradient algorithm.
Lastly, we performed lattice Monte Carlo (MC) optimizations using several hundred lattice sites. In these optimizations, the specific area was fixed and the lattice sites were either occupied or unoccupied by particles. The optimization variables were the occupation state of the lattice sites, the angle between the lattice vectors and the length of one lattice vector. The length of the other lattice vector was constrained by the area, number of particles, angle between the lattice vectors, and the length of the first lattice vector. Possible Monte Carlo moves included inserting a particle to a vacant site, removing a particle from an occupied site, swapping a particle from an occupied site to an unoccupied site, perturbing the angle of the lattice, and perturbing the length of one of the lattice vectors. The system was then optimized via simulated annealing. It was given an initial “temperature,” or energy scale, and moves were accepted or reject based upon the Metropolis algorithm. Ten thousand MC trials were attempted in each cycle and several hundred cycles were performed for each optimization.
It is important to note that although many interesting structural characteristics arose from the results of molecular dynamics simulation and Monte Carlo optimization, no final configurations were identified as ground-state structures. The lattice sums and crystal optimization methods always provided the lowest free-energy structures.
The double-tangent construction requires care and precision since other phases can come very close to the coexistence free energy. The $p$-$g$ and $u$-$a$ curves are discretized over several thousand data points and linearized between between data points. The identification of coexisting phases can be done by using the lower, concave envelope of the $p$-$g$ curve. The coexistence points and ranges of stability were then calculated using a tabulation of $u$, $a$, $p$ and $g$ and linear interpolation.
Results {#sec:phases}
=======
Phase Diagram
-------------
![(Color online) Potential energy per particle $u$ as a function of specific area $a$ for selected crystals and the optimal 2- and 3-particle crystals for $H=0.5$. The dense triangular, honeycomb, striped, and open triangular crystals are stable ground states for $H=0.5$. The square and anti-kagomé structures are omitted for clarity. Dashed lines represent the double tangent construction.[]{data-label="fig:latticesums-h0.5"}](lattice_sums_h0.5.eps){width="60.00000%"}
The double-tangent construction revealed two different types of phase behavior depending on the value of $H$. In no case did the configurations resulting from MD or MC yield a ground state. For $0 < H <0.762902$, there exist five distinct structures. Figure \[fig:latticesums-h0.5\] illustrates the $u$-$a$ curves for $H=0.5$. In the figure, the optimal $n$-particle crystals are not visible when they are identical to the triangular, honeycomb, or kagomé crystals. As shown in in Fig. \[fig:latticesums-h0.5\], at highest pressure, a dense triangular lattice (TRI), where neighboring particles lie inside the potential energy barrier of other neighboring particles, is the ground state. At a reduction of pressure to $p=1.84432$, the dense triangular lattice is in coexistence with the honeycomb crystal (HC), which is illustrated with the dashed tangent lines. In Fig. \[fig:latticesums-h0.5\], the curve for the kagomé lattice appears possibly to touch the coexistence line due to the finite thickness of the line. However, plotting $p$ against $g$ reveals an intersection between the curves for the TRI and HC structures. The kagomé lattice has a higher free energy than both structures in this density range.
Further reduction of the pressure to 0.75263 yields a “striped” (ST) or lane phase coexisting with the honeycomb phase. This phase is an affinely-stretched triangular lattice. The first few coordination shells contain two, four, and two particles. The curves representing the lowest-energy crystals with a two- and three-particle basis either the triangular lattice, honeycomb crystal, or kagomé crystals generally for $a<1.3$ with a corresponding basis. For larger $a$, these curves appear to come close to the coexistence line between the HC and ST phases or the ST and open TRI phases. The $p$-$g$ curves reveal that the free energy is always above that of the coexisting phases. These near-ground states are generally crystals that nearly mimic the coexistence. For example, the optimal three-particle crystal between the HC and ST phases is an alternating sequence of lines with honeycomb-like coordination and striped coordination. These are suboptimal structures because the specific neighbor lengths do not match exactly. At sufficiently low pressure, for $H=0.50$ and $p=0.58275$, the ST phase coexists with an “open” triangular lattice where the neighbor particles lie on the outside of the potential energy barrier.
Lastly, at vanishing pressure, any configuration in which particles are separated by at least ${{\sqrt{3}}}$ is a ground state since the free-energy vanishes. This occurs for $a\geq 3{{\sqrt{3}}}/2$. In this region, the ground states behave like hard disks (HD) of radius ${{\sqrt{3}}}$. There would be a hard-disk crystal and liquid regime with specific area scaled to the hard-disk equation of state, which has been well characterized.[@alder1962phase]
For $0.762902\geq H \geq 1$, the kagomé crystal emerges as a ground state structure for a narrow range of stability. This is an especially important result. In previous work, researchers used an inverse methodology to design pair interactions for targeted ground states.[@rechtsman2006designed] Although they were successful in engineering potential for the honeycomb and square crystals, they were unable to do so for the kagomé. The area and pressure ranges of stability increase with $H$. The emergence of the kagomé crystal as a ground state is shown in the $p$-$a$ curve for $H=1.00$ in Fig. \[fig:latticesums-h1.0\]. As the pressure is reduced, the sequence of stable phases is the dense TRI, KAG, HC, ST, open TRI, and HD phases.
The full phase diagrams in the $p$-$H$ plane and the $a$-$h$ plane are shown in Figs. \[fig:phases-ph\] and \[fig:phases-ah\], respectively. Figure \[fig:phases-ph\] shows that the coexistence lines are nearly linear for small $H$. The pressure range of stability for the open TRI, ST, and KAG phases widens as $H$ increases. When $H$ is sufficiently large to include the KAG phase, the pressure range of stability for the HC phase narrows. As $H$ increases, the area range of stability increases for most phases, excluding the dense TRI phase, which is evident in Fig. \[fig:phases-ah\].
Near $H=1.00$, the slopes of the curves change dramatically. This is due to the softening of the pair potential function as $H$ approaches unity and the fact that the relative minimum and maximum come together much more rapidly as $H$ approaches unity. Fig. \[fig:potential\] shows that the $H=1.00$ potential is significantly softer near $r=1$ than other potentials.
The softening of the potential and the rise of the relative minimum are important features for the inclusion of the KAG phase. In comparing Fig. \[fig:latticesums-h0.5\] to Fig. \[fig:latticesums-h1.0\], one can see that the curve for the kagomé crystal initially begins above the double tangent connecting the TRI and HC phases. As the potential softens and the relative minimum increases, the first minimum in each curve increases proportionally to $H$. However, the softening of the potential bends the left-side of the curves in such a way that the KAG curve lies at lower free energy than that TRI-HC coexistence line. The combination of the height of the relative minimum and the softening are directly related to the potential energy and pressure of the system, the two components of the $T=0$ free energy.
![(Color online) Potential energy per particle $u$ as a function of specific area $a$ for selected crystals and the optimal 2- and 3-particle crystals for $H=1.00$. The dense triangular, kagomé, honeycomb, striped, and open triangular crystals are stable ground states for $H=0.5$ while for $H=1.00$, the kagomé also emerges as a stable ground state. The square and anti-kagomé structures are omitted for clarity. Dashed lines represent the double tangent construction.[]{data-label="fig:latticesums-h1.0"}](lattice_sums_h1.00.eps){width="60.00000%"}
![(Color online) Phase diagram in the $p$-$H$ plane as calculated by double tangent method. The hard-disk-like state (HD) occurs for $p=0$ and $H>0$ and the filled triangle on the lower curve represents the triple point.[]{data-label="fig:phases-ph"}](phasediagram_p-h.eps){width="70.00000%"}
![Phase diagram in the $a$-$H$ plane as calculated by the double tangent method. []{data-label="fig:phases-ah"}](phasediagram_a-h.eps){width="70.00000%"}
![(Color online) Comparison of the location and coordination number of the triangular lattice, honeycomb crystal and kagomé crystal for $a=0.82443$, 1.18745, and 1.06445, respectively, for $H=0.762902$. At this $H$ and $p=2.938$, the TRI, HC, an KAG phases form a triple point and are in coexistence as ground-state structures. The delicate balance between potential energy and forces allow for coexistence.[]{data-label="fig:latcompare"}](compare_lats_0.7629.eps){width="70.00000%"}
The KAG phase emerges at a triple point at $H=0.762909$ and $p=2.938$, where the TRI, HON, and KAG phases form a triple point. We have examined the subtle interplay between the shape of the pair potential function and its derivative at this coexistence point in Fig. \[fig:latcompare\]. The figure shows $v(r)$ and $-v'(r)/2$ for $H=0.762902$. The plot also shows the location of the nearest and next-nearest neighbors for the crystals. The HC phase has the closest neighbors while the TRI phase has the smallest forces.
The coexistence of these structures requires that a complex system of equations be satisfied. For the coexistence pressure $p^*$ and free energy $g^*$, the system of equations becomes $$\begin{aligned}
g^* &=& 3\left[v(d_{t}) + v(d_{t}{{\sqrt{3}}}) - \frac{d_{t}}{2}v'(d_{t}) -\frac{d_{t}{{\sqrt{3}}}}{2}v'(d_{t}{{\sqrt{3}}}) \right] \\
p^* &=& -\frac{\sqrt{3}}{d_t}\left[v'(d_t) + \sqrt{3}v'(d_t\sqrt{3}) + \right] \\
g^* &=& 3\left[\frac{1}{2}v(d_h) + v(d_h{{\sqrt{3}}}) -\frac{d_h}{4}v'(d_h) -\frac{d_h{{\sqrt{3}}}}{2}v'(d_h{{\sqrt{3}}}) \right]\\
p^* &=& -\frac{2}{d_h{{\sqrt{3}}}}\left[ \frac{1}{2}v'(d_h) + {{\sqrt{3}}}v'(d_h{{\sqrt{3}}}) \right] \\
g^*&=& 2v(d_k) + 2v(d_k{{\sqrt{3}}}) -d_kv'(d_k) - d_k{{\sqrt{3}}}v'(d_k{{\sqrt{3}}}) \\
p^* &=& -\frac{{{\sqrt{3}}}}{2d_k}\left[v'(d_k) +{{\sqrt{3}}}v'(d_k{{\sqrt{3}}}) \right] , \end{aligned}$$ where $d_i$ is the nearest-neighbor distance for each structure and is necessarily less than unity for the quintic potential. Evidently, the quintic potential for $H=0.762902$ satisfies these equations. The complexity of the coexistence equations is clear in that each structure weighs certain parts differently. The design of other potentials that stabilize these structures may utilize this system of equations within an appropriate optimization framework.
Stability
---------
The positivity of the squared frequency of all phonons ensures mechanical stability of a crystal. We have examined the phonon spectra for the KAG, HC, and ST phases. These phases are confirmed to be mechanically stable within the relevant density and $H$ ranges. Figure \[fig:phonons\] illustrates the phonon spectra for certain points in the reduced first Brillouin zone for the KAG, HC, and ST structures for $H=0.875$. THE HC and KAG structures have one particularly soft acoustic branch, labeled in the figures. Using the ratio $\omega_{max}^2$/$\omega_{min}^2$ at $M$ point a simple metric for the extent of mechanical stability, this ratio stays relatively fixed for the KAG lattice as $H$ increases. This marks an achievement since previous attempts to stabilize the kagomé crystal had been unsuccessful.[@rechtsman2006designed] For the HC structure, this ratio is higher for $H=1.00$ than for that which is plotted in Fig. \[fig:phonons\], indicating that the crystal is more stable as $H$ increases. In general, the quintic potential and the honeycomb potential[@rechtsman2006designed] yield similar ratios. The striped phase whose lattice vectors for $a=1.51$ and $H=0.875$ are $[1.65029, 0]$ and $[0.27688, 0.91490]$ is also mechanically stable. The phonon spectra from the other “quadrants” are identical to the quadrant displayed in Fig. \[fig:specst\] due to the symmetry of the Brillouin zone.
Low-Energy Structures
---------------------
Although those structure obtained by MD and MC methods were suboptimal, Figures \[fig:latticesums-h0.5\] and \[fig:latticesums-h1.0\] show that the free-energy differences between these structures and the ground states are small. Several structural motifs emerge for this potential and are shown in Fig. \[fig:configs\] for $H=0.5$. These metastable states may have technological value if the freezing kinetics are sufficiently slow. Preliminary simulations suggest the freezing behavior varies with density.
For example, with $a<1.2$, systems typically freeze into a triangular lattice with vacancies randomly distributed as in Fig. \[fig:a0.9\]. Although this is not a ground-state structure, it yields a vacancy-riddled lattice. The vacancies appear to have no particular order. The freezing transition, the temperature at which the system changes from a high-density liquid to an ordered phase, appears to be first order. The drop in potential energy as the temperature is reduced is sharp in this density range.
Systems at densities where coexistence between the HC and ST phases are the ground states tend to exhibit a freezing from the liquid phase to a rigid, structured phase. However, the structured phase, which we believe to be metastable, is characterized by rings and strings as in Fig. \[fig:a1.4\]. The six-particle ring is a characteristic of the HC structure and the strings are characteristics of the ST phase. These metastable states are disordered due to the fluid nature of the strings. The drop in potential with temperature is not as sharp for these densities compared to those at higher densities.
Lastly, at lower densities, as with those associated with the ST and open TRI phases, the metastable, low-energy states adopt labyrinthine characteristics, Fig. \[fig:a1.7\], and eventually colloidal polymers and monomers, \[fig:a2.3\]. In this density range, the drop in potential energy associated with freezing is weak. The phenomena and characteristics of low-energy states are common to all $H$. However, as $H$ increases so does the propensity to form labyrinthine characteristics. This is due to the lower energy barrier and the decrease in $r_b$, the location of the energy barrier. A qualitatively similar, but piecewise linear, potential also yields a labyrinth phase at positive temperature.[@haw2010growth] Although the positive temperature behavior has not been fully explored in this paper, we anticipate that the equation of state for this family of potentials will have interesting behavior. Manipulation of the kinetics to achieve such unusual structures represents one path to achieving kinetically stable materials with controlled vacancy concentrations.
Special Cases: $H=0$ {#sec:cases}
====================
The $H=0$ pair potential has interactions that vanish at a pair distance of unity and beyond ${{\sqrt{3}}}$. At positive pressure, the ground state is the dense triangular lattice. However, at zero pressure and $a\geq {{\sqrt{3}}}/2$, ground-state configurations will have a vanishing potential energy and pressure (enthalpy vanishes). Thus, the type of available ground states is dependent on the area.
A number of interesting structures arise as ground states. For $a>{{\sqrt{3}}}/2$, dilutions of the triangular lattice with unit neighbor spacing are ground states, including the honeycomb and kagomé crystals and other lattice gases. For $a = \sqrt{11}/2$, the striped phase, a Bravais lattice with lattice vectors of $[1, 0]$ and $[1/2, \sqrt{11}/2]$, becomes available as a ground state. Each particle has two neighbors at unit separation and four neighbors at separation of ${{\sqrt{3}}}$. For $a > \sqrt{11}/2$, dilutions of this lattice are also ground states. In addition, any small expansion in the direction normal to the stripes, will allow each stripe to gain some fluidity. Complex liquids of strings have found as ground states using molecular dynamics for at least $a\geq 2.15$. However, the geometric problem is highly nontrivial since for several runs with $a>2.15$, ground states could not always be obtained. For $a=3{{\sqrt{3}}}/2$, an open triangular lattice with neighbor spacing of ${{\sqrt{3}}}$ is a ground state structure.
The question remains as to which type of configurations are entropically (thermodynamically) favorable, or rather which type of system makes up the largest fraction of configuration space. We first make the distinction between discrete ([*e.g.*]{} lattice gas) and continuous entropy ([*e.g.*]{} hard-disk crystal). In the classical case, continuous entropy is uncountable while discrete entropy is not. Making the analogy to hard disks and hard spheres, we believe that the highest entropy phases for a specified area are those that have the availability for continuous entropy. Configurations with the highest-dimensional configuration space dominate the $T=0$ entropy. We estimate that, for a certain $a$, configurations with the fewest constrained degrees of freedom will have the highest dimensional configuration space, and therefore the highest entropy. For $a\leq {{\sqrt{3}}}/2$, all degrees of freedom per particle are constrained. For $a\geq3{{\sqrt{3}}}/2$, no degrees of freedom per particle are constrained.
In order to gain continuous entropy, the system must have the ability to expand the ${{\sqrt{3}}}$ “bonds,” which can be either first-neighbor or second-neighbor connections between particles. Any slight expansion of the dense triangular lattice is not a ground state because each neighbor must be constrained to unit separation. However, an expansion of the open triangular lattice is still a ground state because the ${{\sqrt{3}}}$ bonds are not constrained from above. The problem can be cast as a tiling problem of four triangular tiles. The possible triangular tiles are those with side lengths of unity or ${{\sqrt{3}}}$. These are depicted in Table \[tab:tiles\] along with their shorthand notations.
Because there are no constraints beyond distances of ${{\sqrt{3}}}$, the edges with lengths of ${{\sqrt{3}}}$ can be considered “elastic.” For simplicity, we first consider the tiling problem where these edge lengths are fixed. The rules of the tiling problem are as follows:
- The plane must be tiled with no gaps.
- For pairs of tiles that share an edge, the edges must be of the same length so that the vertices also match.
- The (1,1,r) and (1,r,r) tiles cannot share a ${{\sqrt{3}}}$ edge since this violates a second neighbor constraint ([*i.e.*]{} two vertices are separated by a length between unity and ${{\sqrt{3}}}$).
Name Shape Angles ($^\circ$) Area
--------- ------- --------------------- -------------------
(1,1,1) 60, 60, 60 ${{\sqrt{3}}}/4$
(r,r,r) 60, 60, 60 $3{{\sqrt{3}}}/4$
(1,1,r) 30, 30, 120 ${{\sqrt{3}}}/4$
(1,r,r) 33.56, 73.22, 73.22 $\sqrt{11}/4$
: \[tab:tiles\] Available triangular tiles for the $H=0$ tiling problem.
The internal angle of the (1,r,r) tiles are such that they cannot integrate well with the other tiles. Therefore, in any tiling that includes (1,r,r) tiles, these tiles must “phase separate” from the others. We consider two types of tilings - those with (1,r,r) tiles and those without. First, we consider those without (1,r,r) tiles. An example of such a tiling is shown in Fig. \[fig:denseopen\] where each vertex is decorated with a particle. These tilings are simply dilutions of the dense triangular lattice, or coexistence between a dense and open triangular lattice. The (1,1,r) tiles have two roles. They can act as intermediaries between domains of the dense triangular lattice and the open triangular lattice, and they can dimerize to form a rhombus making a domain of the dense triangular lattice. This coexistence between the dense and open triangular lattices is represented as a double-tangent line connecting the fully constrained dense triangular lattice to the unconstrained open triangular lattice as shown in Fig. \[fig:dimension\].
Next we consider those tilings that include (1,r,r) tiles. Two periodic tilings with a specific area of $a= \sqrt{11}/2 \approx 1.658312$ exist and are shown in Figs. \[fig:stripe\] and \[fig:zigzag\]. We deem these the stripe and “zig-zag” tilings respectively. In these phases, any small expansion perpendicular to the stripe or zig-zag will allow the stripes to have fluidity. On average, these configurations will constrain one degree of freedom per particle, as plotted in Fig. \[fig:dimension\].
For any tiling consisting of all tiles, the (1,r,r) tiles must segregate so that the the other tiles can fully tile the plane. Dimerizing the (1,r,r) tiles along the ${{\sqrt{3}}}$ edges creates a wide stripe. Building off the wide stripe requires (1,1,1) tiles or (1,1,r) tiles and forms a local coexistence with the dense triangular lattice as shown in Fig. \[fig:densestripe\]. Dimerizing the (1,r,r) tiles along the unit length edge creates a narrow stripe. The exposed edges have length ${{\sqrt{3}}}$, requiring (r,r,r) tiles to be directly adjacent to the stripe. This forms a coexistence between the the striped phase and the open triangular lattice. The double tangent construction of these coexistences is displayed as the solid red line in Fig. \[fig:dimension\]. These coexistences between the striped phase and the dense triangular lattice and the striped phase and the open triangular lattice maximize the number of unconstrained degrees of freedom and likely maximize the entropy of the ground state. In addition, these system can take on discrete entropy by way of stacking variants of striped phase and the lattice phase. Using “S” and “T” to denote a stripe and a triangular lattice layer, a STTTTSSS system is degenerate with a STSTSTST system.
The zig-zag phase can only form local coexistence with the open triangular lattice. To do so, the (1,r,r) tiles must form a trimer which exposes the ${{\sqrt{3}}}$ edges on either side of the trimer. Since they are in trimers, their stacking entropy would be less that the stacking entropy available to the coexistence between the stripe and open triangular lattice. Therefore, we believe the stripe phase has a higher entropy than the zig-zag phase.
![(Color online) Unconstrained degrees of freedom per particle for candidate ground-state structures for $H=0$ potential. Configurations with the maximum number of unconstrained degrees of freedom are presumed to be the ground state (red circles). []{data-label="fig:dimension"}](configdimension.eps){width="70.00000%"}
Discussion and Concluding Remarks {#sec:discussion}
=================================
In this paper, we have developed the ground-state phase diagram of a new potential that gives rise to a number of novel phases that include low-coordinated crystal structures. Given the unusual nature of the ground state, we expect that the equation of state and full phase diagram for these systems to exhibit other unusual behaviors at positive temperature. For example, in the global phase diagram of the the Lennard-Jones-Gauss, or honeycomb potential, there was no gas-liquid coexistence in the low-temperature, low-density part of the phase diagram, nor was there a liquid-liquid phase coexistence[@hynninen2006global] We expect most of the solid-solid transitions that we find at zero temperature will remain at small nonzero temperature. Our preliminary calculations suggest that strings, or polymers, may arise in equilibrium at low densities.
In addition, we have interest in the mobility of vacancies, particularly in the cases where vacancy concentrations are dilute, ([*e.g.*]{} $H=0$ and $a\approx {{\sqrt{3}}}/2$), due to the possible relation to supersolid behavior.[@andreev1969soviet; @kim2004probable] For $a$ just above ${{\sqrt{3}}}/2$ and $H=0$, we expect there to be a small number of vacancies in the system at low-temperature. We have estimated the potential energy required for a particle to “hop” from a lattice site to a vacant site. By initializing a system with one vacancy with a “hopping” particle along the transition to the vacant site, in an otherwise undistorted lattice, we minimized $F({\bf r}^N)=|\nabla {\bf u}({\bf r}^N)|^2$, where ${\bf r}^N$ represents particle coordinates, using conjugate gradient minimization. The resulting configuration represents a saddle point in the energy landscape. The difference in potential energy of the saddle point and the ground state is the energy barrier required for the particle and vacancy to swap positions. This barrier sets an activation energy for classical thermal motion. For the quantum case, it would also enter in the tunneling rate. For $H=0$ potential, there is a single saddle point in the vicinity of the numerous initial conditions in the energy landscape with a total energy barrier height of 5.569015. The diffusing particle is midway between the origin and destination sites while the bracing particles are displaced off the lattice line to accommodate the jump. Using molecular dynamics, we expect to relate this saddle point energy to a vacancy diffusion coefficient.
The quintic potential can further be generalized by varying the distance at which the function is truncated. We set this cutoff distance to be ${{\sqrt{3}}}$. However, allowing this cutoff distance to vary introduces a larger class of potentials. A systematic study of the cutoff radius on the robustness of the ground states is necessary for experimental realization. The hard-core plus square shoulder potential has ground states that vary significantly depending on the relative lengthscale of the hard-core distance and the square-shoulder distance[@fornleitner2008lane; @fornleitner2010pattern] It is expected that the ground states of the generalized quintic potential would be sensitive to the location of the minimum and the cutoff distance, though it is currently unknown how sensitive the ground-state phase diagram is to these parameters. Understanding this sensitivity is important to experimentalists who want a simple, robust potential. Developing an optimization procedure to make self-assembly more robust would be particularly useful. In addition, an extension to three-dimensions may provide additional fundamental insight.
As mentioned earlier, inverse optimization techniques have been effective in developing potentials for targeted material properties. We intend to develop a general and broad inverse optimization technique to target specific vacancy arrangements by accounting for and/or manipulating long-ranged vacancy-vacancy interactions. For example, one might develop an objective function whose variables include the strength, sign (attractive/repulsive), and angular dependence of vacancy-vacancy interactions. Alternatively, one might consider a two-component system system of a heavy particle and a light particle and apply an inverse optimization technique to this system. Using a broad family of potentials, one could then optimize over the available parameters to achieve a dilute concentration of effectively repulsive vacancies.
Acknowledgments
===============
We thank Lawrence Cheuk for initial work on a related model. S.T. thanks the Institute for Advanced Study for its hospitality during his stay there. This work was supported by the Office of Basic Energy Sciences, U.S. Department of Energy, Grant DE-FG02-04-ER46108..
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We show that for integer $n\ge 1$, any subset $A{\subseteq}{{\mathbb Z}}_4^n$ free of three-term arithmetic progressions has size $|A|\le 4^{{\gamma}n}$, with an absolute constant ${\gamma}\approx 0.926$.'
address:
- 'School of Mathematics, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30332, USA'
- 'Department of Mathematics, The University of Haifa at Oranim, Tivon 36006, Israel'
- 'Department of Computer Science and Information Theory, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, 1117 Budapest, Magyar tudósok körútja 2, Hungary'
author:
- Ernie Croot
- 'Vsevolod F. Lev'
- 'Péter Pál Pach$^\dag$'
---
Background and Motivation {#s:intro}
=========================
In his influential papers [@b:r1; @b:r2], Roth has shown that if a set $A{\subseteq}\{1,2{,\ldots,}N\}$ does not contain three elements in an arithmetic progression, then $|A|=o(N)$ and indeed, $|A|=O(N/\log\log N)$ as $N$ grows. Since then, estimating the largest possible size of such a set has become one of the central problems in additive combinatorics. Roth’s original results were improved by Heath-Brown [ [@b:h]]{}, Szemerédi [ [@b:sz]]{}, Bourgain [ [@b:b]]{}, Sanders [@b:s2; @b:s3], and Bloom [ [@b:bl]]{}, the current record due to Bloom being $|A|=O(N(\log\log N)^4/\log N)$.
It is easily seen that Roth’s problem is essentially equivalent to estimating the largest possible size of a subset of the cyclic group ${{\mathbb Z}}_N$, free of three-term arithmetic progressions. This makes it natural to investigate other finite abelian groups.
We say that a subset $A$ of an (additively written) abelian group $G$ is *progression-free* if there do not exist pairwise distinct $a,b,c\in A$ with $a+b=2c$, and we denote by $r_3(G)$ the largest size of a progression-free subset $A{\subseteq}G$. For abelian groups $G$ of odd order, Brown and Buhler [ [@b:bb]]{} and independently Frankl, Graham, and Rödl [ [@b:fgr]]{} proved that $r_3(G)=o(|G|)$ as $|G|$ grows. Meshulam [ [@b:m]]{}, following the general lines of Roth’s argument, has shown that if $G$ is an abelian group of odd order, then $r_3(G)\le 2|G|/\operatorname{rk}(G)$ (where we use the standard notation $\operatorname{rk}(G)$ for the rank of $G$); in particular, $r_3({{\mathbb Z}}_m^n)\le
2m^n/n$. Despite many efforts, no further progress was made for over 15 years, till Bateman and Katz in their ground-breaking paper [ [@b:bk]]{} proved that $r_3({{\mathbb Z}}_3^n)=O(3^n/n^{1+{\varepsilon}})$ with an absolute constant ${\varepsilon}>0$.
Abelian groups of even order were first considered in [ [@b:l1]]{} where, as a further elaboration on the Roth-Meshulam proof, it is shown that $r_3(G)<2|G|/\operatorname{rk}(2G)$ for any finite abelian group $G$; here $2G=\{2g\colon
g\in G\}$. For the homocyclic groups of exponent $4$ this result was improved by Sanders [ [@b:s3]]{} who proved that $r_3({{\mathbb Z}}_4^n)=O(4^n/n(\log n)^{\varepsilon})$ with an absolute constant ${\varepsilon}>0$. The goal of this paper is to further improve Sanders’s result, as follows.
Let $H$ denote the binary entropy function; that is, $$H(x) = -x\log_2x - (1-x)\log_2(1-x),\quad x\in(0,1),$$ where $\log_2x$ is the base-$2$ logarithm of $x$.
\[t:main\] If $n\ge 1$ and $A{\subseteq}{{\mathbb Z}}_4^n$ is progression-free, then letting $${\gamma}:= \max \Big\{ \frac12 \big( H(0.5-{\varepsilon})+H(2{\varepsilon}) \big)
\colon 0<{\varepsilon}<0.25 \Big\} \approx 0.926$$ we have $$|A| \le 4^{{\gamma}n}.$$
The proof of Theorem [ \[t:main\]]{} is presented in the next section.
We note that the exponential reduction in Theorem [ \[t:main\]]{} is first of a kind for problems of this sort.
Starting from Roth, the standard way to obtain quantitative estimates for $r_3(G)$ involves a combination of the Fourier analysis and the density increment technique; the only exception is [ [@b:l2]]{} where for the groups $G\cong{{\mathbb Z}}_q^n$ with a prime power $q$, the above-mentioned Meshulam’s result is recovered using a completely elementary argument. In contrast, in the present paper we use the polynomial method, without resorting to the familiar Fourier analysis – density increment strategy.
For a finite abelian group $G\cong{{\mathbb Z}}_{m_1}\oplus\dotsb\oplus{{\mathbb Z}}_{m_k}$ with positive integer $m_1\mid\dotsb\mid m_k$, denote by $\operatorname{rk}_4(G)$ the number of indices $i\in[1,k]$ with $4\mid m_i$. Since, writing $n:=\operatorname{rk}_4(G)$, the group $G$ is a union of $4^{-n}|G|$ cosets of a subgroup isomorphic to ${{\mathbb Z}}_4^n$, as a direct consequence of Theorem [ \[t:main\]]{} we get the following corollary.
If $G$ is a finite abelian group then, writing $n:=\operatorname{rk}_4(G)$, we have $r_3(G)\le 4^{-(1-{\gamma})n}|G|$, where ${\gamma}\approx 0.926$ is the constant of Theorem [ \[t:main\]]{}.
Proof of Theorem [ \[t:main\]]{} {#s:proof}
================================
The proof of Theorem [ \[t:main\]]{} is based on the following lemma.
\[l:main\] Suppose that $n\ge 1$ and $d\ge 0$ are integers, $P$ is a multilinear polynomial in $n$ variables of total degree at most $d$ over a field ${{\mathbb F}}$, and $A{\subseteq}{{\mathbb F}}^n$ is a set with $|A|>2\sum_{0\le i\le d/2}\binom ni$. If $P(a-b)=0$ for all $a,b\in A$ with $a\ne b$, then also $P(0)=0$.
Let $m:=\sum_{0\le i\le d/2}\binom ni$, and let ${{\mathcal K}}=\{K_1{,\ldots,}K_m\}$ be the collection of all sets $K{\subseteq}[n]$ with $|K|\le d/2$. Writing for brevity $$x^I := \prod_{i\in I} x_i,\quad x=(x_1{,\ldots,}x_n)\in{{\mathbb F}}^n,\ I{\subseteq}[n],$$ there exist coefficients $C_{I,J}\in{{\mathbb F}}\ (I,J{\subseteq}[n])$ depending only on the polynomial $P$, such that for all $x,y\in{{\mathbb F}}^n$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{e:cIJ}
P(x-y)
&= \sum{_{\substack{I,J{\subseteq}[n] \\ I\cap J={\varnothing}\\ |I|+|J|\le d}}}
C_{I,J}\, x^I y^J\notag \\
&= \sum_{I\in{{\mathcal K}}} x^I \sum{_{\substack{J{\subseteq}[n]{\setminus}I \\ |J|\le d-|I|}}}
C_{I,J}\, y^J
+ \sum_{J\in{{\mathcal K}}} \Bigg( \sum{_{\substack{I{\subseteq}[n]{\setminus}J \\ d/2<|I|\le d-|J|}}}
C_{I,J}\, x^I \Bigg) y^J.\end{aligned}$$ The right-hand side can be interpreted as the scalar product of the vectors $u(x),v(y)\in{{\mathbb F}}^{2m}$ defined by -0.25in $$\begin{gathered}
u_i(x) = x^{K_i}, \quad
u_{m+i}(x) = \sum{_{\substack{I{\subseteq}[n]{\setminus}K_i \\ d/2<|I|\le d-|K_i|}}}
C_{I,K_i}\, x^I
\intertext{and}
v_i(y) = \sum{_{\substack{J{\subseteq}[n]{\setminus}K_i \\ |J|\le d-|K_i|}}} C_{K_i,J}\, y^J,
\quad v_{m+i}(y) = y^{K_i}\end{gathered}$$ for all $1\le i\le m$. Consequently, if we had $P(a-b)=0$ for all $a,b\in A$ with $a\ne b$, while $P(0)\ne 0$, this would imply that the vectors $u(a)$ and $v(b)$ are orthogonal if and only if $a\ne b$. As a result, the vectors $u(a)$ would be linearly independent (an equality of the sort $\sum_{a\in A}{\lambda}_au(a)=0$ with the coefficients ${\lambda}_a\in{{\mathbb F}}$ after a scalar multiplication by $v(b)$ yields ${\lambda}_b=0$, for any $b\in A$). Finally, the linear independence of $\{u(a)\colon a\in A\}{\subseteq}{{\mathbb F}}^{2m}$ implies $|A|\le 2m$, contrary to the assumptions of the lemma.
It is easy to extend the lemma relaxing the multilinearity assumption to the assumption that $P$ has bounded degree in each individual variable. Specifically, denoting by $f_{\delta}(n,d)$ the number of monomials $x_1^{i_1}\dotsc x_n^{i_n}$ with $0\le i_1{,\ldots,}i_n\le{\delta}$ and $i_1{+\dotsb+}i_n\le d$, if $P$ has all individual degrees not exceeding ${\delta}$, and the total degree not exceeding $d$, then $|A|>2f_{\delta}(n,{\left\lfloor}d/2{\right\rfloor})$ along with $P(a-b)=0\ (a,b\in A,\ a\ne b)$ imply $P(0)=0$. Moreover, taking ${\delta}=d$, or ${\delta}=|{{\mathbb F}}|-1$ for ${{\mathbb F}}$ finite, one can drop the individual degree assumption altogether.
We will use the estimate $$\label{e:binom}
\sum_{0\le i\le z} \binom ni < 2^{nH(z/n)}$$ valid for all integer $n\ge 1$ and real $0<z\le n/2$.
Recall, that for integer $n\ge d\ge 0$, the sum $\sum_{i=0}^d\binom ni$ is the dimension of the vector space of all multilinear polynomials in $n$ variables of total degree at most $d$ over the two-element field ${{\mathbb F}}_2$. In particular, the dimension of the vector space of *all* multilinear polynomials in $n$ variables over ${{\mathbb F}}_2$ is equal to the dimension of the vector space of all ${{\mathbb F}}_2$-valued functions on ${{\mathbb F}}_2^n$, and it follows that any non-zero multilinear polynomial represents a non-zero function. These basic facts are used in the proof of Proposition [ \[p:richcosets\]]{} below.
For integer $n\ge 1$, denote by $F_n$ the subgroup of the group ${{\mathbb Z}}_4^n$ generated by its involutions; thus, $F_n$ is both the image and the kernel of the doubling endomorphism of ${{\mathbb Z}}_4^n$ defined by $g\mapsto 2g\ (g\in{{\mathbb Z}}_4^n)$, and we have $F_n\cong{{\mathbb Z}}_2^n$.
\[p:richcosets\] Suppose that $n\ge 1$ and $A{\subseteq}{{\mathbb Z}}_4^n$ is progression-free. Then for every $0<{\varepsilon}<0.25$, the number of $F_n$-cosets containing at least $2^{nH(0.5-{\varepsilon})+1}$ elements of $A$ is less than $2^{nH(2{\varepsilon})}$.
Let ${{\mathcal R}}$ be the set of all those $F_n$-cosets containing at least $2^{nH(0.5-{\varepsilon})+1}$ elements of $A$, and for each coset $R\in{{\mathcal R}}$ let $A_R:=A\cap R$; thus, $\cup_{R\in{{\mathcal R}}} A_R {\subseteq}A$ (where the union is disjoint), and $$\label{e:Aslarge}
|A_R| \ge 2^{nH(0.5-{\varepsilon})+1},\quad R\in{{\mathcal R}}.$$
For a subset $S{\subseteq}{{\mathbb Z}}_4^n$, write $$2\cdot S:=\{s'+s''\colon (s',s'')\in S\times S,\ s'\ne s'' \}
\quad\text{and}\quad 2\ast S:=\{2s\colon s\in S \}.$$ The assumption that $A$ is progression-free implies that the sets $$B := \cup_{R\in{{\mathcal R}}}(2\cdot A_R){\subseteq}F_n\quad\text{and}\quad
C:=\cup_{R\in{{\mathcal R}}}(2\ast R){\subseteq}F_n$$ are disjoint: this follows by observing that if $2r\in 2\cdot A_R$ with some $r\in R$, then for each $a\in r+F_n$ we have $2a=2r\in 2\cdot A_R{\subseteq}2\cdot
A$. Furthermore, the sets $2\ast R$ are in fact pairwise distinct singletons (for $2r_1=2r_2$ is equivalent to $r_1-r_2\in F_n$ and thus to $r_1+F_n=r_2+F_n$), whence $|C|=|{{\mathcal R}}|$.
Let $d=n-{\left\lceil}2{\varepsilon}n{\right\rceil}$ so that, in view of [ ]{} and [ ]{}, $$\label{e:was1}
2\sum_{0\le i\le d/2} \binom ni < 2^{nH(0.5-{\varepsilon})+1} \le |A_R|, \quad R\in{{\mathcal R}}.$$ Denoting by $\overline C$ the complement of $C$ in $F_n$, and assuming that $|{{\mathcal R}}|\ge 2^{nH(2{\varepsilon})}$ (contrary to what we want to prove), from [ ]{} we get $$\sum_{i=0}^d \binom ni = 2^n - \sum_{i=0}^{{\left\lceil}2{\varepsilon}n{\right\rceil}-1} \binom ni
> 2^n - 2^{nH(2{\varepsilon})} \ge 2^n - |{{\mathcal R}}| = 2^n - |C| = |{{\overline C}}|.$$ Consequently, identifying $F_n$ with the additive group of the vector space ${{\mathbb F}}_2^n$, and accordingly considering $B$ and $C$ as subsets of ${{\mathbb F}}_2^n$, we conclude that the dimension of the vector space of all multilinear $n$-variate polynomials over the field ${{\mathbb F}}_2$ exceeds the dimension of the vector space of all ${{\mathbb F}}_2$-valued functions on ${{\overline C}}$. Thus, the evaluation map, associating with every polynomial the corresponding function, is degenerate. As a result, there exists a non-zero multilinear polynomial $P\in{{\mathbb F}}_2[x_1{,\ldots,}x_n]$ of total degree $\deg P\le d$ such that $P$ vanishes on $\overline C$. In particular, $P$ vanishes on $B{\subseteq}\overline C$, and therefore on each set $2\cdot A_R$, for all $R\in{{\mathcal R}}$. Fixing arbitrarily an element $r\in R$, the polynomial $P(2r+x)$ thus vanishes whenever $x\in
2\cdot(A_R-r)$. Hence, also $P(2r)=0$ by Lemma [ \[l:main\]]{} (which is applicable in view of [ ]{}); that is, $P$ also vanishes on each singleton set $2\ast A_R$, for all $R\in{{\mathcal R}}$. It follows that $P$ vanishes on $C$. However, $P$ was chosen to vanish on $\overline C$. Therefore, $P$ vanishes on all of ${{\mathbb F}}_2^n$, and it follows that $P$ is the zero polynomial. This is a contradiction showing that $|{{\mathcal R}}|<2^{nH(2{\varepsilon})}$, and thus completing the proof.
For $x\ge 0$, let $N(x)$ denote the number of $F_n$-cosets containing at least $x$ elements of $A$; thus $N(x)=0$ for $x>2^n$, and we can write $$\label{e:int1}
|A| = \int_0^{2^{n+1}} N(x)\,dx.$$ Trivially, we have $N(x)\le2^n$ for all $x\ge 0$, so that $$\label{e:int2}
\int_0^{2^{nH(1/4)+1}} N(x)\,dx \le 2^{(H(1/4)+1)n+1} < 2\cdot 4^{{\gamma}n}.$$ On the other hand, the substitution $x=2^{nH(0.5-{\varepsilon})+1}$ gives $$\label{e:int3}
\int_{2^{nH(1/4)+1}}^{2^{n+1}} N(x)\,dx
= n \int_0^{1/4} 2^{nH(0.5-{\varepsilon})+1} N(2^{nH(0.5-{\varepsilon})+1})
\,\log\frac{0.5+{\varepsilon}}{0.5-{\varepsilon}} \,d{\varepsilon},$$ and applying Proposition [ \[p:richcosets\]]{}, the integral in the right-hand side can be estimated as $$\label{e:int4}
2n \int_0^{1/4} 2^{n(H(0.5-{\varepsilon})+H(2{\varepsilon}))}
\,\log\frac{0.5+{\varepsilon}}{0.5-{\varepsilon}} \,d{\varepsilon}< 3n \int_0^{1/4} 2^{n(H(0.5-{\varepsilon})+H(2{\varepsilon}))} \, d{\varepsilon}< n\cdot 2^{{\gamma}n}.$$ From [ ]{}–[ ]{} we get $|A|<(n+2)\cdot4^{{\gamma}n}$, and to conclude the proof we use the tensor power trick: for integer $k\ge 1$, the set $A\times\dotsb\times A{\subseteq}{{\mathbb Z}}_4^{kn}$ is progression-free and therefore $$|A|^k < (kn+2)\cdot 4^{{\gamma}kn}$$ by what we have just shown. This readily implies the result.
[FGR87]{} and [N.H. Katz]{}, New bounds on cap sets, *J. Amer. Math. Soc.* [**25**]{} (2012), no. 2, 585–613. , A quantitative improvement for Roth’s theorem on arithmetic progressions, *submitted*. , On triples in arithmetic progression, *Geom. Funct. Anal.* [**9**]{} (1999), 968–984. and [J.C. Buhler]{}, A density version of a geometric Ramsey theorem, *J. Combin. Theory, Ser. A* [**32**]{} (1982), 20–34. , and [V. Rödl]{}, On subsets of abelian groups with no $3$-term arithmetic progression, *J. Combin. Theory, Ser. A* [**45**]{} (1987), 157–161. , Integer sets containing no arithmetic progressions, *J. London Math. Soc.* [**35**]{} (1987), 385–394. , Progression-free sets in finite abelian groups, *J. Number Theory* [**104**]{} (2004), no. 1, 162–169. , Character-free approach to progression-free sets, *Finite Fields Appl.* [**18**]{} (2012), no. 2, 378–383. , On subsets of finite abelian groups with no 3-term arithmetic progressions, *J. Combin. Theory Ser. A* [**71**]{} (1995), no. 1, 168–172. , Sur quelques ensembles d’entiers, *C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris* [**234**]{} (1952), 388–390. , On certain sets of integers, *J. London Math. Soc.* [**28**]{} (1953), 104–109. , Roth’s theorem in ${{\mathbb Z}}_n^4$, *Anal. PDE 2* (2009), no. 2, 211–234. , On certain other sets of integers, *J. Anal. Math.* [**116**]{} (2012), 53–82. , On Roth’s theorem on progressions, *Ann. of Math. (2)* [**174**]{} (2011), no. 1, 619–636. , Integer sets containing no arithmetic progressions, *Acta Math. Hungar.* [**56**]{} (1990), 155–158.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We present numerical evidence for the crystallization of magnons below the saturation field at non-zero temperatures for the highly frustrated spin-half [kagomé]{} Heisenberg antiferromagnet. This phenomenon can be traced back to the existence of independent localized magnons or equivalently flat-band multi-magnon states. We also present a tentative phase diagram of this transition, thus providing information for which magnetic fields and temperatures magnon crystallization can be observed experimentally. The emergence of a finite-temperature continuous transition to a magnon-crystal is expected to be generic for spin models in dimension $D>1$ where flat-band multi-magnon ground states break translational symmetry. The universality class of this transition depends upon the underlying lattice; for the [kagomé]{} Heisenberg antiferromagnet this transition is expected to belong to the $D=2$ three-state Potts model universality class.'
author:
- Jürgen Schnack
- Jörg Schulenburg
- Andreas Honecker
- Johannes Richter
bibliography:
- 'js-own.bib'
- 'js-mag.bib'
title: 'Magnon crystallization in the [kagomé]{} lattice antiferromagnet'
---
*Introduction.*—Strongly correlated electronic spin systems may possess unusual and thus attractive properties such as magnetization curves characterized by sequences of magnetization plateaus with possible crystallization of magnons as reported for Cd-kapellasite recently [@ONO:NC19]. This is of course a consequence of the intricate nature of their many-body eigenstates [@Bal:N10; @Sta:RPP15; @MeB:CRP16; @SaB:RPP17], which, however, for, e.g., Hubbard as well as Heisenberg models under special circumstances can express itself as destructive interference that “can lead to a disorder-free localization of particles” [@RKB:PRB18]. For translationally invariant systems this automatically yields flat bands in the single-particle energy spectrum, i.e., in one-magnon space in the case of spin Hamiltonians [@Mie:JPA91; @Tas:PRL92; @SSR:EPJB01; @SHS:PRL02; @BlN:EPJB03; @RSH:JPCM04; @ZhT:PRB04; @ZhT:PTPS05]. Today, flat-band physics is investigated in several areas of physics, and many interesting phenomena that are related to flat bands have been found, see, e.g., Refs. [@HuA:PRB10; @PRS:CRP13; @BeL:IJMPB13; @LFB:PRB13; @DRM:IJMP15; @LAF:APX18]. Flat-band systems can be created using, e.g., cold atoms in optical lattices [@JGT:PRL12; @SOW:PRL12] or by employing photonic lattices [@VCM:PRL15; @MSC:PRL15; @BGJ:PRL16].
Among the flat-band systems, the highly frustrated quantum antiferromagnets (AFMs) play a particular role as possible solid-state realizations. There is a large variety of one-, two-, and three-dimensional lattices, where at high magnetic fields the lowest band of one-magnon excitations above the ferromagnetic vacuum is completely flat [@DeR:EPJB06; @DRH:LTP07]. These flat-band antiferromagnets exhibit several exotic features near saturation, such as a macroscopic magnetization jump at the saturation field [@SHS:PRL02], a magnetic-field driven spin-Peierls instability [@RDS:PRL04], a finite residual entropy at the saturation field [@ZhT:PRB04; @DeR:PRB04; @ZhT:PTPS05], a very strong magnetocaloric effect [@ZhH:JSM04; @ZhT:PTPS05; @DeR:EPJB06], and an additional low-temperature maximum of the specific heat signaling the appearance of an additional low-energy scale [@DeR:EPJB06].
![Sketch of a magnon crystal of localized magnons (of minimal size) on the [kagomé]{} lattice antiferromagnet. These localized magnons (red discs) are superpositions of spin flips of spins residing at the vertices of the confining basic hexagons of the [kagomé]{} lattice. []{data-label="magnon_crystal-f-a"}](magnon-crystal-f-1.pdf){width="0.80\columnwidth"}
The focus of the present paper is on a prominent example of a flat-band spin system, the spin-half [kagomé]{} Heisenberg antiferromagnet (KHAF), that is a celebrated paradigm of highly frustrated quantum magnetism [@Bal:N10; @Sta:RPP15; @MeB:CRP16; @SaB:RPP17]. The corresponding Hamiltonian is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{E-2-1}
{ \fontdimen12\textfont3=2pt\fontdimen12\scriptfont3=1.4pt \!\null\mathop{\vphantom{H}\smash{H}}\limits_{\sim}\null\!}
&=&
J\;
\sum_{\{i<j\}}\;
{ \fontdimen12\textfont3=2pt\fontdimen12\scriptfont3=1.4pt \!\null\mathop{\vphantom{\vec{s}}\smash{\vec{s}}}\limits_{\sim}\null\!}_i \cdot { \fontdimen12\textfont3=2pt\fontdimen12\scriptfont3=1.4pt \!\null\mathop{\vphantom{\vec{s}}\smash{\vec{s}}}\limits_{\sim}\null\!}_j
+ g \mu_B\, B \; \sum_{i}\;
{ \fontdimen12\textfont3=2pt\fontdimen12\scriptfont3=1.4pt \!\null\mathop{\vphantom{s}\smash{s}}\limits_{\sim}\null\!}^z_i
\ ,
J > 0
\ ,\end{aligned}$$ where the first term models the Heisenberg exchange between spins at nearest neighbor sites $i$ and $j$ and the second term provides the Zeeman splitting in an external magnetic field.
In addition to the widely debated character of the spin-liquid ground state, the intriguing magnetization process of the KHAF has attracted much attention [@Hid:JPSJ01; @SHS:PRL02; @HSR:JP04; @RDS:PRL04; @ZhT:PRB04; @DeR:PRB04; @CGH:PRB05; @ZhT:PTPS05; @DeR:EPJB06; @NSH:NC13; @CDH:PRB13; @NaS:JPSJ18; @SSR:PRB18; @CRL:SB18; @ONO:NC19]. The magnetization exhibits plateaus at certain fractions of the saturation magnetization, namely at ${\mathcal{M}/\mathcal{M}_{\text{sat}}}=3/9=1/3$, $5/9$, $7/9$ and likely also at ${\mathcal{M}/\mathcal{M}_{\text{sat}}}=1/9$ [@NSH:NC13; @CDH:PRB13]. In contrast to the semiclassical ${\mathcal{M}/\mathcal{M}_{\text{sat}}}=1/3$ plateau in the triangular-lattice Heisenberg antiferromagnet, see, e.g., [@ChG:JPCM91; @Hon:JPCM99; @FZS:JPCM09], the [kagomé]{} plateau states are quantum valence-bond states [@RDS:PRL04; @ZhT:PRB04; @ZhT:PTPS05; @NSH:NC13; @CDH:PRB13]. Moreover, around the ${\mathcal{M}/\mathcal{M}_{\text{sat}}}=7/9$–plateau the flat lowest one-magnon band [@SHS:PRL02] dominates the low-temperature physics and leads to the exotic properties mentioned above. Interestingly, the ${\mathcal{M}/\mathcal{M}_{\text{sat}}}=7/9$ plateau state just below the jump to saturation is a magnon-crystal state that is the magnetic counterpart of the Wigner crystal state of interacting electrons in two dimensions. Since the magnon crystal spontaneously breaks translational symmetry, a finite-temperature phase transition is possible in the two-dimensional KHAF. The challenge is to find appropriate theoretical tools to describe such a transition to the magnon crystal for the quantum many-body system at hand.
Remarkably, the very existence of a flat band allows a semi-rigorous analysis of the low-temperature physics, e.g., for most of the one-dimensional flat-band quantum spin systems including the sawtooth chain [@DeR:PRB04; @ZhH:JSM04; @ZhT:PTPS05] and also for a few two-dimensional systems, such as the frustrated bilayer [@ADP:PRL16; @RKB:PRB18; @DKR:PRB10] as well as the Tasaki lattice [@MHM:PRL12]. Such a semi-rigorous analysis builds on the existence of compact localized many-magnon states, which form either a massively degenerate GS manifold at the saturation field $B_{\rm sat}$ or a huge set of low-lying excitations for $B \lesssim B_{\rm sat}$ and $B \gtrsim B_{\rm sat}$. For the KHAF, the compact localized many-magnon states live on non-touching hexagons [@SHS:PRL02], which can be mapped to hard hexagons on a triangular lattice [@ZhT:PRB04; @DeR:PRB04; @ZhT:PTPS05; @DeR:EPJB06]. This situation is depicted in [Fig. \[magnon\_crystal-f-a\]]{}.
On the experimental side the growing number of [kagomé]{} compounds is promising with respect to possible solid-state realizations of the [kagomé]{} flat-band physics [@Atw:NM02; @MBV:PRL07; @BNL:PRB07; @OTY:PRB11; @HHC:N12; @KKT:PRB15; @IYN:PRL15; @Nor:RMP16; @YNI:PRB17]. Very recently the magnetization process in high field was reported for Cd-kapellasite [@ONO:NC19]. The authors interpret the observed plateau states “as crystallizations of emergent magnons localized on the hexagon of the [kagomé]{} lattice”. We will address the relation to our investigations in the discussion below.
Reliable predictions of the magnetic field–temperature regions where the magnon-crystal phase exists are useful to stimulate specific experiments. However, the semi-rigorous analysis of the flat-band properties of the KHAF based on compact localized many-magnon states, i.e., the hard-hexagon approximation (HHA) is limited because of the existence of a macroscopic number of additional [*non-compact*]{} localized many-magnon states [@DRH:LTP07]. Moreover, at non-zero temperature also non-localized eigenstates enter the game and may influence the thermodynamics of the KHAF. Thus, one may expect corrections to the theory [@ZhT:PRB04; @ZhT:PTPS05] taking into account only compact states.
*Method.*—To investigate the KHAF near the saturation field we present large-scale finite-temperature Lanczos (FTL) studies for finite lattices of $N=27,36,45,54,63,72$ sites, where we have selected only lattices exhibiting the magnon-crystal plateau at ${\mathcal{M}/\mathcal{M}_{\text{sat}}}=7/9$. (Note, $N=42$ discussed in Ref. [@SSR:PRB18] is not appropriate for the current purpose, because those states giving rise to the plateau do not exist.) FTL is an unbiased numerical approach by which thermodynamic quantities are very accurately approximated by means of trace estimators [@JaP:PRB94; @ScW:EPJB10; @HaS:EPJB14; @ScT:PR17; @PRE:COR17]. It takes into account the full Hilbert space (in a coarse-grained way) and thus redresses the shortcomings of the HHA. Moreover, the consideration of six different lattices up to $N=72$ allows to estimate finite-size effects.
The eigenstates of the model are characterized by the magnetic quantum number $M$ belonging to the $z$-component ${ \fontdimen12\textfont3=2pt\fontdimen12\scriptfont3=1.4pt \!\null\mathop{\vphantom{S}\smash{S}}\limits_{\sim}\null\!}^z$ of the total spin and the $\vec{k}$-vector of the translational symmetry. While for $N=27$ and $N=36$ we can take into account all sectors of $|M|$, for $N > 36$ we are restricted to sectors of larger $|M|$: $|M|>9/2$ for $N=45$, $|M|>17$ for $N=54$, $|M|>43/2$ for $N=63$, and $|M|>26$ for $N=72$, respectively. This restriction is not severe, since close to the saturation field the eigenstates with small $|M|$ become excited states with higher energy. Nevertheless, for $N>36$ we are restricted to low enough temperatures to avoid substantial contributions of states with small $|M|$ to the partition function.
The [kagomé]{} lattices of $N=27,36,45,54,63,72$ sites correspond to hard-hexagon finite triangular lattices of $N_{\rm trian}=9,12,15,18,21,24$ sites, respectively. On symmetry grounds, triangular lattices of $N_{\rm trian}=9,12,21$ sites seem to be most appropriate for our investigation [@BLP:PRL92].
![Magnetization ${\mathcal{M}/\mathcal{M}_{\text{sat}}}$: Region of the 7/9 plateau for various finite size realizations of the KHAF.[]{data-label="plateau-7-9"}](magnon-crystal-f-2.pdf){width="0.95\columnwidth"}
*Results.*—First we have a look at the magnetization curve around the $7/9$–plateau and the jump to saturation, see [Fig. \[plateau-7-9\]]{}. The size-independence of the height of the jump is obvious. The width of the plateau, i.e., the field region where the magnon-crystal phase can exist, is about $4\%$ of the saturation field and its finite-size dependence is weak, cf. Ref. [@CDH:PRB13].
The finite-temperature transition to the magnon-crystal phase can be driven either by temperature when fixing $B$ in the plateau region or by the magnetic field when fixing $T$ below the critical temperature $T_c$. The transition is expected to belong to the universality class of the classical two-dimensional Potts model [@ZhT:PRB04; @ZhT:PTPS05], one indication being that the ground states coincide with those of the HHA. This means that the transition is characterized by a power-law singularity in the specific heat $C$ (critical exponent $\alpha=1/3$), see, e.g., [@Wu:RMP82; @NOJ:CMP13]. Thus $C(B,T)$ is an appropriate quantity to detect the transition. For finite lattices the specific heat will not exhibit a true singularity, rather we may expect a well-pronounced peak in $C$ that indicates the critical point. Furthermore, the peak has to become sharper with increasing $N$.
![Specific heat for $B=0.99B_{\rm sat}$ for various finite-size realizations of the KHAF. For $N=45,54,63,72$, where too large Hilbert subspaces had to be neglected, only the low-temperature part of the specific heat is displayed; it is virtually correct for all system sizes.[]{data-label="C-T-099Bsat"}](magnon-crystal-f-3.pdf){width="0.95\columnwidth"}
First we study the temperature profile $C(T)$ for two magnetic fields slightly below saturation, $B=0.990B_{\rm sat}$ (see [Fig. \[C-T-099Bsat\]]{}) and $B=0.983B_{\rm sat}$ (not shown), where we present data for $N=27, 36, 45, 54, 63, 72$. While the influence of $N$ on the peak position $T_{\rm max}$ is rather weak, the increase of the height $C_{\rm max}$ with growing $N$ is significant and the peaks are sharpest for $N=63$ and $N=72$.
![Maximum of the specific heat for two magnetic fields of the plateau region at the respective magnon crystallization temperature, compare [Fig. \[C-T-099Bsat\]]{}. The solid curves according to [@KiL:PA98] are fits to data for those sizes that correspond to highly symmetric lattices (marked by arrows) with $a=1.34005$, $b=4.10176$, $c=-4.66802$ for $B=0.983B_{\rm sat}$ and $a=0.940541$, $b=2.471$, $c=-3.06195$ for $B=0.990B_{\rm sat}$.[]{data-label="Cmax-N-099Bsat"}](magnon-crystal-f-4.pdf){width="0.95\columnwidth"}
Figure \[Cmax-N-099Bsat\] shows the size dependence of $C_{\rm max}$ for both fields. However, we find that the increase of $C_{\rm max}$ is non-monotonic; e.g., $C_{\rm max}$ is larger for $N=63$ than for $N=72$. This might be attributed to geometric details of the finite lattices. The overall scaling of the height of the peak with $N$ is in accordance with a possible phase transition to a magnon crystal, i.e., it could be expected that the height becomes a singularity for $N\to \infty$, cf. Fig. 8 in [@ZhT:PTPS05].
For the two-dimensional three-state Potts model, that we consider to be in the same universality class, the asymptotic behavior of $C_{\rm max}/N$ for large $N$ is given by $C_{\rm max}/N \propto N^{(\alpha/2\nu)}$[@KiL:PA98] with critical indices $\alpha=1/3$ and $\nu=5/6$ [@Wu:RMP82; @NOJ:CMP13]. For small $N$ substantial corrections are to be expected [@KiL:PA98]; corresponding scaling curves, fitted to data points that are related to highly symmetric triangular lattices, are displayed in [Fig. \[Cmax-N-099Bsat\]]{}.
![Specific heat vs. $B$ at various low temperatures for the KHAF with $N=63$ (solid curves) and $N=36$ (dashed curves, same color for same temperature).[]{data-label="C-B-fixT-JS"}](magnon-crystal-f-5.pdf){width="0.95\columnwidth"}
Next we consider the field dependence of the specific heat at low temperatures $T/J=0.005,0.01,0.02$, see [Fig. \[C-B-fixT-JS\]]{}, where we present data for $N=36$ (dashed) and $N=63$ (solid curves). A corresponding figure based on the HHA is given as Fig. 8 in [@ZhT:PTPS05]. There are two peaks left and right of the minimum in $C(B)$ at $B=B_{\rm sat}$ which are related to the huge set of low-lying excitations (flat-band states in form of localized magnon states), cf. [@DeR:EPJB06; @DRH:LTP07]. The peaks are sharp at very low $T/J=0.005$ and become broader with increasing $T$. The height of the maximum above $B_{\rm sat}$ is almost identical for $N=36$ and $N=63$; it does not correspond to a phase transition [@DeR:EPJB06; @DRH:LTP07]. However, in agreement with [Fig. \[C-T-099Bsat\]]{}, for $T/J=0.005$ and $0.01$ the height of the maximum below $B_{\rm sat}$ is much larger for $N=63$, while the position of this maximum is almost identical.
As already argued above, the size dependence of the maximum for $B \lesssim B_{\rm sat}$ is in accordance with a possible phase transition. It is also obvious from [Fig. \[C-B-fixT-JS\]]{} that already at $T/J=0.02$ the relevant maximum is very broad and the size dependence is changed, i.e., a possible critical temperature is below this $T$ value.
A more detailed comparison of our FTL data shown in [Fig. \[C-B-fixT-JS\]]{} with the corresponding HHA data shown as Fig. 8 of [@ZhT:PTPS05] provides some insight in the limitations of the HHA. The $C(B)$ plot in Fig. 8 of [@ZhT:PTPS05] for $T=0.05J$ exhibits a singularity at $B\sim 0.92B_{\rm sat}$. This means that within the HHA (i) the magnon-crystal phase appears at magnetic fields significantly outside (below) the $M = 7/9$ plateau and (ii) the transition temperature is drastically overestimated.
![Phase diagram: (a) Position $T_{\rm max}$ and (b) height $C_{\rm max}$ of the low-$T$ maximum (cf. [Fig. \[C-T-099Bsat\]]{}) in dependence on $B$ for $N=63$ and $N=72$ for fields where the maximum can be unambiguously detected. The vertical dashed lines mark the repective edges of the magnetization plateau. []{data-label="Cmax"}](magnon-crystal-f-6a.pdf){width="0.95\columnwidth"}
![Phase diagram: (a) Position $T_{\rm max}$ and (b) height $C_{\rm max}$ of the low-$T$ maximum (cf. [Fig. \[C-T-099Bsat\]]{}) in dependence on $B$ for $N=63$ and $N=72$ for fields where the maximum can be unambiguously detected. The vertical dashed lines mark the repective edges of the magnetization plateau. []{data-label="Cmax"}](magnon-crystal-f-6b.pdf){width="0.95\columnwidth"}
To derive a tentative phase diagram we have calculated $C(T)$ for a fine net of $B$ values in the plateau region, see [Fig. \[Cmax\]]{}(a), where we show the position $T_{\rm max}$ of the low-$T$ peak of $C(T)$ vs $B$ for $N=63$ and $N=72$. We also show the HHA result $T_c=0.928(1-B/B_{\rm sat})$ (straight black line) [@ZhT:PTPS05]. First we notice that very close to the saturation field ($0.995B_{\rm sat}\lessapprox B \leq B_{\rm sat}$) the HHA agrees well with our data. When further decreasing the magnetic field, our data for $T_{\rm max}$ deviate significantly from the HHA and $T_{\rm max}$ exhibits a maximum at about $B=0.975B_{\rm
sat}$, i.e., near the midpoint of the plateau. When approaching the lower endpoint $B_{\rm end}$ of the plateau (depicted by the vertical lines in [Fig. \[Cmax\]]{}) $T_{\rm max}$ decreases and we may expect that it vanishes near $B_{\rm end}$, where the magnon-crystal ground state disappears. For finite systems, as approaching $B_{\rm end}$ the relevant peak in $C(T)$ merges with low-$T$ finite-size peaks appearing just below $B_{\rm end}$, this way masking the true behavior expected for $N\to \infty$.
We mention that the general shape of the transition curve in [Fig. \[Cmax\]]{}(a) resembles the phase diagram of the magnon crystallization of the fully frustrated bilayer AFM [@ADP:PRL16; @RKB:PRB18; @DKR:PRB10]. Therefore, we may argue that the shape of this curve is generic for two-dimensional spin models possessing flat-band multi-magnon ground states.
The height of the maximum $C_{\rm max}$ of $C(T)$ (supposed to become a power-law singularity for $N\to\infty$) is shown in [Fig. \[Cmax\]]{}(b) vs $B$ for $N=63$ and $N=72$. The shape of these curves is dome-like with a maximum near the midpoint of the plateau. The unusual behavior at $B=B_{\rm sat}$ is discussed in Ref. [@DeR:EPJB06]).
*Discussion.*—We may conclude that our FTL data confirm the very existence of a low-temperature magnon-crystal phase just below the saturation field as conjectured by the HHA [@ZhT:PRB04; @ZhT:PTPS05]. However, the $B$–$T$ region where this phase exists is not properly described by the HHA.
Coming back to the “magnon crystallization” reported in the experimental paper [@ONO:NC19]: Here the authors interpret the observed plateau states “as crystallizations of emergent magnons localized on the hexagon of the [kagomé]{} lattice”. This concept coincides with the present study for the $7/9$–plateau, but may differ for plateaus at smaller magnetization, e.g., at 1/3 and 5/9. Although these lower plateaus can be understood as magnon crystals formed at $T=0$, it still has to be investigated whether the physical behavior for $T>0$ differs from the scenario discussed in our paper, since the huge set of flat-band multi-magnon states determining the low-$T$ thermodynamics near $B_{\rm sat}$ is missing for these plateaus.
This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG SCHN 615/23-1). Computing time at the Leibniz Center in Garching is gratefully acknowledged. The authors are indebted to O. Derzhko and J. Strečka for valuable discussions.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
We calculate the electronic states of Al$_x$Ga$_{1-x}$As/GaAs/Al$_x$Ga$_{1-x}$As double heterojunctions subjected to a magnetic field parallel to the quasi two-dimensional electron gas. We study the energy dispersion curves, the density of states, the electron concentration and the distribution of the electrons in the subbands.
The parallel magnetic field induces severe changes in the density of states, which are of crucial importance for the explanation of the magnetoconductivity in these structures. However, to our knowledge, there is no systematic study of the density of states under these circumstances. We attempt a contribution in this direction.
For symmetric heterostructures, the depopulation of the higher subbands, the transition from a single to a bilayer electron system and the domination of the bulk Landau levels in the centre the wide quantum well, as the magnetic field is continuously increased, are presented in the “energy dispersion picture” as well as in the “electron concentration picture” and in the “density of states picture”.
address: 'INFM and Scuola Normale Superiore, Piazza dei Cavalieri 7, I–56126 Pisa, Italia'
author:
- 'C. D. Simserides'
title: 'Density of states and electron concentration of double heterojunctions subjected to an in-plane magnetic field.'
---
\#1[[$\backslash$\#1]{}]{}
[2]{}
Introduction
============
Althouth the behaviour of the Quasi Two-Dimensional Electron Gas (Q2DEG) in the presence of a perpendicular magnetic field has been studied extensively, much less attention has been devoted to the situation where the magnetic field is applied parallel to the Q2DEG. In the former case, interesting phenomena e.g. the Shubnikov-de Haas effect [@one] and the integer [@two] and the fractional [@three] quantum Hall effects have been observed. In the latter case, electrons move under the competing influence of the Lorenz force and the force due to the quantum well confining potential.
In the presence of an in-plane magnetic field, $B$, single heterojunctions [@four; @five; @six], single [@seven; @eight], double [@eight; @nine; @ten; @eleven; @twelve] and triple [@thirteen] square quantum wells, almost square quantum wells [@fourteen; @fifteen], asymmetric square quantum wells [@sixteen], symmetrical wide single quantum wells[@seventeen; @eighteen] and superlattices [@nineteen] have been considered.
The experimental studies include single heterojunctions [@six], double square quantum wells [@ten; @eleven; @twelve], triple square quantum wells [@thirteen], wide single quantum wells [@eighteen] and superlattices [@nineteen]. The most important experimental finding [@ten; @twelve; @thirteen; @eighteen] is, according to our opinion, the strong conductance “oscillations” due to the variation of the density of states (DOS), as $B$ is increased. Conductance maxima are identified with depopulations of local energy dispersion minima, while conductance minima are identified with van Hove singularities at the chemical potential. This situation has been encountered in symmetrical square double [@ten; @twelve] and triple [@thirteen] quantum wells and in symmetrical wide single quantum wells [@eighteen]. While in the cases of square double and triple quantum wells a simple Tight Binding calculation gave the position of the maxima and the minima, a self-consistent calculation was indispensable in the case of symmetrical wide single quantum wells.
Theoretical studies of the electronic states are usually restricted to simple analytically solvable potential wells, to Tight Binding Approximation, or to perturbative approximations. Self-consistent studies are up to now a few, regarding single heterojunctions [@four; @five], thin single quantum wells [@fourteen] and symmetrical wide single quantum wells [@seventeen].
In the present work, we use self-consistent calculations to study Al$_x$Ga$_{1-x}$As/GaAs/Al$_x$Ga$_{1-x}$As wide double heterojunctions (i.e. a system of two heterojunctions with relatively large distance between the two interfaces) subjected to an in-plane magnetic field. Below, we summarize the particular aims of this work.
Our first aim is to study the density of states when the Q2DEG is subjected to an in-plane magnetic field. In this case, the DOS is not a step-like function, as it is with $B$=0. We show that its form undergoes important changes as $B$ is increased, especially in wide double heterojunctions where usually many subbands are present [@eikosi; @eikosiena]. The self-consistent study of the electronic states and specifically of the DOS is of great importance for the explanation of the experimental magnetoconductivity in these structures. However, up to now, there is no systematic study of the DOS under these circumstances. We attempt to give a contribution in this direction.
Our second aim is to study a bilayer electron system, different from the commonly used symmetrical double square well. Another potentially bilayer electron system is the symmetrical double heterojunctions, when the well width is increased a lot, due to the transition from a “perfect” square quantum well to a system of two separated heterojunctions [@eikosi]. In the former structure a high barrier separates the two electron layers. In the latter structrure the barrier is formed from the redistribution of the carriers in the well and it is relatively weak. Moreover, Smrcka and Jungwirth [@seventeen] have shown, by calculating the energy dispersion curves in a two-subband situation, that symmetrical wide single quantum wells can be potentially bilayer electron systems when the parallel magnetic field is increased. Here, we present the depopulations of the higher subbands and the transition from a single layer to a bilayer electron system not only in the “energy dispersion picture”, but also in the “electron concentration picture”. Thus, we calculate the electron concentration, $n(z)$ and the distribution of the electrons in the subbands, $n_i(z)$. We also give the “the density of states” picture, which is important for the interpretation of the transport experiments. Moreover, we show in these three pictures that in the centre of our wide quantum well, as the magnetic field is further increased, the bulk Landau levels dominate. Finally, we give an example of an asymmetric heterostructure.
The basic theory is presented in section 2 together with some analogies to the classical picture. In section 3 we present the theoretical results for Al$_x$Ga$_{1-x}$As/GaAs/Al$_x$Ga$_{1-x}$As double heterojunctions and we comment on some interesting features observed. Our conclusions are summarized in section 4.
Basic Theory
============
When a magnetic field, $B$, parallel to the y-axis, is applied to a three dimensional electron gas, the motion in the xz-plane is quantized to Landau levels with energy eigenvalues $E_{xz}= \hbar \omega (i+ \frac {1}{2})$, where $i$ is a discrete quantum number, $\hbar$ is the reduced Planck constant and $\omega=\frac{eB}{m^*}$, is the cyclotron frequency. $m^*$ is the effective mass and q=-e is the electron charge. If we additionally apply an electric field, $\vec E$, in the z-axis, $E_{xz}$ depend not only on $i$, but also on the wavevector in the x-axis, $k_x$. Specifically, $E_{xz}= \hbar \omega (i+ \frac {1}{2})-\frac {m^*}{2}
(\frac {E}{B})^2-\hbar k_x(\frac {E}{B})$. In this work we are interested in the configuration with a quantum well in the z-axis (with or without the electric field in the z-axis) and the magnetic field in the y-axis. Again, as we discuss below, $E_{xz}$ depend on both $i$ and $k_x$. However, generally in this case $E_{xz} = E_i(k_x)$ cannot be expressed analytically and have to be determined self-consistently. Of course, without a magnetic field, $E_{xz} = E_i+\frac {\hbar^2 k_x^2}{2m^*}$, where now $i$ is the subband index. In all the situations described above, the energy eigenvalue in the y-axis is $E_y = \frac {\hbar^2 k_y^2}{2m^*}$ ,where $k_y$ is the wavevector in the y-axis. The spin part of the eigenenergy is $E_{spin} = \pm\frac {1}{2}g^*\mu_BB$, where $g^*$ is the effective Landè factor and $\mu_B $ is the Bohr magneton.
Summarizing, in the present configuration, there is a magnetic field in the y-axis, a quantum well in the z-axis and possibly an electric field in the z-axis (e.g. an external field due to a gate). With our choice of axes, the Hamiltonian is:
$$\hat H_{tot}=({\vec p}-q{\vec A})^2/(2m^*)+U(z)+g^*\mu_B{\vec \sigma}
\cdot {\vec B},$$
where $\vec p$ is the momentum operator, $\vec A$ is the vector potential, $m^*=0.067m_e$ is the GaAs effective mass, $m_e$ is the electron mass, $\vec \sigma$ is the spin and $\vec B$ is the parallel magnetic field.
$$U(z)=U_{band\;offset}(z)+U_C(z)+U_{XC}(z)+U_E(z),$$
where $U_{band \; offset}(z)$ is the potential energy term due to the conduction band minima discontinuity, $U_C(z)$ is the Coulombic potential energy, $U_{XC}(z)$ is the exchange and correlation potential energy [@eikosi] and $U_E(z)$ is the potential energy due to an electric field applied in the z-axis e.g. due to a gate. The magnetic field is applied in the y-axis i.e. ${\vec B}=(0,B,0)$. For the vector potential we choose ${\vec A}=(Bz,0,0)$ [@eikosidio]. The Hamiltonian becomes:
$$\hat H_{tot}=(\hat p_x-qB\hat z)^2/(2m^*)+\hat p_y^2/(2m^*)+
\hat p_z^2/(2m^*)+U(z)+g^*\mu_B{\vec \sigma} \cdot {\vec B}.$$
We split the spatial and the spin part. $\Psi({\vec r},{\vec \sigma})=\psi(\vec r) \; \alpha ({\vec \sigma})$ and $E_{tot}=E_{xyz} \pm \frac {1}{2}g^*\mu_BB$. For the spatial part the envelope function equation writes:
$$[(\hat p_x-qB\hat z)^2/(2m^*)+\hat p_y^2/(2m^*)+\hat p_z^2/(2m^*)+
U(z)]\psi=E_{xyz}\psi.$$
$[\hat p_x,\hat H]=[\hat p_y,\hat H]=0$. Thus, we look for solutions in the form $\psi=\frac{1}{\sqrt{S}}\zeta(z) e^{ik_xx} e^{ik_yy}$, where S=L$_x$L$_y$ is the area of the heterostructure in the xy-plane. The coordinate y splits from the coordinates x and z. We have $E_y=\frac {\hbar^2 k_y^2}{2m^*}$, while in the xz plane:
$$\frac{d^2\zeta(z)}{dz^2} +
\frac{2m^*}{\hbar^2}[E_{xz}-\frac{m^*}{2}(\frac{eB}{m^*})^2
(z+\frac{\hbar k_x}{eB})^2-U(z)]\zeta(z)=0.$$
The non-magnetic part of the potential energy is U(z), while the magnetic part of the potential energy is $\frac{m^*}{2}(\frac{eB}{m^*})^2 (z+\frac{\hbar k_x}{eB})^2$. The center of the magnetic potential energy is the point $z_0=-\frac{\hbar k_x}{eB}=-\frac{\hbar k_x}{m^* \omega}$. Thus, the electron is free in the y-axis, but the magnetic field correlates the motion in the x-axis and the z-axis. The motion in the xz-plane is characterised by a running wave $e^{ik_xx}$ and the bound state $\zeta_{i,k_x}(z)$ which depends on both i and $k_x$.
The energy eigenvalues are:
$$E_{tot}=E_{xz}+E_y \pm \frac{1}{2}g^*\mu_BB=E_i(k_x)+\frac
{\hbar^2 k_y^2}{2m^*} \pm \frac{1}{2}g^*\mu_BB,$$
where, generally $E_i(k_x) \ne E_i(-k_x)$.
The density of states is:
$$n({\mathcal E})=\sum_{i,k_x,k_y,\sigma}
\delta ({\mathcal E}-E_{i,k_x,k_y,\sigma})=\sum_{i,k_x} n_{i,k_x}
({\mathcal E}),$$
where:
$$n_{i,k_x} ({\mathcal E})=\sum_{k_y,\sigma}
\delta({\mathcal E}-E_{i,k_x,k_y,\sigma})=
2\sum_{k_y}\delta({\mathcal E}-E_{i,k_x}-\frac{\hbar^2 k_y^2}{2m^*}).$$
We have used the symbolism $E_{i,k_x} \equiv E_i(k_x)$. Intergrating over $k_y$, Eq. 8 writes:
$$n_{i,k_x} ({\mathcal E})=2\frac{L_y\sqrt{2m^*}}{4\pi\hbar}
\frac{1} { \sqrt {{\mathcal E}-E_{i,k_x}}\ }
\cdot \Theta({\mathcal E}-E_{i,k_x}),$$
where $\Theta$ is the step function. We must note here that the DOS is not a step-like function, as it is with zero magnetic field.
The electron concentration is:
$$n(\vec r)=\sum_{i,k_x} n_{i,k_x}(\vec r),$$
where:
$$n_{i,k_x}(\vec r)=\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}
d{\mathcal E}n_{i,k_x} ({\mathcal E})
f_0({\mathcal E})|\psi_{i,k_x}(\vec r)|^2.$$
$f_0({\mathcal E})$ is the Fermi-Dirac distribution function and $\psi_{i,k_x}(\vec r)$ is the three-dimensional envelope function. Thus, at finite temperature , $T$:
$$\begin{aligned}
\lefteqn{
n_{i,k_x}(\vec r)=2 \frac {\sqrt{2m^*}}{4 \pi \hbar L_x}|\zeta_{i,k_x}(z)|^2}
\nonumber\\
& & {} \int_{0}^{+\infty} d{\alpha} \frac {1}{\sqrt{\alpha}}\;
\frac {1}{1+exp(\frac {\alpha+E_{i,k_x}-\mu (T)}{k_BT})},\end{aligned}$$
where $\mu (T)$ is the chemical potential and k$_B$ is the Boltzmann constant. Using Eq. (12), Eq. (10) becomes:
$$\begin{aligned}
\lefteqn{n(z)=\sum_i n_i(z)=
\sum_i \sqrt{\frac {2m^*}{\hbar^2}} \frac {1} {(2 \pi)^2}
\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}dk_x|\zeta_{i,k_x}(z)|^2}
\nonumber\\
& & {} \int_{0}^{+\infty} d{\alpha} \frac {1}{\sqrt{\alpha}}\;
\frac {1}{1+exp(\frac {\alpha+E_{i,k_x}-\mu (T)}{k_BT})}.\end{aligned}$$
Therefore, the sheet electron concentration, is:
$$\begin{aligned}
\lefteqn{N_s=\sum_i N_i=\sum_i \sqrt{\frac {2m^*}{\hbar^2}} \frac {1} {(2 \pi)^2}
\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}dk_x}
\nonumber\\
& & {} \int_{0}^{+\infty} d{\alpha} \frac {1}{\sqrt{\alpha}}\;
\frac {1}{1+exp(\frac {\alpha+E_{i,k_x}-\mu (T)}{k_BT})}.\end{aligned}$$
For a Hamiltonian like that in Eq. (1), $m^* {\vec v}={\vec p}-q{\vec A}$ [@eikosidio], which in our case becomes $m^*\hat v_x=\hat p_x+eB \hat z$, $m^*\hat v_y=\hat p_y$ and $m^*\hat v_z=\hat p_z$. Thus, after a little algebra we obtain for the accelaration and the force operators in the x, y and z axes, respectively: $\hat a_x = + \omega \hat v_z$, $\hat F_x = + m^* \omega \hat v_z$, $\hat a_y = 0$, $\hat F_y = 0$ and $\hat a_z =
- \omega \hat v_x -\frac {1}{m^*} \frac {\partial U(\hat z)}
{\partial \hat z}$, $\hat F_z = - m^* \omega \hat v_x - \frac
{{\partial U(\hat z)}}{\partial \hat z}$. So, in the y-axis there is no force on the electrons, in the x-axis there is only the Lorenz force, while in the z-axis there is apart from the Lorenz force, the force due to the quantum well confining potential.
When there is no quantum well ($U(z)=0$) the quantities $\hat z_0= - \frac {\hat p_x}{eB}$, which corresponds to the z-coordinate of the center of the classical cyclic orbit, and $\hat x_0= \frac {\hat p_z} {eB}+\hat x$, which corresponds to the x-coordinate of the center of the classical cyclic orbit, are constants of the motion. When $U(z)=0$, the quantity $\hat r_c^2=\frac {(\hat p_x+eB\hat z)^2+\hat p_z^2}{{m^*}^2 \omega^2}$, which corresponds to the square of the radius of the classical cyclic orbit is also a constant of the motion. Thus, when $U(z)$ can be ignored, electrons describe the well-known spiral motion.
The algorithm used to solve self-consistently the equations above, is divided in the following steps. ([$\alpha$]{}') We input an initial guess for the non-magnetic potential energy, $U_{in}(z)$. ([$\beta$]{}') We solve the envelope function Eq. (5) for each i and for each $k_x$ to obtain $\zeta _{i,k_x}(z)$ and $E_{i,k_x}$. Care should be taken in this step, to include all possible i and all possible $k_x$ which contribute to the electron concentration. Thus, we start with many subbands and with a wide range of k$_x$. This means that Eq. (5) must be solved [*many*]{} times. ([$\gamma$]{}') $\mu (T)$ can be calculated from charge neutrality [@eikosi; @eikosiena], using Eq. (14). ([$\delta$]{}') Thus, we can calculate, from Eq. (13) $n(z)$ and $n_i(z)$ and therefore $U_{XC}(z)$ [@eikosi]. ([$\epsilon$]{}') Now the charge density is known and it is used to solve the Poisson equation numerically [@eikosi], to obtain $U_C(z)$. We suppose that $\frac {dU_C}{dz}({\it bulk})=0$, because there is no net charge in the bulk material. We take into account the different dielectric constants of GaAs and Al$_x$Ga$_{1-x}$As [@eikosi]. Finally, we choose $U_C({\it left \; bulk})=-U_0$, where $U_0$ is the value of the conduction band minima discontinuity. $U_{XC}({\it bulk})=0$, because the envelope functions decay into the Al$_x$Ga$_{1-x}$As barriers. Thus, $U({\it left \; bulk})=0$. All the structures are long enough in the z-axis, so that bulk conditions prevail before the end of the Al$_x$Ga$_{1-x}$As barriers. ([$\varsigma$]{}') The output non-magnetic potential energy, $U_{out}(z)$, can now be calculated from Eq. (2). ([$\zeta$]{}') If $U_{out}(z)$ is “very close” to $U_{in}(z)$, we have finished. Otherwise, we mix $U_{out}(z)$ and $U_{in}(z)$ to construct the new $U_{in}(z)$ and we return to step ([$\beta$]{}') [@eikosi].
Finally, we notice that since the envelope functions depend on both i and $k_x$, a quantitative calculation of the conductivity will involve tedious algebra, because the scattering matrix elements will depend on $k_x$, too. This complication emerges also in the calculation of the screening. For this reason, although some attemps have already been made [@eikositria], a well established transport theory for a Q2DEG with an in-plane magnetic field has not been developed yet.
Results and Discussion
======================
We apply our treatment to the case of a symmetrical $\delta$-doped Al$_x$Ga$_{1-x}$As/GaAs/Al$_x$Ga$_{1-x}$As double heterojunction, in the presence of a parallel magnetic field, from 0T up to 20T. We choose a symmetrical structure because in this case we can observe most clearly the variation of the electronic states induced by the magnetic field in the “energy dispersion picture”, in the “electron concentration picture” and in the “density of states picture”. The structure consists of a 280[Å]{} undoped Al$_{0.25}$Ga$_{0.75}$As layer, a Si $\delta$-doped Al$_{0.25}$Ga$_{0.75}$As layer (0.28 $\times$ $10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$), an undoped 250[Å]{} Al$_{0.25}$Ga$_{0.75}$As spacer, a 600[Å]{} undoped GaAs well, an undoped 250[Å]{} Al$_{0.25}$Ga$_{0.75}$As spacer, a Si $\delta$-doped Al$_{0.25}$Ga$_{0.75}$As layer (0.28 $\times$ $10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$) and a 280[Å]{} undoped Al$_{0.25}$Ga$_{0.75}$As layer. All layers are assumed to have a slight unintentional acceptor doping of 5 $\times$ $10^{14}$ cm$^{-3}$. We suppose that the sample has been illuminated and therefore all the donors are ionized. This is done because we want to study the effect of the magnetic field under the condition of constant sheet electron concentration. Although our treatment is applicable to any temperature, we will apply it to $T$ = 4.2K. This is done because the experiments are usually performed at or below $T$ = 4.2K. These material and structural parameters result in a sheet electron concentration, N$_s$= 0.54 $\times$ $10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$.
First we will describe the evolution of the changes induced by the magnetic field to the energy dispersion curves, $E_{i}(k_x)$. The situation is described in the lower parts of Fig. 1. In this particular structure, for $B=0$, due to the large well width, the ground state subband and the first and second excited subbands are populated, with sheet electron concentrations $N_0$= 0.238 $\times$ $10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$, $N_1$= 0.233 $\times$ $10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$ and $N_2$=0.069 $\times$ $10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$, respectively. Initially, as the magnetic field is increased, depopulation of the higher subbands is predicted. The second excited subband is depopulated at $B \simeq$ 5T and the first excited subband at $B \simeq$ 7T. Increasing the magnetic field up to 7T, the shapes of the $E_{i}(k_x)$ dispersion curves also change. While the upper subbands remain almost parabolic, the first excited subband, and most obviously the ground state subband undergo important changes, developing gradually local maxima at $k_x=0$ instead of local minima at $B$ = 0T. As can be seen from the lower parts of Fig. 1 this also happens to the other excited subbands for larger values of the magnetic field. For $B>$ 7T, only the ground state subband is populated. At this point the $E_{0}(k_x)$ dispersion curve is continuously below the chemical potential in the range $k_x=[-4 \times 10^8,+4 \times 10^8]$ m$^{-1}$. This means that the system is still a single layer one.
At higher magnetic fields, a transition from a single to a bilayer electron system occurs. This transition has approximately been achieved at $B$ = 12T as can be seen from the lower part of Fig. 1c, but the complete separation of the two layers is achieved at $B$ = 20T (see Fig. 2 where the electron concentrations are presented). During this procedure, the energy separation of the unoccupied states (those with small $|k_x|$) becomes $\hbar \omega$. This is due to the fact that the well width is very large and therefore in the central region of the well, as the magnetic confinement overcomes the well confinement, the bulk Landau levels dominate. This has also been predicted for square, analytically solvable, quantum wells when the well width is large enough [@sixteen].
In the case of a square quantum well, the behaviour of the $E_{i}(k_x)$ curves is determined by the competition of the [*well width*]{} and the [*magnetic length*]{}, $l_B=\sqrt{\hbar/(eB)}$ [@sixteen]. When the well width is smaller than the magnetic length, spatial quantization dominates. The energy levels can be roughly classified into two types, namely, [*confined*]{} states and [*extended*]{} states. In this [*specific case*]{} the confined states in the quantum well increase parabolically as a function of $k_x$ [@seven; @fourteen], while the extended states have an oscillating form with an “average” separation of $\hbar \omega$ [@seven]. However, as the well width or the magnetic field is increased, this behavior changes. Finally, when the well width is larger than the magnetic length, the electron orbits are governed by the Lorentz force and electrons basically describe spiral motion. At this point the energy dispersion curves are flat with a separation of $\hbar \omega$.
In reference [@fourteen], the author, studing thin single quantum wells and taking as the growth axis the z-axis and the magnetic field in the x-axis, bypasses the dependence of the electronic states on the in-plane wavevector in the y-axis (perpendicular to B), using only $k_y=0$. This is done in order to override the large numerical cost of the general case. It is evident from the lower parts of Fig.1 that such an approximation cannot be applied in our case because of the strong depedence of the electronic states on this wavevector. Moreover, for high enough values of the magnetic field the states with this wavevector are not occupied.
The “density of states picture” is given in the upper parts of Fig. 1. We observe that although for $B$ = 1T (Fig. 1a) the DOS is almost step-like, there is already a peak due to the fact that $E_0(k_x)$ has already developed a local maximum at $k_x$=0, instead of the local minimum at $B$=0T. This corresponds to a van Hove singularity, since $\frac {dE_0(k_x)}{dk_x}>$ 0 as we approach the critical point from below and $\frac {dE_0(k_x)}{dk_x}<$ 0 as we approach the critical point from above. The DOS of the first excited subband is not a “perfect step”, because $E_1(k_x)$ is not exactly parabolic. The DOS for the second and the third excited subbands are “perfect steps” because $E_2(k_x)$ and $E_3(k_x)$ are parabolic. We can also see that we have three populated subbands.
In the upper part of Fig. 1b we present the DOS for $B$ = 7T. Clearly, we can observe the depopulation of the first excited subband. Therefore, at this point, as we increase the magnetic field, the conductivity of the structure increases abruptly, due to the abrupt decrease of the DOS at the chemical potential. We also observe that the total DOS is not step-like and that the second and the third excited subbands are not exactly parabolic. Moreover, since $E_0(k_x)$ and $E_1(k_x)$ have developed local maxima at $k_x$=0, there are two peaks in the DOS, corresponding to the two van Hove singularities.
In the upper part of Fig. 1c we present the DOS for $B$ =12T. There is a van Hove singularity at the chemical potential, due to the local maximum of $E_0(k_x)$ at $k_x$=0. Therefore, at this point, as we increase the magnetic field, the conductivity of the structure decreases abruptly due to the abrupt increase of the DOS at the chemical potential. The total DOS indicates that at the center of the well the bulk Landau levels start to develop. All $E_i(k_x)$ have already developed local maxima at $k_x$=0 and the energy separation of successive subbands for small $|k_x|$ is close to $\hbar \omega$.
In the upper part of Fig. 1d we present the DOS for $B$ = 20T. The form of the total DOS stems from the combination of two factors, i.e. as we move in the energy axis to higher energies: (a) From the two local minima of $E_i(k_x)$ up to the local maximum of $E_i(k_x)$ the bilayer electron system dominates. (b) From the local maximum of $E_i(k_x)$ up to the local minima of $E_{i+1}(k_x)$ the bulk Landau levels dominate. In this region the DOS has the form $constant \times \sum_i (\mathcal E -
\hbar \omega (i + \frac {1} {2}))^{- \frac {1} {2}}$ = $constant' \times \sum_{i,k_y} \delta (\mathcal E -
\hbar \omega (i + \frac {1} {2})- \frac {\hbar^2 k_y^2}{2m^*})$, which is the DOS of a free particle in the y-axis together with an harmonic oscilator in the xz-plane. The energy separation of successive subbands for small $|k_x|$ is equal to $\hbar \omega$.
Fig. 2 presents the variation of the electron concentration, $n(z)$ and of the population of the subbands, $n_i(z)$, as we increase the magnetic field from 0T to 20T. The depopulation of the second excited subband at $B \simeq$ 5T and of the first excited subband at $B \simeq$ 7T can also be seen in this “electron concentration picture”. Inspection of Fig. 2 reveals that apart from these depopulations, the form of $n(z)$ changes even from 1T to 7T, with a little bigger separation of the two parts of $n(z)$. This separation increases with the increase of the magnetic field. At 12T there are still electrons in the middle of the well. The division into two parts is complete at 20T. This means that the “electron concentration picture” gives a more precise depiction of the transision to a bilayer system than the “energy dispersion picture”.
We finally give an example of an asymmetric heterostructure. The structure consists of a 700[Å]{} undoped Al$_{0.25}$Ga$_{0.75}$As layer, a 50[Å]{} Si-doped Al$_{0.25}$Ga$_{0.75}$As layer (2 $\times$ $10^{18}$ cm$^{-3}$), an undoped 50[Å]{} Al$_{0.25}$Ga$_{0.75}$As spacer, a 600[Å]{} undoped GaAs well, an undoped 200[Å]{} Al$_{0.25}$Ga$_{0.75}$As spacer, a 50[Å]{} Si-doped Al$_{0.25}$Ga$_{0.75}$As layer (1 $\times$ $10^{18}$ cm$^{-3}$) and a 600[Å]{} undoped Al$_{0.25}$Ga$_{0.75}$As layer. We suppose, again, that all the layers have a slight unintentional acceptor doping of 4 $\times$ $10^{14}$ cm$^{-3}$ and that the sample has been illuminated so that all the donors are ionized. $T$ = 4.2K. These material and structural parameters result in a sheet electron concentration, N$_s$= 1.491 $\times$ $10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$. For $B$ = 0T, there are four populated subbands with sheet electron concentrations $N_0$= 0.742 $\times$ $10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$, $N_1$= 0.406 $\times$ $10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$, $N_2$=0.229 $\times$ $10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$ and $N_3$=0.114 $\times$ $10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$, respectively.
In Fig. 3 we present the energy dispersion curves, $E_{i}(k_x)$ (lower part) and the density of states (upper part), for $B$ = 5T. We notice that for this asymmetric heterostructure $E_i(k_x) \ne E_i(-k_x)$. The populations of the subbands are now $N_0$= 1.042 $\times$ $10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$, $N_1$= 0.324 $\times$ $10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$, $N_2$=0.110 $\times$ $10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$ and $N_3$=0.015 $\times$ $10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$, respectively. We can observe the “transposition and the anticrossings of the parabolas” which result in a complicated form for the DOS. We can also see that there are two different van Hove singularities which give the peaks in the DOS.
Generally, both in the symmetrical and in the asymmetrical case, the van Hove singularities are not simply saddle points because the $E_i(k_x)$, as we approach the critical points, are not of the form $-\alpha k_x^{2}$, $\alpha >$0. The exact form of the dispersion curves is obtained from the self-consistent calculation. Anyway, as we increase the magnetic field, whenever the chemical potential is identified with a van Hove singularity, the conductivity of the structure will decrease abruptly. On the contrary, whenever there is a depopulation of a local energy dispersion minimum, due to the decrease of the DOS at the chemical potential, the conductivity will increase abruptly.
Similar results are obtained for other values of the well width. It is the competition between the magnitude of the magnetic field and the spatial quantization - together with the influence of the number of electrons - that determines the overall behaviour of the system. Extensive comparison with experiment will be presented in a forthcoming paper.
Summary
=======
We have calculated self-consistently the energy dispersion curves, the density of states, the electron concentration and the distribution of the electrons in the subbands, for Al$_x$Ga$_{1-x}$As/GaAs/ Al$_x$Ga$_{1-x}$As double heterojunctions subjected to an in-plane magnetic field.
We have systematically studied the important changes in the density of states, induced by the variation of the in-plane magnetic field. We have pointed out that these changes are of crucial importance for the explanation of the magnetoconductivity experiments.
In the case of symmetric heterostructures, we have demonstrated in the “energy dispersion picture”, in the “electron concentration picture” and in the “density of states picture” the depopulation of the higher subbands, the transition from a single to a bilayer electron system and the domination of the bulk Landau levels in the centre the wide quantum well, as the magnetic field is continuously increased. We have also given an example of an asymmetric heterostructure.
The author wishes to thank Prof. Fabio Beltram and Dr. Vincenzo Piazza for many useful discussions and for the motivation of this work.
[23]{} A. B. Fowler, F. F. Fang, W. E. Howard and P. J. Stiles, [ Phys. Rev. Lett. ]{} [**16**]{} (1966) 901 K. von Klitzing, G. Dorda and M. Pepper, [ Phys. Rev. Lett.]{} [**45**]{} (1980) 494. D. C. Tsui, H. L. Störmer and A. C. Gossard , [ Phys. Rev. Lett.]{} [**48**]{} (1982) 1559 T. Jungwirth and L. Smrcka, [ J. Phys.: Condens. Matter]{} [**5**]{} (1993) L217 J. M. Heisz and E. Zaremba [ Semicond. Sci. Technol.]{} [**8**]{} (1993) 575 H. Ohno and H. Sakaki, [ Appl. Phys. Lett. ]{} [**40**]{} (1982) 893 H. R. Lee, H. G. Oh, T. F. George and C. I. Um, [ J. Appl. Phys. ]{} [**66**]{} (1989) 2442 G. Gumbs, [ Phys. Rev. B ]{} [**54**]{} (1996) 11354 S. K. Lyo, [ Phys. Rev. B ]{} [**50**]{} (1994) 4965 J. A. Simmons, S. K. Lyo, N. E. Harff and J. F. Klem, [ Phys. Rev. Lett. ]{} [**73**]{} (1994) 2256 Y. Ohno, H. Sakaki and M. Tsuchiya, [ Phys. Rev. B ]{} [**49**]{} (1994) 11492 A. Kurobe, I. M. Castleton, E. H. Linfield, M. P. Grimshaw, K. M. Brown, D. A. Ritchie, M. Pepper, G. A. C. Jones, [ Phys. Rev. B ]{} [**50**]{} (1994) 4889 T. S. Lay, X. Ying and M. Shayegan, [ Phys. Rev. B ]{} [**52**]{} (1995) R5511 W. Xu, [ Phys. Rev. B ]{} [**51**]{} (1995) 9770 G. M. G. Oliveira, V. M. S. Gomes, A. S. Chaves, J. R. Leite and J. M. Worlock, [ Phys. Rev. B ]{} [**35**]{} (1987) 2896 Ch.-S. Wang and D.-S. Chuu, [ Physica B ]{} [**191**]{} (1993) 227 L. Smrcka and T. Jungwirth, [ J. Phys.: Condens. Matter]{} [**7**]{} (1995) 3721 T. Jungwirth, T. S. Lay, L. Smrcka and M. Shayegan, [ Phys. Rev. B ]{} [**56**]{} (1997) 1029 P. Denk, M. Hartung, M. Streibl, A. Wixforth, K. L. Campman and A. C. Gossard, [ Phys. Rev. B ]{} [**57**]{} (1998) 13094 C. D. Simserides and G. P. Triberis, [ J. Phys.: Condens. Matter ]{} [**5**]{} (1993) 6437 C. D. Simserides and G. P. Triberis, [ J. Phys.: Condens. Matter ]{} [**7**]{} (1995) 6317 L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, [*Quantum Mechanics (non-relativistic theory)*]{} (1965), (Pergamon Press, Oxford) pp.421-7 H. Tang and P. N. Butcher, [ J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. ]{} [**21**]{} (1988) 3313 ; H. Tang and P. N. Butcher, [ J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. ]{} [**21**]{} (1988) 3959 ; P. Streda, P. Vasek and M. Cukr, [ Phys. Rev. B ]{} [**51**]{} (1995) 11144 ; J. M. Heisz and E. Zaremba, [ Phys. Rev. B ]{} [**53**]{} (1996) 13594
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
We present an overview of a multi-wavelength survey of the Shapley supercluster (SSC; z$\sim$0.05) covering a contiguous area of 260$h^{-2}_{70}$Mpc$^2$ including the supercluster core. The project main aim is to quantify the influence of cluster-scale mass assembly on galaxy evolution in one of the most massive structures in the local Universe. The Shapley supercluster survey (ShaSS) includes nine Abell clusters (A3552, A3554, A3556, A3558, A3559, A3560, A3562, AS0724, AS0726) and two poor clusters (SC1327- 312, SC1329-313) showing evidence of cluster-cluster interactions. Optical ($ugri$) and near-infrared ($K$) imaging acquired with VST and VISTA allow us to study the galaxy population down to m$^\star$+6 at the supercluster redshift. A dedicated spectroscopic survey with AAOmega on the Anglo-Australian Telescope provides a magnitude-limited sample of supercluster members with 80% completeness at $\sim$m$^\star$+3.
We derive the galaxy density across the whole area, demonstrating that all structures within this area are embedded in a single network of clusters, groups and filaments. The stellar mass density in the core of the SSC is always higher than $9{\times}10^{9}{\rm
M}_{\odot}{\rm Mpc}^{-3}$, which is ${\sim}40{\times}$ the cosmic stellar mass density for galaxies in the local Universe. We find a new filamentary structure ($\sim$7Mpc long in projection) connecting the SSC core to the cluster A3559, as well as previously unidentified density peaks. We perform a weak-lensing analysis of the central 1deg$^2$ field of the survey obtaining for the central cluster A3558 a mass of $M_{500}=7.63_{-3.40}^{+3.88}\times10^{14}M_\odot$, in agreement with X-ray based estimates.
author:
- |
P. Merluzzi$^{1}$[^1], G. Busarello$^{1}$, C. P. Haines$^{2}$, A. Mercurio$^{1}$, N. Okabe$^{3}$, K. J. Pimbblet$^{4,5}$, M. A. Dopita$^{6,7}$, A. Grado$^{1}$, L. Limatola$^{1}$, H. Bourdin$^{8}$, P. Mazzotta $^{8}$, M. Capaccioli$^{9}$, N. R. Napolitano$^{1}$, P. Schipani$^{1}$\
[email protected]\
$^1$ INAF-Osservatorio Astronomico di Capodimonte, Via Moiariello 16 I-80131 Napoli, Italy\
$^2$ Departamento de Astronomía, Universidad de Chile, Casilla 36-D, Correo Central, Santiago, Chile\
$^3$ Kavli Institute for the Physics and Mathematics of the Universe (WPI), Todai Institutes for Advanced Study,University of Tokyo, 5-1-5 Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, Chiba 277-8583, Japan.\
$^4$ Department of Physics and Mathematics, University of Hull, Cottingham Road, Kingston-upon-Hull, HU6 7RX, UK\
$^5$ School of Physics, Monash University, Clayton, Melbourne, Victoria 3800, Australia\
$^6$ Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics, Australian National University, Cotter Rd., Weston ACT 2611, Australia\
$^7$ Astronomy Department, Faculty of Science, King Abdulaziz University, PO Box 80203, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia\
$^8$ Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Roma Tor Vergata, Via della Ricerca Scientifica 1, I-00133 Roma, Italy\
$^9$ Dipartimento di Fisica, Università Federico II, Napoli, Italy
date: 'Accepted . Received '
title: 'Shapley Supercluster Survey (ShaSS): Galaxy Evolution from Filaments to Cluster Cores'
---
\[firstpage\]
galaxies: evolution – galaxies: clusters: general – galaxies: clusters: individual: A3552, A3554, A3556, A3558, A3559, A3560, A3562, AS0724, AS0726, SC1327-312, SC1329-313 – galaxies: photometry – galaxies: stellar contents – gravitational lensing: weak
Introduction {#intro}
============
It is well established that the properties of galaxies are correlated with the environment [e.g. @L02; @GYF03; @BEM04; @BEH05; @BBB06; @PSE06; @Haines07; @BBW13]. At $z{\simeq}0$ galaxy populations in rich clusters are dominated by ellipticals, S0s and at lower masses dwarf ellipticals (dEs) with few, if any, star-forming spirals [@D80; @DTS85]. Cluster galaxies have not always been as inactive as they are at the present epoch. @BO84 showed that the fraction of blue (star-forming) galaxies among cluster members increases from almost zero in the local Universe to $\sim$20% by $z{\sim}0.4$, while recent Spitzer/Herschel surveys have confirmed large numbers of starburst galaxies in clusters to $z{\sim}1$ and beyond [e.g. @PBR12]. While some of this rapid evolution of cluster galaxies can be explained by the cosmic ${\sim}10{\times}$ decline in star formation among field galaxies since $z{\sim}1$ [e.g. @LPD05], cluster populations have shown an accelerated evolution in star formation (SF) over the last four billion years, resulting in an overall ${\sim}15{\times}$ reduction in the total star formation rates (SFRs) per unit halo mass since $z{\sim}0.3$ [@HPS13]. Empirically, clusters accrete gas-rich, star-forming spirals at $z{\ga}0$.5–1.0 and then contribute to transforming them somehow into the passive S0s and dEs of local clusters.
Several mechanisms affecting the galaxy properties and dependent upon the environment have been proposed and investigated in detail and all of them serve to kinematically disturb spiral galaxies and/or transform their structural properties and/or deplete their reservoirs of gas, and so quench star formation. These physical processes include gravitational and tidal interactions amongst galaxies [@TT72; @MKL96], between galaxies and the cluster gravitational field [@BV90], galaxy mergers [@BH91], group-cluster collisions [@B01], ram-pressure [@GG72] and viscous stripping [@N82], evaporation [@CS77] and ‘starvation’ [@LTC80]. Since these mechanisms are characterized by different time-scales and efficiencies which depend, in turn, on the properties of both the galaxies themselves (e.g. their stellar masses, morphologies) and their environment, they can affect the galaxy properties in different characteristic ways [@BG06; @Haines07]. Examples of this are the different effects of tidal and hydrodynamical interactions. The ram pressure exerted by the hot and dense intracluster medium (ICM) can effectively remove the cold gas supply, truncating the gas disc and quenching star formation, in massive cluster galaxies passing through the centre of rich clusters in about one crossing time ($\sim 10^9$yr), while the interstellar gas of a massive galaxy may never be completely stripped if the galaxy moves on a tangential orbit or is member of a poor cluster. Repeated high-velocity encounters (harassment) of cluster galaxies can destroy the fragile disc of dwarf galaxies, but not significantly affect the structure of a giant galaxy.
The development of large spectroscopic surveys such as the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS), plus the availability of panoramic far ultra-violet – far infra-red (FUV–FIR) data from the [*GALEX*]{} and [*Spitzer*]{} space telescopes have allowed the impact of environment on SF to be quantified in unprecedented detail. In these studies, however, the environment and its characteristics are usually treated as ‘static parameters’. While the galaxies move across the cluster, field and filament environments (experiencing different ram pressures, encountering other galaxies and possibly being involved in merging), the cluster potential well, the galaxy density as well as the ICM are usually not considered ‘time-dependent’. Of course, at first pass this approach is an unavoidable reduction on complexity. On the other hand in a hierarchical Universe with the assembly of the structures, the galaxies evolve and move, tending towards denser regions with time, while the environments change too, thus what we actually observe is [*galaxy evolution in an evolving environment*]{}.
The most massive structures in the local Universe are superclusters, which are still collapsing with galaxy clusters and groups frequently interacting and merging, and where a significant number of galaxies are encountering dense environments for the first time. The relative dynamical immaturity of superclusters and the presence of infalling dark–matter halos make them ideal laboratories to test the predictions of hierarchical mass assembly models, and in particular on galaxy evolution. Superclusters are not so rare systems in the Universe [see @SD11]. The observations of superclusters is often considered a challenge to the hierarchical structure formation paradigm since such extreme dense structures, but also voids, are not reproduced by the $N$-body simulations. @YBA11 pointed out that the reason of this discrepancy can be due to the method used to assess the probability of finding such events in the distribution of cold matter. They proposed a new technique to analyse an ensemble of $N$-body simulations in a volume equal to that of the two-degree Field Galaxy Redshift Survey [2dFGRS, @C01] where the probability to find peculiar structures (overdense and underdense) was thus estimated to be $\sim$2 per cent and not null.
Superclusters allow in principle both to study dynamical processes such as cluster-cluster collisions and group-cluster mergers and to sample different environments from cluster cores to filaments and fields. Furthermore, within a dynamically active and locally dense structure the probability to observe evidence of environmental effects on galaxy evolution is dramatically enhanced making these systems a sort of [*magnifying glass*]{} to identify the different physical mechanisms which transform the properties of galaxies. In order to address all these aspects, a careful selection of the target is fundamental. The ideal structure should map different environments with evidence of cluster-cluster interactions. Finally, in order to study in detail the galaxy properties a resolution $\lesssim 1$kpc is required in a wide range of galaxy mass down to the dwarf regime where such galaxies are not quenched by internal processes, but are more susceptible to environmental transformations. With all this in mind, we have undertaken a study of the Shapley supercluster which is the largest conglomeration of Abell clusters in the local Universe.
The Shapley Supercluster Survey (ShaSS) will map a 23deg$^2$ region ($\sim$ 260Mpc$^{2}$) of the Shapley supercluster at $z{=}0.048$, containing filaments and embedded galaxy groups which form a dynamically-bound network connecting nine Abell and two poor clusters, in order to identify the primary locations (groups, filaments, clusters) and mechanisms for the transformation of spirals into the S0s and dEs.
Among the observational studies of superclusters, the STAGES project [@G09] addressed in particular the study of galaxy evolution in the Abell901(a,b) supercluster at redshift $z\sim$0.165 while the ORELSE survey (Lubin et al. [-@LGL09], but see also Mei et al. [-@MSH12]) searched for structures on scales greater than 10Mpc at higher redshifs (0.6$<z<$1.3) with the aim to investigate the properties of member galaxies. The comparison between the STAGES, ORELSE and other similar studies and ShaSS will be then unavoidable and useful to trace the evolution with redshift, although we notice that the area (in Mpc$^2$) of ShaSS is a factor 10 that of the STAGES survey and was chosen to map the filaments connecting the Abell clusters.
The optical survey VST-ACCESS in four bands collected at the ESO VLT Survey Telescope (VST) represents the core of this multi-band project. The infrared coverage with WISE, the dedicated spectroscopic survey with AAT/AAOmega and the Shapley-VISTA survey, together with other proprietary data, provide the fundamental data-set to achieve the scientific goals of ShaSS. In this article we will give an overview of the project and present the first results. In Sect. \[objec\] the motivations and main scientific objectives of the project are discussed. The target is described in Sect. \[SSC\]. The characteristics and strategy of the survey are described in Sect. \[survey\]. Details of the data reduction and analysis of the data quality are given in Sects. \[DR\] and \[DA\], respectively. The first results concerning the characterization of the environment are presented in Sect. \[results\], where we derive the galaxy density across the whole ShaSS region and the underlying dark matter distribution for the central 1deg$^2$ field which allows to estimate the mass of the galaxy cluster A3558. In Sect. \[sum\] we present the summary and conclusions.
Throughout the paper we adopt a cosmology with $\Omega_M$=0.3, $\Omega_\Lambda$= 0.7, and H$_0$=70kms$^{-1}$Mpc$^{-1}$. According to this cosmology 1arcsec corresponds to 0.941kpc at $z$=0.048 and the distance modulus is 36.66. The magnitudes are given in the AB photometric system.
Survey motivations and objectives {#objec}
=================================
The role of large scale mass assembly on galaxy evolution
---------------------------------------------------------
In $\Lambda$CDM cosmological models structure formation occurs hierarchically, such that the most massive halos corresponding to galaxy clusters form latest, doubling their masses on average since $z{\sim}0.5$ [@BSW09; @GNF12], and are also the most dynamically immature. Preferentially located at the nodes of the complex filamentary web, clusters are continually accreting dark matter halos containing individual galaxies or galaxy groups. On average, 50% of galaxies in local clusters have been accreted since $z{\sim}0.4$ [@BSB09], of which 40% are within groups [@MBB09].
The process of central galaxies becoming satellites, as their host halos are accreted into more massive halos, has been shown to strongly affect their evolution, with satellite galaxies more likely to be quenched than central galaxies of the same stellar mass [e.g. @WTC12]. Star formation is suppressed within galaxy groups, with the fraction of star-forming galaxies declining steadily with increasing group mass (at fixed stellar mass) and proximity to the group centre [@WVY06; @WTC12; @WDF13]. Galaxies which are quenched within such groups and later accreted into clusters are described as having been ‘pre-processed’.
Numerical simulations and theoretical studies predict the effect of cluster-cluster mergers on galaxy properties. @BOC10 claimed that merging of galaxy clusters may induce SF due to the increase of the external pressure of the ICM compressing the cold gas in the cluster galaxies. This results in a population of starburts or post-starburst galaxies having the same age and so dating the merging event. The spatial distribution of these star-forming galaxies is expected to differ from the overall distribution of the other cluster galaxies. Similarly, for comparable group and cluster halo densities gravitational shocking as the group enters the cluster could temporarily increases its mass and pull the group members into a denser, more compact system inducing galaxy mergers [@Moss06]. Simulations also showed that starbursts induced by galaxy mergers can be amplified by a factor $\sim 2$ [@MB08] if they take place in the tidal field of cluster/group of galaxies.
@OLK05 studied the excess population of radio galaxies in the cluster A2125 at $z$=0.25, mostly located in groups outside the cluster core and with radio luminosities indicating the SF as the main mechanism responsible of the radio emission. The authors related this observational evidence with the ongoing major cluster-cluster merger and explained the increased SF as due to the variation of the tidal field experienced by the member galaxies during a cluster-cluster interaction, probably being close to the core passage. Studying a system of merging clusters, @JHS08 observed an excess of star-forming galaxies aligned along the bridge of galaxies connecting A3158 to the A3125/A3128 complex, suggestive of merger-induced SF. In addition, they found that the fraction of radio-loud sources is lower with respect to a global cluster environment and similar to that measured by @VBM00 in the cluster A3558 which is considered as an example of a late merger stage. They suggested that in the cluster cores radio emission from active galactic nuclei (AGNs) is suppressed in the late stages of cluster mergers. The suppressed radio emission observed in both bright and faint cluster galaxies has been also associated to cluster merger by @MM07. They explained their findings with the disruption of cool cores, i.e. the gas supply to the central AGN for the bright galaxies, while the low radio loudness and fainter cluster galaxies have been affected by the enhanced ram pressure when crossing the shock front between the merging clusters. Further observational support of the important role that cluster mergers play in triggering the evolution of cluster galaxies is provided by @OCN12 studying the merging cluster A2744. They identified three rare ‘jellyfish’ galaxies located in close proximity to the ICM features associated with a merging subcluster and its shock front. Their interpretation is that the SF knots detected in the tails of stripped gas are due to the rapid increase in pressure experienced by the galaxies interacting with the shock.
Hence, the observations seem to confirm that galaxy/group accretion and cluster-cluster merger affect the cluster galaxies and that the galaxy properties can be sensitive indicators of the merger stage.
Measuring the environmental effects beyond r$_{200}$ {#r200}
----------------------------------------------------
The colour-density relation is observed in galaxy clusters well beyond $r_{200}$ [e.g. @Haines09] and the fraction of star-forming galaxies steadily increases with cluster-centric radius. Nevertheless even at 3-5$\times$ r$_{200}$, the fraction of star-forming galaxies is below that seen in the field [e.g. @CEG11] suggesting that the environment plays a role inducing transformations well outside $r_{200}$.
By means of hydrodynamical cosmological simulations @BMB13 investigated the trend of cold and hot gas contents and SF as function of clustercentric distance in clusters and groups of galaxies. They found a large-scale trend with cold and hot gas contents and SF increasing with the clustercentric distance, but approaching the values of the field galaxy sample only at $\sim 5r_{200}$ (corresponding to 10Mpc for a massive cluster). Moreover, the SF in low-mass cluster galaxies (M=10$^{9-9.5}$M$_{\odot}$) still shows a significant discrepancy even at this large radius with respect to that of the field galaxies. According to the authors, three main causes can explain the observed trends: i) ‘pre-processing’ of galaxies within infalling groups; ii) ‘overshooting’ for those galaxies that are not falling in for the first time (also called ‘backsplash’ galaxies); iii) ram-pressure stripping. Of course, the three mechanisms act differently depending on the galaxy and host halo mass and the clustercentric distance, but in any case the radial trend of the hot gas cannot be explained solely by overshooting and pre-processing. A direct interaction with the host group/cluster is also required and their simulations suggest that ram-pressure stripping can strip the hot gas from low- and high-mass galaxies out to several times $r_{200}$, although it cannot affect the cold gas except for the low-mass galaxies. The authors also claimed that tidal interaction does not play an important role in the gas removal, but it should be an important factor in the morphological transformation of these galaxies.
S0s differ from normal spirals by their higher bulge luminosities rather than fainter disks [@CZ04], disfavouring simple RPS or starvation mechanisms [but see @KSS09]. Instead, mechanisms such as merging or harassment are capable of channelling material to a central bulge, sufficient to produce the higher central mass densities seen in cluster spirals and ultimately the stellar phase densities found in S0s [@MMT07]. This channeling of material will also likely fuel rapid growth of the central supermassive black hole and trigger a period of nuclear activity. Deep observations are needed to reveal tidal streams or ‘fans’, characteristic of recent merging activity [@vD05].
In-situ transformation via merging in clusters is strongly suppressed due to the high encounter velocities. Low-velocity encounters and mergers should be much more frequent in galaxy groups, leading to the suggestion that the bulge growth required to form S0s occurs primarily via pre-processing in galaxy groups, which are subsequently accreted into clusters [@BEM04]. Moreover, the S0 fractions of $z{\la}0.5$ groups match those seen in clusters at the same redshifts, and are much higher than found in the field [@WOM09]. Strong nuclear activity which is linked to bulge growth is also found to be effectively suppressed in cluster galaxies, with the distribution of X-ray AGN in rich clusters revealing them to be an infalling population with high relative velocities [@HPS12]. This confirms that the transformation of galaxies often occurs (or begins at least) well outside the cluster cores, in groups or as infalling galaxies enter the virialized region for the first time [@MET05].
Hints about the distribution of galaxy luminosity, colours and morphology in the filaments have been given by @PB06, who found that brighter galaxies have a less filamentary distribution than the fainter ones. With respect to the morphology, the early-type galaxies are concentrated in the vicinity of the nodes, while spiral galaxies are sparsely distributed across the filaments. @FBM08 observed that the fraction of starburst galaxies in the filaments around the cluster A1763 is twice that in other cluster regions as detected by [*Spitzer*]{} and suggested that filaments are a sort of [*galaxy reservoir*]{} for clusters.
By studying a sample of supercluster filaments in the two-degree Field Galaxy Redshift Survey, @PRP08 observed a sudden enhancement in SF in faint dwarf galaxies outside the cluster virial radius. They interpreted their findings with a close interaction and/or harassment with other infalling galaxies along the same filaments. Another possible explanation is the very first interaction that these galaxies experienced with the ICM inducing tidal shocks and then a burst of SF. Actually, the dominant processes that quench SF in galaxies depend crucially on the galaxy mass. Dwarf galaxies, given their shallow potential wells, should be more susceptible to environmental processes such as tidal/ram-pressure stripping [e.g. @BWG09]. Indeed their SF histories are completely defined by their local environment, since passive dEs are only found as satellites within massive halos [i.e. cluster, group or massive galaxy; @Haines06; @Haines07]. The formation of many cluster dEs is often rather recent, manifest by young stellar ages (${\sim}2$Gyr) and the significant populations of starburst and post–starburst dwarf galaxies in the outskirts of local clusters [@SLH09; @MHR11].
Relating star formation quenching to ram-pressure stripping {#RPS}
-----------------------------------------------------------
Ram-pressure stripping (RPS), as originally proposed by @GG72 requires, in principle, the presence of a dense ICM. Thus, its effect would be limited to cluster cores where the gas discs of massive spirals are rapidly truncated. Nevertheless, with a 3–D hydrodynamical simulation, @MBD03 showed that RPS may extend to poorer environments for low-mass galaxies which, thanks to their lower escape velocities, are easier to strip. @RH05, by means of high resolution 2D hydrodynamical simulations, demonstrated that ram pressure effects can be observed over a wide range of ICM conditions. In particular, in high density environments RPS severely truncates the gas disc of L$^\star$ galaxies, while in low density environments, where moderate ram pressure is foreseen, their gas disc is clearly disturbed and bent [@RH05]. The gas discs of these galaxies can be truncated to 15-20kpc in the first 20–200Myr of RPS.
{width="150mm"}
@ACCESSV identified a bright (L$>$L$^\star$) barred spiral galaxy 1Mpc from the centre of the rich cluster A3558 in the Shapley supercluster core, which is strongly affected by RPS. Integral-field spectroscopic observations revealed ongoing gas stripping in the form of one-sided extraplanar ionized gas along the full extent of the disk, simultaneously with a starburst triggered by gas compression along the leading edge of the galaxy. The galaxy is estimated to be being subjected to weak-moderate ram pressure, as defined by @RH05. This adds a piece of evidence to the fact that RPS is acting more efficiently on the galaxy interstellar medium (ISM) than previously foreseen and also outside of the cluster cores as also observed in the Virgo cluster by @CGK09. This new understanding of the RPS supports the view that this mechanism is the principal transformation process to quench SF in spirals although probably helped by other processes affecting the structure of the galaxies. @BBW13 drew a similar conclusion analysing a sample of 182 disk galaxies in the cluster system Abell901/902. The fraction of galaxies showing asymmetric gas rotation curves, and thus probably affected by RPS [@KKU08], turned out to be 75 per cent higher in the clusters than in the field, the majority of them being morphologically undisturbed. Although these galaxies seemed preferentially located at low clustercentric radii, they also observed a population of dusty and red spirals in the cluster outskirts, which could be also affected by ISM-ICM interactions. The relevance of RPS for quenching SF in cluster galaxies is further complicated by the fact that a non-homogeneous ICM is expected for non virialized merging and post-merging clusters, thus the clustercentric distance is not the only parameter describing the ICM density, i.e. the ram-pressure strength.
The approach of the Shapley Supercluster Survey {#HOW}
-----------------------------------------------
Our study is based on characterizing a dynamically active environment in a multifaceted way and disentangling its effects on galaxy evolution. It has the following main objectives.
-
: To investigate the role of cluster-scale mass assembly on the evolution of galaxies mapping the effects of the environment in the cluster outskirts and along the filaments with the aim to identify the very first interactions between galaxies and their environment.
-
: To identify and measure signs of ongoing transformation in galaxies belonging to a complex structure with the goal of improving our comprehension of what drives their star-formation quenching and structural modification.
-
: To obtain detailed maps of the dark matter and baryonic matter distributions (galaxies, ICM), combining weak lensing, X-ray and dynamical analyses.
-
: To quantify the variation in the stellar mass fractions going from cluster cores to groups, by comparing the near-infrared light distribution with the dark matter maps and dynamical masses.
-
: To build up a multi-band homogeneous data-set on this area of the sky made of sub-kiloparsec resolution imaging and magnitude-limited spectroscopy, thus providing the community with a solid background for studies of the Shapley supercluster.
To address the above objectives we will explore the global and internal properties of galaxy populations extending outside the cluster/group virial radius and aim for an accurate characterization of the environment. This will be defined through galaxy density, dark matter distribution, dynamical substructure, and ICM properties. The different quantifications of the environment will allow us to disentangle the effects of local and large-scale density, cluster and group merging, dynamical state and mass of the host system on the properties of galaxies in different ranges of mass.
Recent studies investigated the effects of the local and large-scale environment on galaxy evolution, mainly considering groups of galaxies. Some of these works defined the environment through the luminosity-density only [e.g. @LTH12], or associate galaxy groups to a large-scale environment identified by a smoothed luminosity field [e.g. @LLY13], or are limited to massive galaxies [e.g. @CSC13]. Therefore, although there is a general agreement that the group environment is important for the evolution of the group members, a study of global and internal properties of galaxy population in groups and, in general, in different structures dynamically bound in a supercluster is still lacking. For instance, @RMB12 found that both local (distance from the centre) and global (mass) group environments play a role in quenching star formation, while @Ziparo14 show that global group-scale mechanisms linked to the presence of a hot gas halo are dominant in quenching SF in group galaxies rather than purely density related processes.
In the following we briefly outline how we will derive the quantities necessary for our study (see also Sect. \[survey\]).
As the main classification scheme of galaxies we will adopt the concentration, asymmetry and clumpiness parameters [@K85; @BJC00; @CBJ00; @C03], complemented by the M20 and Gini coefficients [@LPM04; @AvN03]. This parameter set (hereafter ‘CAS+MG’) has proven to robustly link the internal light distribution of galaxies to their formation and evolution [e.g. @SCL07; @MGZ09; @KPO14; @HMC14; @LJC08; @LJC11 and references therein]. Besides being effective in separating the different morphological types and tracing star formation, the CAS+MG scheme is particularly sensitive to their recent interaction or merging activities, making it the ideal tool to obtain a census of galaxies whose structure appears disturbed by the environment, which is crucial for our project. For a selected sample of ‘normal’ galaxies (as determined through the CAS+MG parameters) it will be possible to quantify the relevance of (pseudo-)bulges and bars as a function of the environment by surface photometry fitting.
In Fig. \[gals\] we show examples of SSC galaxies in the magnitude range from m\*-1 to m\*+4 ($r=14-19$mag). For galaxies in this magnitude range we plan to perform classical (visual) morphological classification, that will be used to calibrate the CAS+MG parameters against the Hubble sequence for our data. The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and spatial resolution of VST images will instead allow us to obtain reliable CAS+MG parameters up to m\*+6 ($r=21$mag), i.e. well into the dwarf galaxy regime (see Sect. \[optical\]). Finally, AAOmega and literature spectra of more luminous galaxies will provide spectral classification through line indices.
Galaxy global properties such as colours, stellar masses and star-formation rates will be derived. The contribution of both unobscured and obscured SFR need to be considered since dust-obscured cluster galaxies are common in merging clusters [e.g. @HSE09]. The $u$–band luminosity will provide a star-formation rate (SFR) indicator once calibrated using the multi–wavelength data already available in the Shapley supercluster core (see Sect. \[CD\]), by obtaining correlations between luminosity, dust extinction, and metallicity. The available mid-infrared data will provide a robust and independent indicator of obscured star formation (Sect. \[CD\]), and also allow us to identify AGN via their unusually red W1-W2 colours [e.g. @WISE10]. AGN will also be identified from their emission-line ratios or broad emission lines from the AAOmega spectra, or their X-ray emission in the supercluster core where XMM data are available.
The depths of our survey are conceived to reach the necessary accuracy of all of the above quantities, as will be outlined in the next Sections.
Finally, we will not only measure statistically the environmental effects on galaxy properties on such large scales, but also to ‘catch in the act’ the direct interaction of supercluster galaxies with their environment into the surrounding large-scale structure. The latter is possible only using imaging with a sub-kiloparsec resolution and follow-up integral-field spectroscopy for a few individual cases [e.g. @ACCESSV].
The target: Shapley supercluster {#SSC}
================================
The ‘remote cloud of galaxies in Centaurus’ first identified by @S30 is one of the richest superclusters in the nearby Universe, consisting of as many as 25 Abell clusters [@ZZS93] in the redshift range 0.033$< z <$0.060 [@QRM95; @QMP97]. The first spectroscopic study confirming the existence of the ‘Centaurus supercluster’ was carried out by @MM87, then it was re-discovered by @SBC89 [their ‘$\alpha$-region’] as a cluster overdensity in the @ACO89 [ACO] cluster catalogue and identified by @R89 [his ‘Shapley concentration’] as an excess in galaxy number counts in the UK Schmidt Telescope Sky Survey plates.
The Shapley supercluster (hereafter SSC) because of its peculiar richness and location, lying in the direction of the dipole anisotropy of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB), was investigated as responsible of at least a fraction of the Local Group acceleration [@SBC89; @R89; @PV91; @QRM95; @KME04; @FKK13 and references therein]. To assess the role of this structure in the acceleration of the Local Group a robust estimate of its mass is required. This gave a boost to spectroscopic and X-ray observations of the supercluster devoted to i) map the whole structure and measure the density contrast in galaxy number counts and mass/number of associated clusters; ii) investigate its dynamical state and iii) derive the underlying mass distribution. A detailed review of the properties of the Shapley supercluster based on previous investigations will be given elsewhere (Merluzzi et al., in preparation), here we will describe the key characteristics of the SSC - i.e. those features making the SSC, and above all its central region, [*a magnifying glass*]{} to investigate the effect of the environment and mass assembly on galaxy evolution.
Supercluster morphology and dynamics
------------------------------------
By analysing a spectroscopic sample across a region of 15deg in diameter centred on the dominant cluster A3558, @QRM95 concluded that the supercluster has a ‘cigar-shape with the eastern side being the closest to us’ [but see also @DPP04] and from the flattened geometry they suggested that it is not spherical and virialized. The complex morphology of the SSC comprises a main body at $cz\sim$15000kms$^{-1}$ together with walls/filaments/arms of galaxies connecting the three main systems of interacting clusters (the A3558, A3528 and A3571 complexes) as well as a foreground structure connecting the SSC to the Hydra-Centaurus supercluster ($cz\sim$4000kms$^{-1}$) and hints of a background structure at $cz\sim$23000kms$^{-1}$[for details see @QCR00; @PQC06]. The main plane of the SSC ($cz\sim$14800kms$^{-1}$) extends 10x20deg$^{2}$ [see @DPP04]. Is this vast and complex structure gravitationally bound? In this case it would be the most massive bound structure known in the Universe.
Applying a spherical collapse model, @RQC00 found that the SSC is gravitationally collapsing at least in its central region within a radius of 8$h^{-1}$Mpc centred on A3558 including 11 ACO clusters; the very inner region, associated with the massive clusters, is likely in the final stages of collapse. X-ray observations of clusters in the SSC confirmed the overdensity: a factor 10 to 50 cluster overdensity [@RFE91] and factor 3 baryon overdensity [@F91] over a region of 60x80Mpc$^{2}$. These results indicated that the structure is gravitationally bound at least in its central region.
From the ROSAT All-Sky Survey in a region of 0.27sterad, @DSE05 measured the cluster number density which turned out to be more than an order of magnitude greater than the mean density of Abell clusters at similar latitudes - mainly due to an excess of low-luminosity X-ray systems in the outskirts, suggesting that the supercluster is still accreting low-mass systems. @EFW97 analysing a mosaic of 15x20deg$^{2}$ of ROSAT and Einstein Observatory X-ray observations centred on A3558, concluded that the SSC core is dynamically bound within $\sim 9$Mpc, approaching the maximum expansion before collapsing, i.e. the turnaround point. On the other hand, the dynamical analysis of @BZZ00 proposed a scenario where the SSC has already reached its turnaround radius and the final collapse will happen in $\sim 1$Gyr.
Using the X-ray cluster sample of @DSE05 and the spherical collapse model, @ML08 investigated the dynamics of the SSC. Their study showed that the SSC is not bound at a radius of 51Mpc with an outer shell moving radially away from the centre, while the excess of mass becomes enough to bind a spherical region of $\sim$10Mpc radius.
Recently, @PB13 ran $N$-body numerical simulations of the SSC and other superclusters in order to determine what portions of the superclusters were potentially gravitationally bound. The SSC showed the most extended bound structure among the other analyzed superclusters. In particular, A3554, A3556, A3558, A3560 and A3562 have a large number of close encounters in their simulations, while an additional pair, A1736 and A3559, has also some chance of being bound. In such a crowded environment it is very unlikely that galaxies have not been affected by cluster related processes such as RPS, starvation and/or galaxy harassment and tidal interaction.
One of the key objectives of ShaSS is to constrain the dark matter distribution and mass over this whole region via a weak lensing analysis, and in conjunction with X-ray and dynamical analyses estimate the extent of the region that is gravitationally bound to the SSC core, and determine whether clusters such as A3559 are currently falling towards the supercluster core.
The Shapley supercluster core {#SSCC}
-----------------------------
We now zoom in to the very central dense region of SSC, namely the ‘core’, which consists of three Abell clusters: A3558, A3562, and A3556 and two poor clusters (SC1327-312 and SC1329-313), resolved by @BRF94 by means of X-ray observations. The evolutionary stage of the SSC core (SSCC) is still matter of debate.
[**Cluster**]{} [**RA**]{} J2000 [**DEC**]{} J2000 [**richness**]{}$^a$
----------------- ------------------ ------------------- ----------------------- ----- ---------------------- ----- --- ------ ----- --------------------------------- -----
AS0724 13 13 08.6 -32 59 38$c$ 14864$\pm$157 $d$ 510$\pm$85 $d$ 0 8.8$\times$10$^{13}$ $e$
AS0726 13 15 11.7 -33 38 52$d$ 14892$\pm$137 $d$ 578$\pm$77 $d$ 0 0.96 $f$ 4.6$\times$10$^{13}$ $f$
A3552 13 19 00.7 -31 51 04$c$ 14753$\pm$119 $d$ 682$\pm$60 $d$ 1 3.6$\times$10$^{13}$ $e$
A3554 13 19 27.6 -33 29 49$c$ 14431$\pm$94 $d$ 560$\pm$66 $d$ 1 0.80 $f$ 5.8$\times$10$^{13}$ $f$
A3556 13 24 00.2 -31 39 22$c$ 14357$\pm$76 $g$ 643$^{+53}_{-43}$ $g$ 0 0.98 $f$ 1.7$\times$10$^{14}$ $f$
A3558 13 28 02.6 -31 29 35$c$ 14403$^{+60}_{-55}$ $g$ 996$^{+40}_{-36}$ $g$ 4 1.16 $f$ 1.3$\times$10$^{15}$ $g$
A3559 13 29 53.1 -29 30 22$h$ 14130$\pm$57 $d$ 519$\pm$45 $d$ 3 0.31 $f$ 2.0$\times$10$^{13}$ $f$
A3560 13 32 22.0 -33 05 24$i$ 14551$\pm$106 $d$ 793$\pm$116 $d$ 3 1.33 $f$ 3.4$\times$10$^{14}$ $f$
A3562 13 33 47.0 -31 40 37$c$ 14455$\pm$191 $d$ 1197$\pm$194 $d$ 2 0.89 $f$ (3.9$\pm 0.4$)$\times$10$^{14}$ $j$
SC1327-312 13 29 45.4 -31 36 12$k$ 14844$^{+105}_{-211}$ $g$ 691$^{+158}_{-146}$ $g$ 1.30 $f$ 3.0$\times$10$^{13}$ $f$
SC1329-313 13 31 36.0 -31 48 45$k$ 14790$^{+114}_{-67}$ $g$ 377$^{+93}_{-82}$ $g$ 1.14 $f$ 3.7$\times$10$^{13}$ $f$
13348$^{+69}_{-83}$ $g$ 276$^{+70}_{-61}$ $g$
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a\) @ACO89.
b\) All the masses are dynamically derived except for that of A3562 which is derived from X-ray observations.
c\) @DSE05.
d\) @PQC06, the redshift is corrected with respect to the CMB.
e\) @RQC00, cluster mass within a radius enclosing an average density 500 times the critical density.
f\) @RMP06, estimates of virial radius and virial mass.
g\) @BZZ98, the mass value is transformed into adopted cosmology.
h\) @DFJ99.
i\) @BVZ02.
j\) @EBD00, the mass value is transformed into adopted cosmology.
k\) @BRF94.
For SC1329-313 mass and virial radius are estimated for the whole system, while redshifts and velocity dispersions
are given for the two different clumps by @BZZ98.
Uncertanities are quoted when available.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\[clusters\]
The dynamical analysis of the SSCC pointed out its very complex dynamical state with interacting clusters belonging to the same structure elongated both in declination and along the line of sight [@BZV94; @BZZ98]. Several sub-condensations, detected also in X-ray, could be recognized. @BPR98 identified twenty-one significant three-dimensional subclumps, including eight in the A3558 cluster alone. This ‘clumpy’ structure as well as the proximity of the clusters (e.g. the Abell radius of A3556 is overlapped to that of A3558) makes robust estimates of the cluster velocity dispersions, masses [see @BZZ98] and even Abell richness [see @MGP94] difficult. Based on their spectroscopic study, @BPR98 proposed two alternative evolutionary scenarios for the SSCC: i) a cluster-cluster collision seen just after the first core-core encounter; ii) a series of random mergings occurred among groups and clusters. Diffuse filamentary X-ray emission has been observed across the whole SSCC [@BZM96; @KB99; @HTS99] connecting the clusters. A continuous filament of hot gas connecting A3562 and A3558 was also seen in the reconstructed thermal Sunyaev-Zeldovich (SZ) [*Planck*]{} survey map (Planck Collaboration [-@Planck13]). The distribution of the X-ray emission was found to be clearly asymmetric in A3562, A3558 and SC1329-313 and gradients of gas temperature and metallicity have been measured [@EBD00; @AKF03; @FHB04] suggesting that cluster-cluster mergers have occurred and/or are ongoing. By analysing XMM-Newton observations, @FHB04 proposed a tidal interaction between SC1329-313 and A3562 to explain the observed properties of the hot gas in A3562 – the tailed shape of the X-ray emission associated with SC1329-313 as well as the sloshing of the A3562 core. Another detailed analysis of XMM-Newton and Chandra by @RGM05 pointed out the very complex dynamical history of A3558 having characteristics which are typical of both merging (e.g. gas temperature gradients) and relaxed (e.g. cool core) clusters. They also detected a cold front leading in the NW direction and probably due to the sloshing of the cluster core induced by the perturbation of the gravitational potential associated with a past merger. A weak and asymmetric radio halo has been detected in A3562 [@VBD03; @GVB05]. The radio halo correlates with the X-ray emission and presents a radio head-tailed galaxy embedded in it and located between the cluster core and SC1329-313, thus supporting the interaction between the two systems as proposed by @FHB04. A deficit of radio galaxies with respect to the radio-optical luminosity function of other clusters, although probably to be ascribed to A3558 alone, was observed by @VBM00. On the other hand, @M05, with a radio survey of a 7deg$^{2}$ region of the SSCC, found a dramatic increase in the probability for galaxies in the vicinity of A3562 and SC1329-313 to be associated with radio emission suggesting young starbursts related to the recent merger of SC1329–313 with A3562. This observation could be explained by galaxy merging efficiently transferring gas into the galaxy centre, feeding AGN and then switching on SF [@B99] .
Although the studies mentioned above are fundamental to demonstrate the complex dynamical status of the SSC and its core, none of them could systematically tackle the issue of galaxy evolution in the supercluster environment due to the lack of accurate and homogeneous multi-band imaging covering such an extended structure. This prevented to collect information about the integrated (magnitudes, colours, SFR) and internal properties (morphological features, internal colour gradients) of the supercluster galaxies. Excluding observations of single clusters in SSC, the first CCD observations covering a $\sim 2$deg$^2$ contiguous area of SSCC were those of the ACCESS project [PI: P. Merluzzi; @SOSI; @SOSII see Sect. \[ACCESS\]] which analyzed a galaxy sample complete down to $B$=22.5 ($>m^\star$+6) and $R$=22.0 ($>m^\star$+7), i.e. well into the dwarf galaxy regime (see Table \[mstar\]).
ACCESS project: main results and open issues {#ACCESS}
--------------------------------------------
The multi-wavelength data-set of the ACCESS [^2] project [see @ACCESSI], covering 2-3deg$^{2}$ of the SSCC allowed us to obtain the complete census of stellar content and SF across the core region from A3556 to A3562. This project was dedicated to investigating the effect of the environment on galaxy evolution in the SSCC exploiting one of the first multi-wavelength data-sets available for such a wide area of a supercluster. The data include panoramic imaging in the UV (Galaxy Evolution Explorer, GALEX), optical (ESO Wide Field Imager, WFI), NIR (UKIRT/WFCAM) and mid-infrared (Spitzer/MIPS), as well as high signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) medium-resolution optical spectroscopy (AAT/AAOmega) for 448 supercluster galaxies. In the following we mention the main results of this project and the open issues that stimulated us to undertake a new multi-wavelength study over a wider supercluster area.
By studying the optical [@SOSI] and near-infrared [NIR, @ACCESSI] luminosity functions (LFs) down to m$_K^\star$+6 it was found that the slope of the LF increases from high- to low-density environments, indicating that mechanisms such as galaxy harassment and/or tidal stripping contribute to shape the LF. The stellar mass function (SMF), however, does not seems to change its trend with galaxy density in the SSCC and does not show the sharp upturn below $\mathcal{M}$=10$^{9.5}$M$_{\odot}$ observed in the field galaxy population [@PBZ10; @BDL12]. Is this difference due to the different evolution of the supercluster and the field galaxies, or it is only an artifact due to the different range of stellar masses analyzed for field and supercluster galaxies? And also, which are the different contributions to the galaxy SMF of the blue and red galaxy populations in the supercluster from the cluster cores to the filaments and field? To answer these questions, the mass range should be extended and the membership ascertained.
We also found evidence that the bulk of the star-forming galaxies have been recently accreted from the field and have yet to have their star-formation activity significantly affected by the cluster environment [@ACCESSII] and that the vast majority of SF seen in the SSCC comes from normal infalling spirals [@ACCESSIII]. Nevertheless, this analysis was limited to galaxies belonging to the SSCC and thus in an extremely dense environment. With the aim to reach a comprehensive picture of how and where galaxies start to quench their SF, it is important to move out from the cluster cores and analyze the properties of the infalling galaxies, i.e. to follow the cluster member from the [*converging*]{} filaments into the clusters. This will also enable us to investigate wether the formation of early-type galaxies, dominant in cluster cores, can be driven by [ *morphological quenching*]{} [see @MBT09] or RPS/starvation [e.g. @CK08]. It is unclear which is the most likely and effective process at work [@ACCESSIV]. Wether the formation of passive early-type galaxies in cluster cores should involve the [ *prior*]{} morphological transformation of late-type spirals into S0/Sa, mechanisms as pre-processing and tidal interaction have to be considered and quantified. In order to understand if this is the case, we need a morphological study of supercluster galaxies, both isolated and in groups, in the cluster outskirts and beyond.
{width="168mm"}
ShaSS: the data {#survey}
===============
We will map a region of $\sim$260Mpc$^2$ including the SSCC and other six galaxy clusters (AS0724, AS0726, A3552, A3554, A3559 and A3560, see Fig. \[VST-ACCESS\]). The supercluster region is chosen to ensure to map the structures directly connected to the SSCC. In fact, the 11 clusters in the region are all within 500kms$^{-1}$ of the central cluster A3558. The survey boundaries are chosen to cover all 11 clusters and the likely connecting filaments, but also to extend into the field (fields 19 and 20 in Fig. \[VST-ACCESS\]). The main characteristics of the clusters and groups in the survey are listed in Table \[clusters\]. We would like to point out that among the other quantities taken from the literature, the virial radii and masses should be considered only indicative for the SSC clusters studied here for which the assumptions of spherical symmetry and isotropy of the velocities are likely not applicable.
The data-set includes optical ($ugri$) and NIR ($K$) imaging acquired with VST and VISTA respectively, and optical spectroscopy with AAOmega. At present the $i$-band imaging and AAOmega spectroscopic surveys are completed, while the other observations are ongoing. Table \[depths\] summarizes the depths and completion of the imaging surveys which are described in Sects. \[optical\] and \[VISTA\]. In the table we list both the target depths and those measured from the data[^3]. For the characteristics of the spectroscopic survey see Sect. \[AAO\].
[**Band**]{} [**m$^\star$**]{} [**reference**]{}
-------------- ------------------- -------------------
$B^a$ 15.35 [@SOSI]
$R^a$ 14.52 [@SOSI]
$K^a$ 11.70 [@ACCESSI]
$r_{AB}^b$ 15.00 [@SOSI]
: [**Assumed m$^\star$ values.**]{}
--
--
: [**Assumed m$^\star$ values.**]{}
----------------------------------------------------------------
a\) Vega photometric system.
b\) Derived from the $R$-band value once converted in $r_{AB}$
with [@BR07] and [@FSI93].
----------------------------------------------------------------
: [**Assumed m$^\star$ values.**]{}
\[mstar\]
-------------- ------------------- ---------------- -------------------- ------------------ -------
[**Band**]{} [**Exp. Time**]{} [**seeing**]{}$^b$ [**complete**]{}
\[s\] [**target**]{} [**measured**]{} \[arcsec FWHM\[ \[%\]
$u$ 2955 24.5 24.3 0.8-1.1 48
$g$ 1400 24.2 24.8 0.6-1.0 43
$r$ 2664 24.2 24.3 0.6-0.8 61
$i$ 1000 22.4 23.2 0.5-1.0 100
$K$ 1620 20.4 20.3 0.6-1.0 60
-------------- ------------------- ---------------- -------------------- ------------------ -------
--
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
a\) Within a 3arcsec diameter aperture.
b\) Range of seeing estimated from the already observed fields.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
\[depths\]
VST-ACCESS survey {#optical}
-----------------
The new optical survey (PI: P. Merluzzi), conceived in the framework of the ACCESS project and named after it VST-ACCESS, is being carried out using the Italian INAF Guaranteed Time of Observations (GTO) with OmegaCAM at the 2.6m ESO telescope VST [@SCA12] located at Cerro Paranal (Chile). The corrected field of view of 1$^\circ$x 1$^\circ$ allows the whole ShaSS area to be covered with 23 VST fields as shown in Fig. \[VST-ACCESS\]. Each of the contiguous VST-ACCESS fields is observed in four bands: $ugri$. Red dots in Fig. \[VST-ACCESS\] denote the 1676 spectroscopic supercluster member galaxies ($11300 < V_h < 17000$kms$^{-1}$) available from literature at the time of the survey planning. The X-ray centres are indicated by crosses for all the known clusters except AS0726, whose centre is derived by a dynamical analysis.
We will achieve our scientific goals studying the global and internal physical properties of Shapley galaxies down to $m^\star$+6. In particular, we need to i) derive accurate morphology as well as structural parameters ($\delta$[*log*]{}$r_e\sim0.04$ and $\delta n_{Ser} \sim1$) and detect some of the observational signatures related to the different processes experienced by supercluster galaxies (e.g. extraplanar material); ii) estimate accurate colours, photo–$z$ [$\delta
z<0.03$, see @CEL12] and stellar masses; iii) evaluate the star-formation rates and resolve the star forming regions at least for the subsample of brighter galaxies. The required SNR depends on which galaxy property is measured: it is higher for the morphological analysis and resolving internal properties/structures [SNR$\sim$100 in our 3arcsec aperture, see @CBJ00; @HMB07], but it can be significantly lower for accurate measurements of aperture photometry and colours (SNR$\sim$20). In the latter case, however, the minimum required SNR should be achieved in all bands.
We chose to use mainly the $r$-band imaging for the morphological analysis, so the $r$ band defines the survey depths in all bands. In $r$ band $m^\star_r \sim 15$ (AB magnitude, see Table \[mstar\]) and at $m^\star_r$+6=21 we require SNR=100 for the morphological/structural analysis. The completeness magnitude of the catalogue in $r$ band is instead defined by the star/galaxy separation (see Sect. \[DA\]) which we estimate to be robust down to $r$=23.5mag (SNR$\sim$10 within a 3arcsec aperture), corresponding to a limiting magnitude $r$=24.2mag (SNR=5). We are collecting the $r$-band imaging under the best observing conditions having a median seeing FWHM$\sim$0.8arcsec corresponding to 0.75kpc at $z\sim
0.05$. Additionally, the $r$ imaging is fundamental to our weak lensing analysis, to ensure a sufficient density of lensed background galaxies with shape measurements.
The typical colours at $z\sim 0.048$ for red sequence galaxies in the AB photometric system are: $u{-}g{\sim}1.4$, $g{-}r{\sim}0.8$, $r{-}i{\sim}0.35$ according to stellar population models [@BC03 $\tau{=}3.0$Gyr, $Z=Z_\odot$]. This approximation allowed us to estimate the required depths for the other three bands which all should provide complete galaxy samples down to $m^\star$+6 with SNR$\ge 20$.
The 1 square degree unvignetted field of view is sampled at 0.21arcsec per pixel by OmegaCAM with a 16k$\times$16k detector mosaic of 32 CCDs which constitute the science array. The detector mosaic presents gaps up to 25arcsec and 85arcsec wide in X and Y direction, respectively. To bridge the gaps, we chose the dither offsetting mode with a diagonal pattern and 5 exposures for $i$, $g$ and $u$ bands. In order to reach the required depth, cover the gaps and avoid saturation in the centre of bright galaxies, the $r$-band images are instead obtained with 9 exposures and smaller offsets. The contiguous pointings of VST-ACCESS are overlapped by 3arcmin. This strategy allows, for each band, to use a few pointings observed under photometric conditions in each run to calibrate all the other fields as well as to check the photometric accuracy.
[**Field**]{} [**Bands**]{} [**ESO Periods**]{}$^a$
--------------- ----------------- -------------------------
F01 $i$ P89
F02 $i$ $r$ P89 P91
F03 $i$ $r$ $g$ $u$ P90 P91 P88 P88
F04 $i$ P90
F05 $i$ P90
F06 $i$ $r$ P89 P91
F07 $i$ $r$ P89 P91
F08 $i$ $r$ $g$ $u$ P88 P89 P88 P90
F09 $i$ P91
F10 $i$ P90
F11 $i$ $r$ $u$ P89 P91 P91
F12 $i$ $r$ $g$ $u$ P89 P90 P91 P91
F13 $i$ $r$ $g$ $u$ P90 P90 P89 P88
F14 $i$ P90
F15 $i$ P90
F16 $i$ $r$ $g$ $u$ P89 P90 P91 P91
F17 $i$ $r$ $g$ $u$ P89 P90 P91 P91
F18 $i$ $r$ $g$ $u$ P88 P90 P90 P89
F19 $i$ P91
F20 $i$ P91
F21 $i$ $r$ $g$ $u$ P88 P90 P91
F22 $i$ $r$ $g$ $u$ P88 P90 P90
F23 $i$ $r$ $g$ $u$ P88 P90 P90
: [**VST-ACCESS observations P88-P91.**]{}
--
--
: [**VST-ACCESS observations P88-P91.**]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a\) For each band in column 2 the period of observations is indicated.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
: [**VST-ACCESS observations P88-P91.**]{}
\[PP\]
![The coloured squares show the VST-ACCESS field coverage at the end of ESO-P91 (September 2013). Gray dots are the supercluster members from literature.[]{data-label="coverage"}](ShaSS_fig3.eps){width="80mm"}
To carry out the optical survey with VST about 100 hours of telescope time are foreseen. The observations started in February 2012 and are in progress. In the first four ESO semesters a total of 48h have been allocated of which 87 per cent carried out. We show the coverage at the end of the first two years of the survey (September 2013) in Fig. \[coverage\] and in Table \[PP\] the distribution of the observations across this period. The following strategy is chosen to set the priority of the fields to be observed.
1)
: To map the whole area in the $i$ band in order to have a magnitude-limited galaxy catalogue with high astrometric and photometric accuracy. This catalogue was mandatory to carry out the spectroscopic survey (see below).
2)
: To collect multi-band optical imaging in the region of the SSCC where we have already available the multi-band data-set (see Sect. \[CD\] ) which allows a cross-check of some of the quantities derived from the optical data, e.g. SF indicators.
3)
: To map in optical bands the southern 15deg$^2$ first, including the two Abell clusters A3554 and A3560 and probable filaments connecting these clusters to the SSCC and which is already covered by the VISTA $K$-band survey (see Sect. \[VISTA\]).
4)
: To complete then the wavelength coverage of the northern 8deg$^2$ starting from the eastern side (A3559).
![Overlaid to the VST-ACCESS coverage (gray boxes), the 14 2deg-diameter AAOmega pointings (circles). Gray dots as in Fig. \[coverage\]. Two VST-ACCESS pointings (top-rigth) are not covered by the spectroscopic survey.[]{data-label="AAO_conf"}](ShaSS_fig4.eps){width="84mm"}
AAOmega spectroscopic survey {#AAO}
----------------------------
A spectroscopic survey of 21deg$^2$ of the ShaSS area[^4] was carried out with the AAOmega spectrograph at the 3.9m Anglo Australian Telescope in May 2013 (PI: P. Merluzzi). The main aim of this survey is to trace the structure of the SSC, beyond the known galaxy clusters, including filaments and groups, in order to describe the local environment in as much detail as possible. We also aimed to reach high completeness in stellar mass and SFR, and for such reason the priorities given to the targets were based on WISE W1 3.4$\mu$m (as a proxy for stellar mass) and W3 12$\mu$m (as a proxy for SFR) magnitudes. The detailed analysis of the spectroscopic survey will be presented in a forthcoming article. Here, we note brief details of this process and the pertinent numbers of galaxies recovered.
AAOmega is a dual-beam fibre-fed spectrograph, allowing the acquisition of up to 392 simultaneous spectra of objects in a two degree diameter field on the sky. Our observations were carried out with gratings 580V and 385R on the blue and red arm respectively, covering the wavelength range 370–880nm at a resolution of $\lambda / \Delta \lambda\sim $ 1300. The survey consisted of 14 AAOmega pointings of 1.5h integration time (including several repeats to constrain the pair-wise blunder rate[^5]), whose centres were determined using a simulated annealing algorithm in the same manner as @DJB10 which allows to optimize the number of targets. Figure \[AAO\_conf\] shows the configuration of the 14 AAOmega pointings superimposed to the VST fields.
The data were reduced in a standard manner using [2dfdr]{} [@L02] which included a Laplacian edge detection to remove incident cosmic rays. Redshifts where obtained using the [runz]{} code common to 2dFGRS, 2SLAQ, GAMA, WiggleZ [@C01; @C06; @D11; @DJB10] which involves Fourier space correlation of each spectrum to a wide batch of template spectra.
We obtained 4037 new redshift measurements in the whole area, which, combined with pre-existing measurements, give a total of 6130 redshifts. In the redshift range of the SSC assumed here (see Fig. \[histo\]), the available redshifts are now 2281, of which 915 have been obtained with our AAOmega survey (see Sect.\[dens\]). Beyond the SSC, 3014 AAOmega redshifts encompass the large-scale background structure, unveiling remarkable peaks in the range $z$=0.07–0.25 which were mostly unknown before.
The AAOmega survey is 80 per cent complete down to $i=17.6$mag, W1=14.7mag and W3=10.7mag. These two last translate into a completeness of 80 per cent in stellar mass and SFR of respectively $\mathcal {M}_\star\sim $8.7$\times 10^{9}$ M$_{\odot}$ and SFR$\sim$0.7M$_{\odot}$yr$^{-1}$ at the supercluster redshift. The value of the stellar mass is obtained by means of the W1-stellar mass calibration as determined by matching SDSS DR7 galaxies at the same distance as the SSC, with stellar mass estimates from @SRC07 and @BR07, to the WISE all sky-catalogue, and taking the best-fit linear relation between W1 flux and stellar mass. The SFR is evaluated from the W3 magnitude using eq. 1 of @DYT12.
![The nine VISTA tiles (red rectangles) mapping the southern SShaSS area. Gray dots as in Fig. \[coverage\].[]{data-label="VISTA_F"}](ShaSS_fig5.eps){width="84mm"}
Shapley-VISTA $K$-band survey {#VISTA}
-----------------------------
The NIR survey (PI: C. P. Haines) is being carried out with VIRCAM at the 4m ESO telescope VISTA located at Cerro Paranal (Chile). These $K$-band observations are accomplished using the Chilean GTO.
VIRCAM covers 0.59deg$^2$ per single pointing (paw-print) with 16 2048pxl$\times$2048pxl detectors. The gaps between the arrays amount to 90 per cent and 42.5 per cent of the detector size along the X and Y axis respectively. So, to obtain a contiguous coverage of the $1.5^\circ\times 1^\circ$ field of view six offsetting paw-prints (a tile) are needed. The mean pixel size is 0.339 arcsec. Almost all the ShaSS area can be covered with 15 VIRCAM tiles. At present, the 9 tiles in Fig. \[VISTA\_F\] have been observed.
Combination of the $K$-band data with the VST optical imaging ($ugri$) we will derive accurate stellar masses by means of stellar population models constrained by the observed optical and infrared colours. This will allow us to robustly measure the SMF and distinguish the contributions of star-forming and passive galaxies to the SMF in different mass ranges down into the dwarf regime.
To achieve our scientific goals we need to estimate stellar masses down to $\mathcal{M}=10^7$M$_\odot$ (see Sect. \[ACCESS\]) corresponding to $K\sim$19.6 ($\sim
K^\star$+8, see Table \[depths\]) which is therefore the requested completeness limit for accurate aperture photometry (SNR$>$10 for a point source in 3arcsec aperture). In order to estimate the NIR-optical colour gradients with 20-30 per cent accuracy using VST-ACCESS and Shapley-VISTA data, a SNR$\sim$40-50 is required and according the survey depth this can be achieved at magnitudes brighter than $K\sim$17.7 corresponding to $K^\star$+6 [$\ge
10^{8.75}$M$_\odot$, @ACCESSI].
The 13.5deg$^{2}$ southern ShaSS regions was observed in the $K_{s}$ band by VISTA in April–May 2014 (093.A-0465: 18hours allocated), covered by a $3{\times}3$ mosaic of VIRCAM tiles as shown in Fig. \[VISTA\_F\]. Each stacked paw-print image consists of $9{\times}9$s exposures, repeated using 5-point jitter pattern with a maximal offset from the central position of 30arcsec. Each tile of six paw-prints was observed a second time, such that each point within the tile region was covered by four stacked paw-prints[^6], giving an exposure time of 1620s per-pixel. As for the VST-ACCESS survey, the tiles are slightly overlapped (${\sim}8$arcmin in Y and ${\sim}3$arcmin in X) to confirm the consistency of the photometry from one tile to another. Initial data reduction steps were performed at the Cambridge Astronomical Survey Unit (CASU) using a software pipeline developed specifically for the reduction of VIRCAM data, as part of the VISTA Data Flow System[^7] [VDFS @ILH04]. VISTA $K_{s}$ magnitudes are calibrated onto the Vega magnitude photometric system using unsaturated 2MASS stars in the image, based on their magnitudes and colours in the 2MASS point source catalogue. The resultant stacked $K$-band images have FWHMs in the range 0.6–1.0arcsec. The $K$-band magnitude detection limit at 5$\sigma$ within a 3arcsec aperture turns out to be 20.3mag.
We aim to complete observations of the remaining northern 8deg$^{2}$ region with VISTA in 2015.
Complementary data {#CD}
------------------
The Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer [WISE, @WISE10] is a NASA Explorer mission that observed the entire sky in 2010 in four near/mid-infrared bandpasses: 3.4$\mu$m (W1), 4.6$\mu$m (W2), 12$\mu$m (W3) and 22$\mu$m (W4). All the data have been reduced, calibrated and released to the public[^8]. The WISE satellite made twice as many passes of the region covered by the ShaSS survey as it did on average for most areas of the sky (the ecliptic poles excluded), and so the limiting magnitudes are slightly deeper than the typical WISE depths reaching W1=16.96 (Vega magnitude) at SNR=10. This corresponds to $\sim$m$^\star$+5 for galaxies in the SSC. The W2 filter (4.6$\mu$m) is a magnitude shallower. We typically reach W2=15.26 at a SNR of 10. The W3 filter (12$\mu$m) reaches a depth of W3=11.12 mag (1.0mJy) at a SNR of 10. This corresponds to a SFR of 0.46M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$ for galaxies in the SSC [eq. 1 of @DYT12]. The W4 filter (22$\mu$m) reaches a depth of W4=7.58 (7.7mJy) at SNR of 10. This corresponds to a SFR of $\sim$2.1M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$ for galaxies in the SSC. The resolution of the WISE bands are 6.1arcsec, 6.4arcsec and 6.5arcsec FWHM in bands W1, W2 and W3. W4 instead has a FWHM of 12.0arcsec.
To cross-correlate WISE and optical catalogues, we use the software STILTS[^9] searching for the closest match within a 3arcsec radius between the VST-ACCESS and WISE detections. Due to higher spatial resolution, the astrometry of the optical images is more accurate and source deblending is checked to avoid multiple detections of a single extended source. In the WISE catalogue, excluding the very extended and bright sources, i.e. few resolved nearby galaxies, there are very few multiple detections of extended sources. This allows us to associate each optical ($gri$) detection only with one IR detection. The few cases of multiple detection of extended sources in the IR images are then fixed in the final cross-correlated optical-IR catalogue. This approach has been adopted for the $i$-WISE catalogue used for the spectroscopic survey. We note also that nearby IR resolved galaxies were not spectroscopic targets, since their redshifts were already available from the literature.
The ShaSS data are complemented in the central 2-3deg$^2$ by [ *Spitzer*]{}/MIPS 24/70$\mu$m photometry and [*GALEX*]{} near-ultraviolet and far-ultraviolet imaging which allowed us to produce a complete census of SF (both obscured and unobscured), extending down to SFRs $\sim$0.02–0.05M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$, i.e down to levels comparable to the SMC. Although these data do not cover the whole ShaSS region they are fundamental for our survey. The W3 data will enable us to measure the SFR down to 0.2M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$ at 5$\sigma$, while the W1-W3 colour allows us to reproduce and map the bimodal galaxy distributions seen in the f$_{24}/f_K$ galaxy colours in the supercluster core [@ACCESSII], but over the entire supercluster region, splitting the supercluster galaxies into star-forming, transitional and passive populations. This is possible because we verified that a strong linear correlation exists between W1-W3 colour and f$_{24}/f_K$.
Near-infrared $K$-band imaging from the United Kingdom Infrared Telescope with the Wide Field Infrared Camera are also available for 3deg$^2$ in the SSCC providing a complete galaxy sample down to $K$=18 [@ACCESSI]. XMM-Newton archive data are available for the SSCC region and for A3560 and will enable us to map the ICM gas and to identify possible shock fronts due to cluster mergers and then to investigate the effects of such events on galaxy properties.
For a subsample of supercluster galaxies, we have been obtaining integral-field spectroscopy with WiFeS [@Dopita07] on the Australian National University 2.3m telescope at Siding Spring in Australia. We are targeting a few bright ($m<m^\star$+1.5) supercluster galaxies showing evidence of undergoing transformation. All these galaxies are selected by either disturbed morphology, such as asymmetry and tails, or evidence of star-formation knots [@ACCESSV]. For these objects, we also have obtained H$\alpha$ imaging with Maryland-Magellan Tunable Filter [MMTF; @veilleux] on the Magellan-Baade 6.5m telescope at the Las Campanas Observatory in Chile.
--------------- -------------- -------------------- ---------------------------- --------------------
[**Night**]{} [**Band**]{} [**ZP**]{} [**colour term**]{} [**extinction**]{}
2013-02-13 u 23.261 $\pm$ 0.028 0.026 $\pm$ 0.019 ($u-g$) 0.538
2013-03-16 g 24.843 $\pm$ 0.006 0.024 $\pm$ 0.006 ($g-i$) 0.18
2012-04-29 r 24.608 $\pm$ 0.007 0.045 $\pm$ 0.019 ($r-i$) 0.1
2012-02-27 i 24.089 $\pm$ 0.01 -0.003 $\pm$ 0.008 ($g-i$) 0.043
--------------- -------------- -------------------- ---------------------------- --------------------
\[ZP\]
VST data reduction {#DR}
==================
The VST images have been processed using the VST–Tube imaging pipeline [@GCL12], developed for the data produced by the VST.
After applying the overscan correction and bias subtraction, we divide by the master flat - a normalized combination of the dome and twilight flats, in which the twilight flat is passed through a low-pass filter first.
Due to differences between the electronic amplifiers, the CCDs do not have the same gain levels. In order to have the same photometric zeropoint (ZP) for all the mosaic chips a gain harmonization procedure has been applied. The procedure finds the relative CCD gain coefficients which minimizes the background level differences in adjacent CCDs. A further correction is needed for the light scattered by the telescope and instrumental baffling. The resulting uncontrolled redistribution of light adds a component to the background and the flat field will not be an accurate estimate of the spatial detector response. Indeed, after flat-fielding, the image background will appear flat but the photometric response will be position-dependent. This error in the flat-fielding can be mitigated through the determination and application of the illumination correction (IC) map. The IC map is determined by comparing the magnitudes of photometric standard fields with the corresponding SDSS DR8 PSF magnitudes. The differences between the VST and SDSS magnitudes are plotted vs. X and Y axis in Fig. \[IC\] before (top panels) and after (bottom panels) the IC. Usually, the same IC map can be used for observations carried out on the time scale of a month.
In the case of the [*i*]{} band it is required to correct for the fringe pattern due to thin-film interference effects in the detector of sky emission lines. Also this is an additive component that must be subtracted. The fringing pattern is estimated using the $\frac{SuperFlat}{TFlat}$ ratio where [*SuperFlat*]{} is obtained by overscan and bias correcting a sigma-clipped combination of science images and [*TFlat*]{} is the sky flat. To this aim, the dithering amplitudes of the science frames used must be larger than the extended object sizes in the same images. This is mandatory to allow the sigma-clip procedure to efficiently remove such objects. The difference between the above ratio across the image and its model obtained with a surface polynomial fit is the fringing pattern. The fringe pattern is subtracted from the image applying a scale factor which minimizes the absolute difference between the [*peak*]{} and [*valley*]{} values (maximum and minimum in the image background) in the fringe corrected image.
The relative photometric calibration among the exposures contributing to the final mosaic image is obtained comparing the magnitudes of bright unsaturated stars in the different exposures, i.e. minimizing the quadratic sum of differences in magnitude using SCAMP [@B06]. The absolute photometric calibration is computed on the photometric nights comparing the observed magnitude of stars in photometric standard fields with SDSS photometry. For those fields that are not observed in photometric but clear nights, we take advantage of the sample of bright unsaturated stars in the overlapping regions between clear and photometric pointings and, by using SCAMP, each exposure of the clear fields is calibrated onto the contiguous photometrically calibrated field. In Table \[ZP\] we give examples of the fitted values for the ZP and colour term obtained using the Photcal tool [@RAR04]. In several cases, the photometric standard star fields were observed with insufficient span in airmass to do a suitable fit. The extinction coefficient was then taken from the extinction curve provided by ESO. The errors listed in Table \[ZP\] are those of the fit. The actual errors for the ZP is given by the r.m.s. of the detection among the different exposures of each pointing and turns out to be less than 0.03mag in all bands.
![[*Top*]{}: differences between the $r$-band magnitudes of stars in a standard field observed with VST and SDSS magnitudes vs. X and Y image axis. [*Bottom*]{}: The same $\Delta$mag after the IC correction has been applied.[]{data-label="IC"}](ShaSS_fig6.eps){width="84mm"}
The relative astrometry among the pointings is derived using SCAMP, while for the absolute astrometry we refer to the astrometric catalogue 2MASS obtaining $\lesssim 0.3$arcsec astrometric accuracy in all bands. The image resampling, application of astrometric solution and co-addition is performed using the tool SWARP [@B02] which produces the final stacked image with a weighted average. At the stage of the co-addition the scale factors for relative and absolute photometric calibration are applied.
Analysis of the optical images {#DA}
==============================
Once the mosaic images were obtained, we proceeded with the catalogue extraction and measured the photometric accuracy and completeness. Details of ShaSS catalogue extraction and release will be given in a companion article (Mercurio et al. in preparation).
We used the software package SExtractor [@BA96] estimating the background locally and using a Gaussian filter for source detection. For each source we measured magnitudes in different apertures as well as Kron and PSF magnitudes.
To distinguish between stars and galaxies, we adopted a progressive approach [@AMB13] using the following parameters provided by SExtractor: i) the stellarity index to select point-like sources; ii) the half-flux radius as a measure of source concentration; iii) the new SExtractor parameter which takes into account the difference between the model of the source and the model of the local PSF; iv) the peak surface brightness above background; v) a final visual inspection for objects with ambiguous values of the stellarity index.
We estimated the completeness magnitudes using both trends of the galaxy number counts and the method by @GMA99. The catalogues turned out to be 100 per cent complete at the total magnitudes of 23.9-24.1, 23.8-24.0, 23.3-23.5, 21.8-22.0mag in $ugri$ bands, respectively. The ranges of magnitudes are due to small differences in seeing among the VST fields.
We measured the SNR inside a 3arcsec aperture as function of magnitudes achieving SNR=20 at $ugri$ at 22.8, 23.3, 22.8, 21.7mag, respectively. SNR$\sim$100 is reached at 21.1mag in $r$ band (m$^\star$+6) as required. These depths enable us to study the galaxy population down to m$^\star$+6.
Results
=======
![Redshift distribution of galaxies in the ShaSS around the SSC. Gray vertical lines indicate the redshift range adopted here for the SSC: 11300-17000kms$^{-1}$.[]{data-label="histo"}](ShaSS_fig7.eps){width="80mm"}
{width="160mm"}
In this section we derive the first quantitative characterization of the environment in the survey area in terms of stellar mass density. We also derive the dark matter distribution in the very centre of the SSCC including the cluster A3558 and the poor cluster SC1327-312.
Galaxy density {#dens}
--------------
To map the structure of the supercluster, and determine its extent in redshift space and across the plane of the sky, we take advantage of our redshift survey which allows us to demarcate the supercluster in redshift space as lying within the recession velocities 11300–17000kms$^{-1}$ (see Fig. \[histo\]). These cuts select a supercluster sample of 2281 galaxies across the ShaSS area.
Each galaxy was weighted ($w_{j}$) according to the inverse probability of it having been observed spectroscopically. Firstly, each galaxy which could have been targeted for spectroscopy (${\rm
W1}<15.0$, $i<18.0$) or was a spectroscopic member of the supercluster, was given an initial equal weight of 1.0. For each of these galaxies lacking a redshift, its weight was transferred equally to its ten nearest neighbours with known redshift that also had the same priority level in our AAOmega spectroscopic survey. This results in galaxies without redshifts having zero weight, while galaxies in regions where the spectroscopic survey is locally 50$\%$ complete having weights of 2.0. The transferring of weight only within priority levels ensures that we can account statistically for the systematic differences in spectroscopic completeness from one level to another, as well as mapping the local spatial variations in completeness.
Each galaxy $j$ belonging to the supercluster is represented by a Gaussian kernel whose transverse width is iteratively set to $\sigma_{0} [\rho_{j}(\mathbf{x}, z)/\bar{\rho} ]^{-1/2}$, where $\bar{\rho}$ is the geometric mean of the $\rho_{j}$, and a fixed radial width of 700kms$^{-1}$. Each galaxy is normalized by the weight parameter $w_{j}$ to account for spectroscopic incompleteness. The transverse kernel width for each galaxy is initially set to $\sigma_{0}{=}6$arcmin, and then iteratively adjusted to account for variations in the spatial density of galaxies, such that it typically encloses the 5 to 10 nearest neighbours of the galaxy, irrespective of its location within the supercluster.
Figure \[D\_map\] shows the resulting density map in which each galaxy is further weighted by its W1 flux as a proxy for its stellar mass [e.g. @JMT13; @MS14; @MSV14]. The density map draws our attention to several features of the whole structure.
a)
: Across the SSCC the density of supercluster galaxies is always higher than 315mJydeg$^{-2}$. This corresponds to ${\sim}7{\times}10^{12}{\rm M}_{\odot}{\rm deg}^{-2}$ based on the W1–stellar mass calibration obtained for the SSC galaxies (see end of Sect. \[AAO\]). Assuming a depth of 5000kms$^{-1}$ or 71Mpc the stellar mass density is $9.3{\times}10^{9}{\rm
M}_{\odot}{\rm Mpc}^{-3}$. Both the stellar mass estimates include a 12% correction to account for the low-mass galaxies with $\mathcal{M}{<}10^{9.8}{\rm M}_{\odot}$ or W$1{>}15$ not targeted in our spectroscopic survey, based on the stellar mass function of @BDL12. This is a mean overdensity of ${\sim}40{\times}$ with respect to the cosmic total stellar mass density for galaxies in the local Universe ($z{<}0.06$) estimated by @BDL12 from the GAMA survey [@D11]. We obtain a similar overdensity of 35–40${\times}$ if we simply compare the observed W1 flux density of SSCC galaxies with the average W1 flux density of $W1<15$ galaxies within the same redshift range selected from the SDSS DR7 (8032deg$^{2}$). Although the SDSS is $r$-band selected, it should be complete to W1=14.5 at $z{=}0.048$, and only marginally incomplete to W1=15.0. The higher density peaks in the SSCC, corresponding to the cluster cores but also the groups and cluster sub-structures, are interconnected forming a single system. This implies that the galaxy distribution follows the hot gas distribution observed across the whole SSCC [e.g. @KB99].
![ Cross-correlations for galaxy and stellar ellipticities, $\langle e_\alpha e_\alpha^{*}\rangle$. Red diamonds ($\alpha=1$) and blue circles ($\alpha=2$) denote the correlation function for corrected galaxy ellipticities, $e_\alpha^{\rm cor}$ and residual stellar ellipticities, $e_\alpha^{*,res}$ after correcting the PSF anisotropy. Green triangles ($\alpha=1$) and magenta squares ($\alpha=2$) are the correlation function for raw galaxy ellipticities, $e_\alpha^{\rm raw}$ and raw stellar ellipticities, $e_\alpha^{*,raw}$ before the correction. The separation radii are offset by $\pm5\%$.[]{data-label="fig:xi_ge"}](ShaSS_fig9.eps){width="\hsize"}
(b)
: There is clear evidence of a filament ($\sim$7Mpc in projection) heading north from the SSCC, connecting it with A3559, with W1 flux densities of ${\ga}1$50mJydeg$^{-2}$ (${\ga}20{\times}$ overdensities). @QCR00 qualitatively indicated a ‘broad arm running north’ from the SSCC, but in their description this feature should point to A3557a which is located NW of the ShaSS region. In this direction we do not detect any clear overdensity.
c)
: Several overdensities are detected across the density map. Some of them can be associated to cluster dynamical substructures already identified by @BPR98 [see Fig. \[D\_map\]], but other density peaks are also detected, i.e. that W of A3556. The positions of the system centres as defined by X-ray peak and galaxy overdensity appear slightly different, as expected in dynamically active systems. The highest discrepancy between these determinations is found for AS0724, where the X-ray centre is located 35arcmin from the galaxy overdensity centre. Notice that AS0726 was not detected by ROSAT and its centre was derived by a previous spectroscopic survey [@PQC06], likely affected by incompleteness. Our newly detected overdensity is actually located 16arcmin from the previous centre.
d)
: In A3560 two main density clumps are sharply defined together with a western clump. The northern clump can be related to the X-ray emission, elongated towards A3558, detected in the very centre of the cluster which suggested a minor merger scenario between the main cluster and a group located $\sim 8$arcmin N of the cluster centre [@VRB13]. Also the galaxy distribution shows an asymmetric shape elongated in the N direction, but extending a factor two in projection with respect to the X-ray emission [c.f. Fig. 5 of @VRB13], taking into account only the two denser clumps in our map. Thus the group involved in the claimed merger could be significantly more massive than that previously identified in the APM catalogue.
In a companion paper, we will assign galaxies to supercluster structures/overdensities. This will be achieved through the dynamical analysis enabling us to detect and measure the amount of cluster dynamical substructures, and to identify possible pre-merging clumps or merger remnants. In particular, we will i) select cluster members [e.g. @FGG96; @GFG96]; ii) derive the centre of the most significant peaks of each identified system applying the 2D adaptive kernel technique to galaxy positions; iii) detect possible subclumps and assign objects to groups [@ABZ94]; iv) identify the 3D substructures combining velocity and position information [@DS88].
{width="\hsize"}
Weak lensing mass distribution of A3558 {#WL}
---------------------------------------
We conducted a weak lensing analysis of the VST-ACCESS field 8 (see Fig. \[VST-ACCESS\]) following @KSB as modified by @Okabe13 [@Okabe14]. We measure image ellipticity of objects detected in the $r$-band data, $e_\alpha$, from the weighted quadrupole moments of the surface brightness. We then correct a PSF anisotropy of galaxy ellipticities by the function of second-order bi-polynomials of the stellar anisotropy kernel. A cross correlation function of residual stellar ellipticities and the corrected galaxy ellipticities does not show overcorrection or insufficient correction as shown in Fig. \[fig:xi\_ge\]. Then, a reduced distortion signal, $g_\alpha$, is estimated with a correction of isotropic smearing effect. We select background galaxies following @Okabe13 and adopt a new method for minimizing the contamination of member galaxies extending to the colour-colour plane. We measure two colours, $g-i$ and $g-r$, and fit the red sequence with a linear function. A colour offset is defined for each galaxy by $\Delta
C\equiv\left(\Delta(g-i)^2+\Delta(g-r)^2\right)^{1/2}$, where $\Delta(g-i)\equiv(g-i)-(g-i)_{\rm ES0}$ and $\Delta(g-r)\equiv(g-r)-(g-r)_{\rm ES0}$ and ‘ES0’ denotes the red sequence galaxies. We select background galaxies by $\Delta C>0.53$ which is the lower limit to allow $1\%$ contamination level. The number density of background source galaxies is $2.2\,{\rm
arcmin}^{-2}$, and their mean redshift is $\langle
z_s\rangle\simeq0.49$.
The mass map is reconstructed as described in @Okabe08. The reduced shear is pixelized into a regular grid with a Gaussian smoothing, $G(\theta)\propto \exp[-\theta^2/\theta_g^2]$. The FWHM resolution of the map is 11.7arcmin. The smoothed shear pattern is estimated with a Gaussian kernel, $G(\theta)$, and a statistical weight $w_{g,i}=(\sigma_{g,i}^2+\alpha^2)^{-1}$ for the $i$th galaxy, where $\sigma_g$ is the rms error of the shear estimate and the softening constant variance. We choose $\alpha=0.4$ as a typical value of the mean rms of $\sigma_g$. We next invert the smoothed shear field with the kernel [@Kaiser93] in Fourier space to obtain the projected mass distribution. The resulting mass map, $\kappa$, for field 08 of VST-ACCESS is shown in Fig. \[fig:wlmap\]. The mass map is elongated along the east-west direction which is parallel to the large-scale filamentary structure. A main peak is associated with distributions of member galaxies and diffuse X-ray emission of A3558. Another possible clump, located E of A3558, is likely associated with diffuse X-ray emission of the galaxy group SC1327-3136.
We compute the tangential distortion component, $g_+$, with respect to the projected cluster-centric radius from the BCG of A3558, shown in Fig. \[gt\_profile\]. The lensing signal $g+$ is decreasing as the radius, $r_{cl}$ increases, and becomes flat or increases at $r_{cl}>20$arcmin. To understand this feature, we fit the two-dimensional shear pattern with two mass components: A3558 and the east clump [e.g. @Okabe11]. We use the Navarro Frenk & White (NFW) profile [@NFW96; @NFW97] as the mass model represented by two parameters: $M_\Delta$ which is the enclosed mass within a sphere of radius $r_\Delta$, and the halo concentration $c_\Delta=r_\Delta/r_s$. Here, $r_\Delta$ is the radius inside of which the mean density is $\Delta$ times the critical mass density, $\rho_{\rm cr}(z)$, at the redshift $z$. Since it is difficult to constrain the concentration for the east clump, we assume a mass-concentration relation [@Bhattacharyaetal2011]. The centre of A3558 is fixed at the BCG position, while the position of the secondary mass component is treated as a free parameter. The model is described by five parameters in total. The best-fit M$_{500}$ for A3558 is $7.63_{-3.40}^{+3.88}\times10^{14}$M$_\odot$. The total lensing signal of the two components (solid line in Fig. \[gt\_profile\]) well describes the observed lensing signals. Since A3558 and the east clump are embedded in the SSCC, surrounding data are essential to further constrain the mass.
![[*Top panel:*]{} The tangential distortion component, $g_+$, as a function of the projected cluster-centric radius from the BCG, is estimated by azimuthally averaging the measured galaxy ellipticities. A bump in lensing signals is found around $r>20$. The profile is well described by two NFW components of A3558 and the east clump. The red solid, green dashed and blue dotted lines are the best-fit NFW profile for the total mass, A3558 and the east clump, respectively. [*Bottom panel:*]{} The $45$ degree rotated component, $g_\times$, is consistent with a null signal.[]{data-label="gt_profile"}](ShaSS_fig11.eps){width="\hsize"}
Although this is a preliminary result, the derived dark matter mass can be compared with that evaluated from the XMM-Newton data-set. To this aim, we computed the Y$_X$ mass proxy, defined as the product of gas mass M$_{gas,500}$ and average temperature $kT$ [@KVN06]. As described in @BM08, we inverted a gas mass profile from the radially average surface brightness of A3558, then iterated about the Y$_X$-M$_{500}$ scaling relation calibrated from hydrostatic mass estimates in a nearby sample of clusters observed with XMM-Newton [@APP10]. Note that the surface brightness of A3558 has been evaluated within an angular sector excluding the eastern filament connecting A3558 to SC1327-312. This yielded estimates of gas mass M$_{gas,500}=0.62\pm 0.01\times10^{14}$M$_\odot$, average temperature $kT=4.91\pm 0.14$keV, and total mass M$_{500}=(4.62\pm
0.24)\times10^{14}$M$_\odot$ within r$_{500}=1160\pm 20$kpc, which is consistent with the WL estimate. Previous X-ray mass estimates based on ROSAT data gave for M$_{500}$: 8.7$\times 10^{14}$M$_\odot$ [@EFW97]; 6.09$\times 10^{14}$M$_\odot$ [@RQC00]; 8.4$\times
14^{14}$M$_\odot$ [30% uncertainty, @ML08]. The dynamical mass derived by @BZZ98 of A3558 and listed in Table \[clusters\] turns out to be a factor 1.7 higher than the WL mass, but also a factor 3 higher than X-ray mass determination previously available as the authors stated in their work. @RMP06 computed the dynamical mass inside the virial radius obtaining M$_{vir}$=6.7$\times 10^{14}$M$_\odot$.
Summary and conclusions {#sum}
=======================
The Shapley Supercluster Survey (ShaSS) aims to assess the role of cluster-scale mass assembly on galaxy evolution searching for possible connections between the properties of the cosmological structures (density, dynamical status, hot-gas content, dark and luminous matter distribution) and those of the associated galaxies (morphology, internal structure, star formation, nuclear activity). This requires that we extend the investigation from the cluster cores to their outskirts, to the infalling galaxies and groups along the filaments in a dynamically-bound network. The centre ($\sim$3deg radius) of the Shapley supercluster at $z\sim 0.05$ is the optimal target to undertake such a study enclosing a massive and dynamically active structure showing signs of cluster-cluster mergers, enhancing the probability to observe evidence of environmental effects on galaxy evolution, but also providing an extraordinary variety of environments concentrated in a small survey volume.
ShaSS includes nine Abell clusters (A3552, A3554, A3556, A3558, A3559, A3560, A3562, AS0724, AS0726) and two groups (SC1327-312, SC1329-313) covering a region of $\sim$260Mpc$^2$. The survey includes the following data-sets.
-
: Optical ($ugri$) imaging acquired with the VLT Survey Telescope (PI P. Merluzzi) provides a galaxy catalogue complete down to $r = 23.3$ (SNR$\sim$10, limit for star/galaxy separation as measured from the collected data) corresponding to $\sim$m$^\star$+8.3 at the supercluster redshift. The multi–band $gri$ catalogue is complete to $\sim$m$^\star$+7.1 and the $u$-band catalogue to $\sim$m$^\star$+6.7. The achieved SNRs allow to study the galaxy population down to $\sim$m$^\star$+6 and derive morphological parameters (CAS+MG, see Sect. \[DA\]) in $r$ band to the same depth. The VST-ACCESS survey is ongoing.
-
: Near-infrared ($K$) imaging acquired with the Visible and Infrared Survey Telescope for Astronomy (PI C. P. Haines) reaching the depth of $K\sim 19.6$ ($\sim$m$^\star$+7.9 at the supercluster redshift) allows to study the galaxy population down to the magnitude limit of the optical catalogue. The survey started in April 2014.
-
: The spectroscopic survey with AAOmega at the Anglo-Australian Telescope (PI P. Merluzzi) collected 4037 new redshifts across 21deg$^2$ of ShaSS. Together with the already available redshifts the spectroscopic sample is now 80% complete down to $r\sim 18$ ($\sim$m$^\star$+3 at the supercluster redshift).
-
: The above dedicated surveys are complemented by near/mid-infrared data from the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) in four bands (W1-W4) 3.4, 4.6, 12 and 22$\mu$m. Over the ShaSS area, we reach W1=16.96 (Vega magnitude) and W3=11.12 mag (1.0mJy) at SNR=10 corresponding to $\sim$m$^\star$+5 and SFR of 0.46M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$, respectively, for galaxies in the supercluster.
For the central 2-3deg$^2$, XMM-Newton, [*Spitzer*]{}/MIPS 24$\mu$m and 70$\mu$m, [*GALEX*]{} near-ultraviolet and far-ultraviolet data are also available, as well as targeted observations of single galaxies providing H$\alpha$ imaging with the Maryland-Magellan Tunable Filter on the Magellan-Baade 6.5m telescope at the Las Campanas Observatory in Chile and integral-field spectroscopy with WiFeS on the Australian National University 2.3m telescope at Siding Spring in Australia.
In this first article we derived the stellar mass density distribution based on supercluster members weighted by the W1 flux. This first quantitative characterization of the environment for the whole region covered by ShaSS shows a clumpy structure both in the SSCC and the surrounding clusters with several substructures, most of them already identified in previous works. All the clusters in the ShaSS area are embedded in a common network. This was suggested, but only for the SSCC where supercluster galaxies continuously populate the core following the gas filaments connecting the Abell clusters as mapped by X-ray observations [@KB99]. We estimate the mean overdensity across the SSCC being ${\sim}40{\times}$ with respect to the cosmic total stellar mass density for galaxies in the local Universe ($z{<}0.06$).
Some new substructures with respect to previous works have been identified in the ShaSS density map such as those associated with A3560 N from the cluster centre in the direction of A3558, towards which also the X-ray emission is elongated [@VRB13]. The most important new feature is however the filament connecting the SSCC and the cluster A3559 as well as the less pronounced overdensity extending from the SSCC towards A3560.
The other environment indicator analyzed here is the dark matter distribution derived from the weak-lensing analysis of VST imaging. Using this approach, we studied the central 1deg$^{2}$ field including A3558 and SC1327-312. The derived WL map shows that the dark matter is concentrated in two peaks which correspond to the rich cluster and the group, although the centres seem slightly offset with respect to the X-ray emission and the galaxy density. This can be due to the lower resolution of the WL map and/or ascribed to the complex dynamical state of the SSCC. The estimated mass of A3558 is $M_{500}=7.63_{-3.40}^{+3.88}\times10^{14}M_\odot$, consistent with the X-ray estimate of M$_{500}=(4.16\pm
0.19)\times10^{14}$M$_\odot$. We notice that the WL mass determination will be improved extending the analysis to a larger region of the supercluster as planned in the ShaSS project.
We conclude pointing out that the VST imaging is the first CCD photometry covering homogeneously and continuously such a large portion of the Shapley supercluster, with this depth and resolution (corresponding to 0.75kpc at the supercluster redshift). Taking advantage of the $i$-band and WISE W1 photometry, the AAOmega survey has been designed and carried out to obtain a magnitude-limited redshift sample, which was never achieved before [e.g. @QCR00; @DPP04; @PQC06]. With these characteristics, ShaSS will build up the first multi-band homogeneous data-set of a vast region of the Shapley supercluster and provide a fundamental local counterpart to the supercluster surveys at higher redshifts.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
This work was conceived in the framework of the collaboration of the FP7-PEOPLE-IRSES-2008 project ACCESS. Based on data collected with i) the ESO - VLT Survey Telescope with OmegaCAM (ESO Programmes 088.A-4008, 089.A-0095, 090.A-0094, 091.A-0050) and the ESO - Visible and Infrared Survey Telescope for Astronomy with VIRCAM (ESO Programme 093A-0465) at the European Southern Observatory, Chile and ii) Anglo-Australian Telescope and 2dF+AAOmega at the Australian Astronomical Observatory, Australia (OPTICON proposal 2013A/014). The optical imaging is collected at the VLT Survey Telescope using the Italian INAF Guaranteed Time Observations. The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-13) under grant agreement number 312430 (OPTICON; PI: P. Merluzzi) and PRIN-INAF 2011 ‘Galaxy evolution with the VLT Surveys Telescope (VST)’ (PI A. Grado). CPH was funded by CONICYT Anillo project ACT-1122. N.Okabe is supported by a Grant-in-Aid from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan (26800097) and by World Premier International Research Center Initiative (WPI Initiative), MEXT, Japan. PM and GB would like to thank A. M. Hopkins for his support during the spectroscopic observations at the Australian Astronomical Observatory and the Universidad de Chile for the hospitality and support during their staying. PM thanks M. Petr-Gotzens for her support in the VST observations. The authors thank Prof. L. Campusano for his helpful comments to the manuscript. This publication makes use of data products from the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer, which is a joint project of the University of California, Los Angeles, and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory/California Institute of Technology, funded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The author thank the anonymous referee for her/his constructive comments and suggestions.
G. O., [Corwin]{} H. G. J., [Olowin]{} R. P., 1989, ApJS, 70, 1
R. G., [van den Bergh]{} S., [Nair]{} P., 2003, ApJ, 588, 218
F., [Kondou]{} K., [Furuzawa]{} A., [Tawara]{} Y., [Yamashita]{} K., 2003, ApJ, 596, 170
M., [Mercurio]{} A., [Brescia]{} M., [Cavuoti]{} S., [Longo]{} G., 2013, PASP, 125, 68
M., [Pratt]{} G. W., [Piffaretti]{} R., [B[ö]{}hringer]{} H., [Croston]{} J. H., [Pointecouteau]{} E., 2010, A&A, 517, A92
K. M., [Bird]{} C. M., [Zepf]{} S. E., 1994, AJ, 108, 2348
Y. M., [McCarthy]{} I. G., [Balogh]{} M. L., [Font]{} A. S., 2013, MNRAS, 430, 3017
I. K., [Balogh]{} M. L., [Bower]{} R. G., [Glazebrook]{} K., [Nicol]{} R. C., [Bamford]{} S. P., T. B., 2006, MNRAS, 373, 469
I. K., [Driver]{} S. P., [Loveday]{} J., [Taylor]{} E. N., [Kelvin]{} L. S., [et al.]{} 2012, MNRAS, 421, 621
M. L., [Eke]{} V., [Miller]{} C., [Lewis]{} I., [Bower]{} R., [et al.]{} 2004, MNRAS, 348, 1355
F. D., [Wolf]{} C., [Gray]{} M. E., [Jogee]{} S., [Balogh]{} M., [et al.]{} 2009, A&A, 508, 665
S., [Pisani]{} A., [Ramella]{} M., [Zucca]{} E., [Zamorani]{} G., 1998
S., [Venturi]{} T., [Zucca]{} E., [De Grandi]{} S., [Ettori]{} S., [Molendi]{} S., 2002, A&A, 396, 65
S., [Zucca]{} E., [Malizia]{} A., [Zamorani]{} G., [Scaramella]{} R., [Vettolani]{} G., 1996, A&A, 305, 435
S., [Zucca]{} E., [Vettolani]{} G., [Zamorani]{} G., [Scaramella]{} R., [Collin]{} C. A., [MacGillivray]{} H. T., 1994, MNRAS, 267, 665
S., [Zucca]{} E., [Zamorani]{} G., [Moscardini]{} L., [Scaramella]{} R., 2000, MNRAS, 312, 540
S., [Zucca]{} E., [Zamorani]{} G., [Vettolani]{} G., [Scaramella]{} R., 1998
J. E., [Hernquist]{} L. E., 1991, ApJ, 370, 65L
K., 1999, ApJ, 510, L15
K., 2001, ApJ, 546, 189
K., [Owers]{} M. S., [Couch]{} W. J., 2010, ApJ, 718, 27L
J. C., [Stewart]{} K. R., [Bullock]{} J. S., [Purcell]{} C. W., [Barton]{} E. J., [Wechsler]{} R. H., 2009, ApJ, 690, 1292
M. A., [Jangren]{} A., [Conselice]{} C. J., 2000, AJ, 119, 2645
E., 2006, ASPC, 351, 112
E., [Arnouts]{} S., 1996, A&AS, 117, 393
E., Y. M., M. R., G. M., P. D., B. M., 2002, ASPC, 281, 228
S., [Habib]{} S., [Heitmann]{} K., [Vikhlinin]{} A., 2013, ApJ, 766, 32
M. R., [Eisenstein]{} D., [Hogg]{} D. W., [Schlegel]{} D. J., [Brinkmann]{} J., 2005, ApJ, 629, 143
M. R., [Roweis]{} S., 2007, AJ, 133, 734
B., [B[ö]{}hm]{} A., [Wolf]{} C., [Arag[ó]{}n-Salamanca]{} A., [Barden]{} M., [Gray]{} M. E., [Ziegler]{} B. L., [Schindler]{} S., [Balogh]{} M., 2013, A&A, 549, 142
A., [Gavazzi]{} G., 2006, PASP, 118, 517
H., [Mazzotta]{} P., 2008, A&A, 479, 307
M., [Springel]{} V., [White]{} S. D. M., [Jenkins]{} A., [Lemson]{} G., 2009, MNRAS, 398, 1150
J., [Raychaudhury]{} S., [Forman]{} W., [Jones]{} 1994, ApJ, 424, 59
G., [Charlot]{} S., 2003, MNRAS, 344, 1000
H., [Oemler]{} Jr. A., 1984, ApJ, 285, 426
G., [Valtonen]{} M., 1990, ApJ, 350, 89
R., [Drinkwater]{} M., [Edge]{} A., [Eisenstein]{} D., [Nichol]{} R., [Outram]{} P., [Pimbblet]{} K., [et al.]{} 2006, MNRAS, 372, 425
B., [Schiminovich]{} D., [Cortese]{} L., [Fabello]{} S., [Hummels]{} C. B., [Moran]{} S. M., [Lemonias]{} J. J., [Cooper]{} A. P., [Wu]{} R., [Heckman]{} T. M., [Wang]{} J., 2013, MNRAS, 436, 34
D., [Zabludoff]{} A. I., 2004, ApJ, 616, 192
L., [Eminian]{} C., [Loveday]{} J., [Norberg]{} P., [Baldry]{} I. K., [Hurley]{} P. D., [Driver]{} S. P., [Bamford]{} S. P., [Hopkins]{} A. M., [et al.]{} 2012, MNRAS, 425, 1527
A., [van Gorkom]{} J. H., [Kenney]{} J. D. P., [Crowl]{} H., [Vollmer]{} B., 2009, AJ, 138, 1741
S. M., [Eisenhardt]{} P. R., [Gonzalez]{} A. H., [Stanford]{} S. A., [Brodwin]{} M., [Stern]{} D., [Jarrett]{} T., 2011, ApJ, 743, 34
M., [Dalton]{} G., [Maddox]{} S., [Sutherland]{} W., [Norberg]{} P., [Cole]{} S., [et al.]{} 2001, MNRAS, 328, 1039
C. J., 2003, ApJS, 147, 1
C. J., [Bershady]{} M. A., [Jangren]{} A., 2000, ApJ, 529, 886
L. L., [Songalia]{} A., 1977, Nature, 266, 501
H. H., [Kenney]{} J. D. P., 2008, AJ, 136, 1623
L. P., [Forman]{} W., C. J., 1999, AJ, 519, 533
E., [Schindler]{} S., T. E., 2005, A&A, 444, 387
E., [Yan]{} L., [Tsai]{} C., [Eisenhardt]{} P., [Stern]{} D., [Assef]{} R. J., [Leisawitz]{} D., [Jarrett]{} T. H., [Stanford]{} S. A., 2012, ApJ, 748, 80
M., [Hart]{} J., [McGregor]{} P., [Oates]{} P., [Bloxham]{} G., [Jones]{} D., 2007, ApSS, 310, 255
A., 1980, ApJ, 236, 351
A., [Shectman]{} S. A., 1988, AJ, 95, 985
A., [Thompson]{} I. B., [Shectman]{} S. A., 1985, ApJ, 288, 481
M. J., [Jurek]{} R. J., [Blake]{} C., [Woods]{} D., [Pimbblet]{} K. A., [et al.]{} 2010, MNRAS, 401, 1429
M. J., [Parker]{} Q., [Proust]{} D., [Slezak]{} E., [Quintana]{} H., 2004, PASA, 21, 89
S. P., [Hill]{} D. T., [Kelvin]{} L. S., [Robotham]{} A. S. G., [Liske]{} J., [Norberg]{} P., [et al.]{} 2011, MNRAS, 413, 971
S., [Bardelli]{} S., [De Grandi]{} S., [Molendi]{} S., [Zamorani]{} G., [Zucca]{} E., 2000, MNRAS, 318, 239
S., [Fabian]{} A. C., A. W. A., 1997, MNRAS, 289, 787
A. C., 1991, MNRAS, 253, 19L
D., [Biviano]{} A., [Marleau]{} F. R., [Storrie-Lombardi]{} L. J., [Durret]{} F., 2008, ApJ, 672, L9
D., [Girardi]{} M., [Giuricin]{} G., [Mardirossian]{} F., [Mezzetti]{} M., 1996, ApJ, 473, 670
U., [Kerschhaggl]{} M., [Kowalski]{} M., [Aldering]{} G., [Antilogus]{} P., [Aragon]{} C., [et al.]{} 2013, A&A, 560, A90
A., [Henriksen]{} M. J., [Briel]{} U. G., [de Plaa]{} J., [Kaastra]{} J. S., 2004, ApJ, 611, 811
M., [Shimasaku]{} K., [Ichikawa]{} T., 1995, PASP, 107, 945
L., [Navarro]{} J. F., [Frenk]{} C. S., [Jenkins]{} A., [Springel]{} V., [White]{} S. D. M., 2012, MNRAS, 425, 2169
B., [Maccagni]{} D., [Andreon]{} S., 1999, A&A, 342, 408
S., [Venturi]{} T., [Brunetti]{} S., [Bardelli]{} S., [Dallacasa]{} D., [Ettori]{} S., [Finoguenov]{} A., [Rao]{} A. P., [Zucca]{} E., 2005, A&A, 440, 867
M., [Fadda]{} D., [Giuricin]{} G., [Mardirossian]{} F., [Mezzetti]{} M., [Biviano]{} A., 1996, ApJ, 457, 61
T., [Yamauchi]{} C., [Fujita]{} Y., [Okamura]{} S., [Sekiguchi]{} M., [Smail]{} I., [Brnardi]{} M., [Gomez]{} P. L., 2003, MNRAS, 346, 601
A., [Capaccioli]{} M., [Limatola]{} L., [Getman]{} F., 2012, Mem. SAIt, 19, 362
M. E., [Wolf]{} C., [Barden]{} M., [Peng]{} C. Y., [et al.]{} 2009, MNRAS, 393, 1275
J. E., [Gott]{} J. R. I., 1972, ApJ, 176, 1
C. P., [Busarello]{} G., [Merluzzi]{} P., [Smith]{} R. J., [Raychaudhury]{} S., [Mercurio]{} A., [Smith]{} G. P., 2011a, MNRAS, 412, 127
C. P., [Busarello]{} G., [Merluzzi]{} P., [Smith]{} R. J., [Raychaudhury]{} S., [Mercurio]{} A., [Smith]{} G. P., 2011b, MNRAS, 412, 145
C. P., [Gargiulo]{} A., [La Barbera]{} F., [Mercurio]{} A., [Merluzzi]{} P., [Busarello]{} G., 2007, MNRAS, 381, 7
C. P., [La Barbera]{} F., [Mercurio]{} A., [Merluzzi]{} P., [Busarello]{} G., 2006, ApJ, 647, 21L
C. P., [Merluzzi]{} P., [Busarello]{} G., [Dopita]{} M. A., [Smith]{} G. P., [La Barbera]{} F., [Gargiulo]{} A., [Raychaudhury]{} S., [Smith]{} R. J., 2011
C. P., [Merluzzi]{} P., [Mercurio]{} A., [Gargiulo]{} A., [Krusanova]{} N., [Busarello]{} G., [La Barbera]{} F., [Capaccioli]{} M., 2006, MNRAS, 371, 55
C. P., [Pereira]{} M. J., [Sanderson]{} A. J. R., [Smith]{} G. P., [Egami]{} E., [Babul]{} A., [Edge]{} A. C., [Finoguenov]{} A., [Moran]{} S. M., [Okabe]{} N., 2012, ApJ, 754, 97
C. P., [Pereira]{} M. J. J., [Smith]{} G. P. E. E., [Sanderson]{} A. J. R., [Babul]{} A., [Finoguenov]{} A., [Merluzzi]{} P., [Busarello]{} G., [Rawle]{} T. D., [Okabe]{} N., 2013, ApJ, 775, 126
C. P., [Smith]{} G. P., [Egami]{} E., [Ellis]{} R. S., [Moran]{} S. M., [Sanderson]{} A. J. R., [Merluzzi]{} P., [Busarello]{} G., [Smith]{} R. J., 2009, ApJ, 704, 126
C. P., [Smith]{} G. P., [Egami]{} E., [Okabe]{} N., [Takada]{} M., [Ellis]{} R. S., [Moran]{} S. M., [Umetsu]{} K., 2009, MNRAS, 396, 1297
H., [Tsuru]{} T., [Shimasaku]{} K., [Yamauchi]{} S., [Ikebe]{} Y., [Koyama]{} K., 1999, ApJ, 521, 90
B., [McIntosh]{} D. H., [Barden]{} M., [Bell]{} E. F., [Rix]{} H.-W., [Borch]{} A., [Beckwith]{} S. V. W., [Caldwell]{} J. A. R., [Heymans]{} C., [Jahnke]{} K., [Jogee]{} S., [Koposov]{} S. E., [Meisenheimer]{} K., [S[á]{}nchez]{} S. F., [Somerville]{} R. S., [Wisotzki]{} L., [Wolf]{} C., 2007, ApJS, 172, 615
B. W., [Mu[ñ]{}oz-Mateos]{} J.-C., [Comer[ó]{}n]{} S., [Meidt]{} S., [Sheth]{} K., [Laine]{} S., [et al.]{} 2014, ApJ, 781, 12
M. J., [Lewis]{} J., [Hodgkin]{} S., [Bunclark]{} P., [Evans]{} D., [McMahon]{} R., [Emerson]{} J. P., [Stewart]{} M., [Beard]{} S., 2004, in [Quinn]{} P. J., [Bridger]{} A., eds, Optimizing Scientific Return for Astronomy through Information Technologies Vol. 5493 of Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, [VISTA data flow system: pipeline processing for WFCAM and VISTA]{}. pp 411–422
T. H., [Masci]{} F., [Tsai]{} C. W., [Petty]{} S., [Cluver]{} M. E., [Assef]{} R. J., [et al.]{} 2013, AJ, 145, 6
M., [Sato]{} M., [Gill]{} J. A., [Fleenor]{} M. C., [Brick]{} A.-M., 2008, MNRAS, 390, 289
N., [Squires]{} G., 1993, ApJ, 404, 441
N., [Squires]{} G., [Broadhurst]{} T., 1995, ApJ, 449, 460
W., [Sluka]{} C., [Schindler]{} S., [Ferrari]{} C., [Ziegler]{} B., 2009, A&A, 499, 87
S. M., 1985, ApJS, 59, 115
D., [Pimbblet]{} K. A., [Owers]{} M. S., [Jones]{} D. H., [Stephenson]{} A. P., 2014, MNRAS, 439, 2755
D. D., [Mullis]{} C. R., [Ebeling]{} H., 2004, ApJ, 608, 721
A. V., [Vikhlinin]{} A., [Nagai]{} D., 2006, ApJ, 650, 128
T., [Kapferer]{} W., [Unterguggenberger]{} S., [Schindler]{} S., [Ziegler]{} B. L., 2008, A&A, 483, 783
A., [Böhringer]{} H., 1999, A&A, 341, 23
R. B., [Tinsley]{} B. M., [Caldwell]{} C. M., 1980, ApJ, 237, 692
E., [Papovich]{} C., [Dole]{} H., [Bell]{} E. F., [Lagache]{} G., [Rieke]{} G. H., [et al.]{} 2005, ApJ, 632, 169
I., [Balogh]{} M., [De Propris]{} R., [Couch]{} W., [Bower]{} R., [et al.]{} 2002, MNRAS, 334, 673
H., [Tempel]{} E., [Hein[ä]{}m[ä]{}ki]{} P., [Nurmi]{} P., [Einasto]{} M., [Saar]{} E., 2012, A&A, 545, A104
J. M., [Jonsson]{} P., [Cox]{} T. J., [Croton]{} D., [Primack]{} J. R., [Somerville]{} R. S., [Stewart]{} K., 2011, ApJ, 742, 103
J. M., [Jonsson]{} P., [Cox]{} T. J., [Primack]{} J. R., 2008, MNRAS, 391, 1137
J. M., [Primack]{} J., [Madau]{} P., 2004, AJ, 128, 163
L. M., [Gal]{} R. R., [Lemaux]{} B. C., [Kocevski]{} D. D., [Squires]{} G. K., 2009, AJ, 137, 4867
H. E., [Lares]{} M., [Yaryura]{} C. Y., [Paz]{} D., [Padilla]{} N., [Lambas]{} D. G., 2013, MNRAS, 432, 1367
S., [Haines]{} C. P., [Raychaudhury]{} S., 2011, MNRAS, 412, 1098
A., [Brighenti]{} F., [D’Ercole]{} A., 2003, MNRAS, 345, 1329
M., [Bournard]{} F., [Teyssier]{} R., [Dekel]{} A., 2009, ApJ, 707, 250
M., [Bournaud]{} F., 2008, MNRAS, 385, L38
J. C., [Mamon]{} G. A. P., 2007, A&A, 475, 169
S., [Schombert]{} J., 2014, arXiv:1407.1839
S. L., [Balogh]{} M. L., [Bower]{} R. G., [Font]{} A. S., [McCarthy]{} I. G., 2009, MNRAS, 400, 937
S., [Stanford]{} S. A., [Holden]{} B. P., [Raichoor]{} A., [Postman]{} M., [Nakata]{} F., [Finoguenov]{} A., [et al.]{} 2012, ApJ, 754, 141
S. E., [Schinnerer]{} E., [van de Ven]{} G., [Zaritsky]{} D., [Peletier]{} R., [et al.]{} 2014, ApJ, 788, 144
J., [Moles]{} M., 1987, RMxAA, 14, 72
A., [Merluzzi]{} P., [Haines]{} C. P., [Gargiulo]{} A., [Krusanova]{} N., [Busarello]{} G., [La Barbera]{} F., [Capaccioli]{} M., [Covone]{} G., 2006, MNRAS, 368, 109
P., [Busarello]{} G., [Dopita]{} M. A., [Haines]{} C. P., [Steinhauser]{} D., [Mercurio]{} A., [Rifatto]{} A., [Smith]{} R. J., [Shindler]{} S., 2013, MNRAS, 429, 174
P., [Mercurio]{} A., [Haines]{} C. P., [Smith]{} R. J., [Busarello]{} G., [Lucey]{} J. R., 2010, MNRAS, 402, 753
N., [Godwin]{} J. G., [Peach]{} J. V., 1994, MNRAS, 267, 431
N. A., 2005, AJ, 130, 2541
B., [Katz]{} N., [Lake]{} G., [Dressler]{} A., [Oemler]{} A., 1996, Nature, 379, 613
S. M., [Ellis]{} R. S., [Treu]{} T., [Smail]{} I., [DRessler]{} A., [Coil]{} A. L., [Smith]{} G. P., 2005, ApJ, 634, 977
S. M., [Miller]{} N., [Treu]{} T., [Ellis]{} R. S., [Smith]{} G. P., 2007, ApJ, 659, 1138
C., 2006, MNRAS, 373, 167
J. A., [Loeb]{} A., 2008, MNRAS, 391, 1341
J. C., [Gil de Paz]{} A., [Zamorano]{} J., [Boissier]{} S., [Dale]{} D. A., [P[é]{}rez-Gonz[á]{}lez]{} P. G., [Gallego]{} J., [Madore]{} B. F., [Bendo]{} G., [Boselli]{} A., [Buat]{} V., [Calzetti]{} D., [Moustakas]{} J., [Kennicutt]{} Jr. R. C., 2009, ApJ, 703, 1569
J. F., [Frenk]{} C. S., [White]{} S. D. M., 1996, ApJ, 462, 563
J. F., [Frenk]{} C. S., [White]{} S. D. M., 1997, ApJ, 490, 493
P. E. J., 1982, MNRAS, 192, 1007
N., [Bourdin]{} H., [Mazzotta]{} P., [Maurogordato]{} S., 2011, ApJ, 741, 116
N., [Futamase]{} T., [Kajisawa]{} M., [Kuroshima]{} R., 2014, ApJ, 784, 90
N., [Smith]{} G. P., [Umetsu]{} K., [Takada]{} M., [Futamase]{} T., 2013, ApJ, 769, L35
N., [Umetsu]{} K., 2008, PASJ, 60, 345
F. N., [Ledlow]{} M. J., [Keel]{} W. C., [Wang]{} Q. D., [Morrison]{} G. E., 2005, AJ, 129, 31
M. S., [Couch]{} W. J., [Nulsen]{} P. E. J., [Randall]{} S. W., 2012, ApJ, 750, L23
B., [Bharadwaj]{} S., 2006, MNRAS, 372, 827
D. W., [Batuski]{} D. J., 2013, MNRAS, 436, 796
K. A., [Smail]{} I., [Edge]{} A. C., [O’Hely]{} E., [Couch]{} W. J., [Zabludoff]{} A. I., 2006, MNRAS, 366, 645
P. A. R., [Aghanim]{} N., [Armitage-Caplan]{} C., [Arnaud]{} M., [Ashdown]{} M., [Atrio-Barandela]{} F., [Aumont]{} J., [Aussel]{} H., [Baccigalupi]{} C., et al. 2013, arXiv:1303.5089
M., [Valdarnini]{} R., 1991, MNRAS, 249, 46
P., [Biviano]{} A., [Rodighiero]{} G., [Baronchelli]{} I., [Salvato]{} M., [Saintonge]{} A., [et al.]{} 2012, A&A, 537, A58
S. C., [Raychaudhury]{} S., [Pimbblet]{} K. A., [Drinkwater]{} M. J., 2008, MNRAS, 388, 1152
L., [Bolzonella]{} M., [Zucca]{} E., [Zamorani]{} G., [Lilly]{} S., [et al.]{} 2010, A&A, 523, 13
D., [Quintana]{} H., [Carrasco]{} E. R., [Reisenegger]{} A., [Slezak]{} E., [Muriel]{} H., [Dünner]{} R., [Sodré]{} L. J., [Drinkwater]{} M. J., [Parker]{} Q., [Ragone]{} C. J., 2006, A&A, 447, 133
H., [Carrasco]{} E. R., [Reisenegger]{} A., 2000, AJ, 120, 511
H., [Melnick]{} J., [Proust]{} D., [Infante]{} L., 1997, A&ASS, 125, 247
H., [Ramirez]{} A., [Melnick]{} J., [Raychaudhury]{} S., [Slezak]{} E., 1995, AJ, 110, 463
M., [Arnaboldi]{} M., [Ripepi]{} V., [Massarotti]{} M., [McCracken]{} H. J., [et al.]{} 2004, A&A, 417, 51
C. J., [Muriel]{} H., [Proust]{} D., [Reisenegger]{} A., [Quintana]{} H., 2006, A&A, 445, 819
J., [Mulchaey]{} J. S., [Bai]{} L., [Ponman]{} T. J., [Raychaudhury]{} S., [Dariush]{} A., 2012, ApJ, 757, 122
S., 1989, Nature, 342, 251
S., [Fabian]{} A. C., [Edge]{} A. C., [Jones]{} C., [Forman]{} W., 1991, MNRAS, 248, 101
A., [Quintana]{} H., [Carrasco]{} E. R., [Maze]{} J., 2000, AJ, 120, 523
E., [Hensler]{} G., 2005, A&A, 433, 875
M., [Ghizzardi]{} S., [Molendi]{} S., [Finoguenov]{} A., 2005, A&A, 463, 839
S., [Rich]{} R. M., [Charlot]{} S., [Brinchmann]{} J., [Johnson]{} B. D., [Schiminovich]{} D., [et al.]{} 2007, ApJS, 173, 267
R., [Baiesi-Pillastrini]{} G., [Chincarini]{} G., [Vettolani]{} G., 1989, Nature, 338, 562
C., [Carollo]{} C. M., [Lilly]{} S., [Sargent]{} M. T., [Feldmann]{} R., [Kampczyk]{} P., [et al.]{} 2007, ApJS, 172, 406
P., [Capaccioli]{} M., [Arcidiacono]{} C., [Argomedo]{} J., [Dall’Ora]{} M., [D’Orsi]{} S., [Farinato]{} J., [Magrin]{} D., [Marty]{} L., [Ragazzoni]{} R., [Umbriaco]{} G., 2012, SPIE, 8444, 1
H., 1930, Harward Coll. Obs. Bull., 874, 9
R. K., [Diaferio]{} A., 2011, MNRAS, 412, 2938
R. J., [Lucey]{} J. R., [Hudson]{} M. J., [Allanson]{} S. P., [Bridges]{} T., [Hornschemeier]{} A. E., [Marzke]{} R. O., [Miller]{} N. A., 2009, MNRAS, 392, 1265
A., [Toomre]{} J., 1972, ApJ, 178, 623
P. G., 2005, ApJ, 130, 2747
S., [Weiner]{} B. J., [Rupke]{} D. S. N., [McDonald]{} M., [Birk]{} C., [Bland-Hawthorn]{} J., [Dressler]{} A., [Hare]{} T., [Osip]{} D., [Pietraszewski]{} C., [Vogel]{} S. N., 2010, AJ, 139, 145
T., [Bardelli]{} S., [Dallacasa]{} D., [Brunetti]{} S., [Giacintucci]{} S., [Humstead]{} R. W., [Morganti]{} R., 2003, A&A, 402, 913
T., [Bardelli]{} S., [Morganti]{} R., [Humstead]{} R. W. a., 2000, MNRAS, 314, 594
T., [Rossetti]{} M., [Bardelli]{} S., [Giacintucci]{} S., [Dallacasa]{} D., [Cornacchia]{} M., [Kantharia]{} N. G., 2013, A&A, 558, A146
S. M., [van den Bosch]{} F. C., [Yang]{} X., [Mo]{} H. J., 2006, MNRAS, 366, 2
A. R., [Tinker]{} J. L., [Conroy]{} C., 2012, MNRAS, 424, 232
D. J., [Oemler]{} A. J., [Mulchaey]{} J. S., [McGee]{} S. L., [Balogh]{} M. L., [Bower]{} R. G., 2009, ApJ, 692, 298
J., [Dekel]{} A., [Faber]{} S. M., [Noeske]{} K., [Koo]{} D. C., [Gerke]{} B. F., [Cooper]{} M. C., [Salim]{} S., [Dutton]{} A. A., [Newman]{} J., [Weiner]{} B. J., [Bundy]{} K., [Willmer]{} C. N. A., [Davis]{} M., [Yan]{} R., 2013, MNRAS, 428, 3306
E. L., [Eisenhardt]{} P. R. M., [Mainzer]{} A. K., [Ressler]{} M. E., [Cutri]{} R. M., [et al.,]{} 2010, AJ, 140, 1868
C. Y., [Baugh]{} C. M., [Angulo]{} R. E., 2011, MNRAS, 413, 1311
F., [Popesso]{} P., [Finoguenov]{} A., [Biviano]{} A., [Wuyts]{} S., [et al.]{} 2014, MNRAS, 437, 458
E., [Zamorani]{} G., [Scaramella]{} R., [Vettolani]{} G., 1993, ApJ, 407, 470
[^1]: [email protected]
[^2]: European funded project: [*ACCESS: A Compete CEnsus of Star formation in the Shapley supercluster*]{}, PI: P. Merluzzi; www.oacn.inaf.it/ACCESS
[^3]: The noise inside the aperture can be estimated from the flux and its uncertainty derived by SExtractor (see eq. 61 of SExtractor User Manual; www.astromatic.net/software/sextractor
[^4]: At the time of the AAOmega observations two of the VST fields had not yet been observed.
[^5]: This is the incidence rate where one measures and re-measures (independently) the redshift of a target galaxy. If these two values are different by $>$600kms$^{-1}$, it is a pair-wise blunder [@C01].
[^6]: Each point within a tile is covered by 2 of the 6 paw-prints.
[^7]: http://casu.ast.cam.ac.uk/surveys-projects/vista/vdfs
[^8]: http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/Missions/wise.html
[^9]: http://www.star.bris.ac.uk/ mbt/stilts
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We discuss Rayleigh-Ritz variational calculations with nonorthogonal basis sets that exhibit the correct asymptotic behaviour. We construct the suitable basis sets for general one-dimensional models and illustrate the application of the approach on two double-well oscillators proposed recently by other authors. The rate of convergence of the variational method proves to be considerably greater than the one exhibited by the recently developed orthogonal polynomial projection quantization.'
address: 'INIFTA (UNLP, CCT La Plata-CONICET), División Química Teórica, Blvd. 113 S/N, Sucursal 4, Casilla de Correo 16, 1900 La Plata, Argentina'
author:
- Javier Garcia and Francisco M Fernández
title: 'Rayleigh-Ritz variational method with suitable asymptotic behaviour'
---
Introduction {#sec:intro}
============
In a recent paper Handy and Vrinceanu[@HV13] proposed a method for the calculation of energy eigenvalues that is based on the projection of the bound-state wavefunction onto sets of orthogonal polynomials. The approach named orthogonal polynomial projection quantization (OPPQ) proved to be rapidly converging and more stable than the Hill determinant methods.
Among other models the authors considered the sextic $V_{S}(x)=x^{6}-4x^{2}$ and quartic $V_{Q}(x)=x^{4}-5x^{2}$ two-well oscillators. The bound states behave asymptotically as $\psi (x)\sim e^{-x^{4}/4}$ and $\psi (x)\sim
e^{-|x|^{3}/3}$ in the former and latter case, respectively. Handy and Vrinceanu[@HV13] chose the reference functions $R_{G}(x)=e^{-x^{2}/2}$ and $R_{TT}(x)=e^{-x^{4}/4}$ and showed that the latter is preferable for $V_{S}(x)$ while the former is more convenient for $V_{Q}(x)$. In fact, $R_{TT}(x)$ exhibits the correct asymptotic behaviour for the potential $V_{S}(x)$. At first sight it appears to be surprising that the authors did not try the reference function $R(x)=e^{-|x|^{3}/3}$, which is expected to be suitable for the quartic double well, since their approach permits the use of arbitrary nonanalytic positive reference functions[@HV13].
The purpose of this paper is to show that it is quite straightforward to apply the variational Rayleigh-Ritz method (RRM) with a basis set that exhibits the correct asymptotic behaviour of the eigenfunctions for the models discussed above. In addition to it, we deem it worthwhile to compare the well known, extremely reliable and widely used RRM with the recently developed OPPQ.
In section \[sec:basis\_set\] we develop the basis sets with suitable asymptotic behaviours for some general one-dimensional models. In section \[sec:results\] we calculate the eigenvalues for the oscillators $V_{S}(x)$ and $V_{Q}(x)$ with three basis sets having different asymptotic behaviours, including the correct one for each model. We also compare RRM and OPPQ results for two models and two basis sets. Finally, in section \[sec:conclusions\] we summarize the main conclusions of the paper.
Basis functions with suitable asymptotic behaviour {#sec:basis_set}
==================================================
In this section we show how to build a non-orthogonal basis set with the appropriate asymptotic behaviour at infinity. To this end we generalize a procedure proposed recently by Fernández[@F13] for a particular case. For simplicity we focus on the one-dimensional eigenvalue equation $$-\psi ^{\prime \prime }(x)+V(x)\psi (x)=E\psi (x), \label{eq:Schro}$$ and assume tat $$\lim\limits_{|x|\rightarrow \infty }x^{-2k}V(x)=a>0. \label{eq:lim_V}$$ Under such condition the eigenfunctions behaves asymptotically as $$\begin{aligned}
\psi (x) &\sim &e^{-|S_{k}(x)|} \nonumber \\
S_{k}(x) &=&\frac{\sqrt{a}}{k+1}x^{k+1}. \label{eq:Psi_asymp}\end{aligned}$$ We consider the following cases:
Case 1: Parity-invariant potential $V(-x)=V(x)$.
a\) $k$ even. The non-orthogonal basis set is of the form $$\begin{aligned}
f_{j}(x) &=&|x|^{j}e^{-|S_{k}(x)|},\,j=0,2,3,\ldots \mathrm{\ even\,states},
\nonumber \\
f_{j}(x) &=&x|x|^{j}e^{-|S_{k}(x)|},\,j=0,1,\ldots \mathrm{\ odd\,states},
\label{eq:basis_k_even}\end{aligned}$$
b\) $k$ odd. In this case we choose $$\begin{aligned}
f_{j}(x) &=&x^{2j+s}e^{-S_{k}(x)},\,j=0,1,\ldots \nonumber \\
s &=&\left\{
\begin{array}{c}
0\mathrm{\ }\mathrm{even\,states} \\
1\mathrm{\ }\mathrm{odd\,states}
\end{array}
\right. . \label{eq:basis_k_odd}\end{aligned}$$
Case 2: Asymmetric potential $V(-x)\neq V(x)$. The basis set is $$f_{j}(x)=x^{j}e^{-|S_{k}(x)|},\,j=0,1,\ldots
\label{eq:basis_V_assym}$$
For concreteness in what follows we consider two of the examples discussed by Handy and Vrinceanu[@HV13] $$V_{Q}(x)=x^{4}-5x^{2}, \label{eq:V_Q}$$ and $$V_{S}(x)=x^{6}-4x^{2}, \label{eq:V_S}$$ with asymptotic behaviours given by $S_{2}(x)=x^{3}/3$ and $S_{3}(x)=x^{4}/4$, respectively. However, they chose reference functions associated to $S_{3}(x)$ and $S_{1}(x)=x^{2}/2$ for the two models.
The RRM enables us to obtain the eigenvalues approximately from the roots of the secular determinant $$\left| \mathbf{H}-E\mathbf{S}\right| =0, \label{eq:sec_det}$$ where $\mathbf{H}$ and $\mathbf{S}$ are $N\times N$ square matrices with elements $$H_{ij}=\left\langle f_{i}\right| \hat{H}\left| f_{j}\right\rangle
,\,S_{ij}=\left\langle f_{i}\right| \left. f_{j}\right\rangle ,
\label{eq:mat_el}$$ and $\hat{H}=\hat{p}^{2}+V(x)$. Once we have the approximate eigenvalues we obtain the eigenvectors from the secular equation $$\left( \mathbf{H}-E\mathbf{S}\right) \mathbf{C=0,} \label{eq:sec_eq}$$ where $\mathbf{C}$ is an $N\times 1$ column matrix with the coefficients $c_{j}$ of the variational trial function.
The application of this approach to the Schrödinger equation with a parity-invariant potential is particularly simple because we can restrict the calculation of the matrix elements to the half line $x>0$[@F13]. Since all the matrix elements reduce to integrals of the form $$\left\langle f\right| \left. g\right\rangle =\int_{0}^{\infty }f(x)g(x)\,dx,
\label{eq:inner_prod}$$ then we do not have to take into account the absolute value of the coordinate explicitly when $k$ is even.
Results {#sec:results}
=======
We first verify the effect of the asymptotic behaviour of the basis sets (\[eq:basis\_k\_even\]) and (\[eq:basis\_k\_odd\]) on the rate of convergence of the RRM. A reasonable estimate of the rate of convergence is the logarithmic error $L_{N}=\log \left| E_{n}^{(app)}-E_{n}^{(RPM)}\right| $ where $E_{n}^{(app)}$ is the eigenvalue calculated by any of the methods described in this paper and $E_{n}^{(RPM)}$ is a very accurate result obtained by means of the RPM[@FMT89a; @FMT89b]. Figure \[fig:x4x2\] shows $L_{N}$ for the first four eigenvalues of (\[eq:V\_Q\]) calculated by means of the RRM with the functions $S_{1}(x)$, $S_{2}(x)$ and $S_{3}(x)$ in terms of the number of basis functions $N$. We see that the rate of convergence decreases according to $S_{2}(x)>S_{1}(x)>S_{3}(x)$; that is to say, the RRM converges more rapidly when choosing the correct asymptotic behaviour $S_{2}(x)$. On the other hand, figure \[fig:x6x2\] shows that the relative rate of convergence of the RRM for the potential (\[eq:V\_S\]) is $S_{3}(x)>S_{2}(x)>S_{1}(x)$. Once again the greater rate of convergence is given by the correct asymptotic behaviour $S_{3}(x)$. Besides, the second inequality appears to be reasonable because $S_{2}(x)$ is closer to the correct asymptotic behaviour than $S_{1}(x)$.
We think that it is also worthwhile to compare the rate of convergence of the simple, well known and reliable RRM and the rather more elaborate OPPQ using the same basis set in both approaches. Handy and Vrinceanu[@HV13] chose the reference function $R_{G}(x)=e^{-x^{2}/2}$ for the PT-symmetric potential $$V(x)=ix^{3} \label{eq:ix^3}$$ and we therefore choose the function $S_{1}(x)$ for the RRM. More precisely, instead of the non-orthogonal basis set (\[eq:basis\_k\_odd\]) we resorted to the eigenfunctions of the harmonic oscillator that are truly consistent with the orthogonal Hermite polynomials used by those authors. Figure \[fig:ix3\] shows $L_{N}$ for the first four eigenvalues calculated by both methods. It clearly shows that the RRM rate of convergence is noticeably greater that the OPPQ one.
The better performance of the RRM is not restricted to the PT-symmetric cubic oscillator; this approach converges more rapidly for the two other models discussed above. For example, figure \[fig:x4x2\_b\] compares the logarithmic errors of both approaches for the eigenvalues of the double-well oscillator (\[eq:V\_S\]). In this case we have chosen the basis set with the correct asymptotic behaviour $S_{3}(x)$ for the RRM and the OPPQ results for $R_{TT}(x)=e^{-x^{4}/4}$[@HV13]. The difference between the convergence rates of both approaches is even more dramatic for this oscillator. However, it makes more sense for small $N$ because the number of significant digits of the OPPQ results reported by the authors is rather small for a fair comparison at large $N$.
Finally, we deem it worthwhile to show the RPM eigenvalues chosen as a reference for the calculation of the logarithmic errors. We have $$\begin{aligned}
E_{0} &=&-3.41014276123982947529770965352190919871233904756 \nonumber \\
&&4881868937911775329611301715294 \nonumber \\
E_{1} &=&-3.250675362289235980228513775547736877154601147639 \nonumber \\
&&4241429953014335680690809034749688022953825298 \nonumber \\
E_{2} &=&0.6389195637838381244910101033325042648524013290581 \nonumber \\
&&37207433367771840730088316019330941500824 \nonumber \\
E_{3} &=&2.5812162706174514809779380656962090234197947974759 \nonumber \\
&&598949291704975284539346710703866627200928172\end{aligned}$$ for (\[eq:V\_Q\]) $$\begin{aligned}
E_{0} &=&-0.5232686221275522394161694971907840611656342225187 \nonumber \\
&&11069953854385633821213450649003542309 \nonumber \\
E_{1} &=&1.00576834022554481670604083074777604686886504417542 \nonumber \\
&&730471341100873617568288708176003637 \nonumber \\
E_{2} &=&5.37497000884004499406051476941823532582175431150133 \nonumber \\
&&8177585996687355671683247232390293 \nonumber \\
E_{3} &=&10.5725850445859121139060615553140114648422138800575 \nonumber \\
&&29217715660995992776130576146017312\end{aligned}$$ for (\[eq:V\_S\]) and $$\begin{aligned}
E_{0} &=&1.156267071988113293799219177999951 \nonumber \\
E_{1} &=&4.1092287528096515358436684785613 \nonumber \\
E_{2} &=&7.5622738549788280413518091106314827208 \nonumber \\
E_{3} &=&11.314421820195804402233783948426989\end{aligned}$$ for (\[eq:ix\^3\]). These quite accurate results may be used as benchmarks for other approaches.
Conclusions {#sec:conclusions}
===========
We have shown that it is not difficult to introduce the correct asymptotic behaviour of the wavefunction into the RRM variational trial function, specially if the potential is parity invariant. Present results clearly show that the correct asymptotic behaviour increases the rate of convergence of the approach dramatically. In principle, the same strategy can be implemented through the appropriate OPPQ reference function but it has not yet been tried for the case of $k$ even[@HV13].
We have also shown that the rate of convergence of the RRM is considerably greater than that for the OPPQ. In addition to it the former approach is simpler and more straightforward. The integrals that appear in both approaches are basically the same and can in principle be calculated by the same algorithms. Here we just compared the results for two oscillators and two basis sets with different asymptotic behaviours but the trend is exactly the same for the other possible combinations of model and basis set.
We do not know the reason why the RRM rate of convergence is so much greater than the OPPQ one. What we already know is that in the case of the Hermitian Hamiltonians the former approach exhibits the additional advantage that its approximate eigenvalues tend to the exact ones from above. On the other hand, the OPPQ eigenvalues do not appear to exhibit any bounding property.
[9]{} Handy C N and Vrinceanu D 2013 *J. Phys. A* **46** 135202.
Fernández 2013 *Cent. Eur. J. Phys.* (in the press), arXiv:1204.0229 \[math-ph\].
Fernández F M, Ma Q, and Tipping R H 1989 *Phys. Rev. A* **39** 1605.
Fernández F M, Ma Q, and Tipping R H 1989 *Phys. Rev. A* **40** 6149.
![Logarithmic errors for the first four eigenvalues of the double well $V_Q(x)$ calculated by means of the basis sets with $S_1(x)$ (squares, red) $S_2(x)$ (filled squares, green) and $S_3(x)$ (circles, blue)[]{data-label="fig:x4x2"}](X4X2E0.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"} ![Logarithmic errors for the first four eigenvalues of the double well $V_Q(x)$ calculated by means of the basis sets with $S_1(x)$ (squares, red) $S_2(x)$ (filled squares, green) and $S_3(x)$ (circles, blue)[]{data-label="fig:x4x2"}](X4X2E1.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"} ![Logarithmic errors for the first four eigenvalues of the double well $V_Q(x)$ calculated by means of the basis sets with $S_1(x)$ (squares, red) $S_2(x)$ (filled squares, green) and $S_3(x)$ (circles, blue)[]{data-label="fig:x4x2"}](X4X2E2.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"} ![Logarithmic errors for the first four eigenvalues of the double well $V_Q(x)$ calculated by means of the basis sets with $S_1(x)$ (squares, red) $S_2(x)$ (filled squares, green) and $S_3(x)$ (circles, blue)[]{data-label="fig:x4x2"}](X4X2E3.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"}
![Logarithmic errors for the first four eigenvalues of the double well $V_S(x)$ calculated by means of the basis sets with $S_1(x)$ (squares, red) $S_2(x)$ (filled squares, green) and $S_3(x)$ (circles, blue)[]{data-label="fig:x6x2"}](X6X2E0.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"} ![Logarithmic errors for the first four eigenvalues of the double well $V_S(x)$ calculated by means of the basis sets with $S_1(x)$ (squares, red) $S_2(x)$ (filled squares, green) and $S_3(x)$ (circles, blue)[]{data-label="fig:x6x2"}](X6X2E1.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"} ![Logarithmic errors for the first four eigenvalues of the double well $V_S(x)$ calculated by means of the basis sets with $S_1(x)$ (squares, red) $S_2(x)$ (filled squares, green) and $S_3(x)$ (circles, blue)[]{data-label="fig:x6x2"}](X6X2E2.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"} ![Logarithmic errors for the first four eigenvalues of the double well $V_S(x)$ calculated by means of the basis sets with $S_1(x)$ (squares, red) $S_2(x)$ (filled squares, green) and $S_3(x)$ (circles, blue)[]{data-label="fig:x6x2"}](X6X2E3.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"}
![Logarithmic errors for the first four eigenvalues of the PT-symmetric potential (\[eq:ix\^3\]) calculated by means of the RRM (squares, red) and the OPPQ method (circles, blue) []{data-label="fig:ix3"}](IX3E0.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"} ![Logarithmic errors for the first four eigenvalues of the PT-symmetric potential (\[eq:ix\^3\]) calculated by means of the RRM (squares, red) and the OPPQ method (circles, blue) []{data-label="fig:ix3"}](IX3E1.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"} ![Logarithmic errors for the first four eigenvalues of the PT-symmetric potential (\[eq:ix\^3\]) calculated by means of the RRM (squares, red) and the OPPQ method (circles, blue) []{data-label="fig:ix3"}](IX3E2.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"} ![Logarithmic errors for the first four eigenvalues of the PT-symmetric potential (\[eq:ix\^3\]) calculated by means of the RRM (squares, red) and the OPPQ method (circles, blue) []{data-label="fig:ix3"}](IX3E3.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"}
![Logarithmic errors for the first four eigenvalues of the double well $V_S(x)$ calculated by means of the RRM (squares, red) and the OPPQ method (circles, blue)[]{data-label="fig:x4x2_b"}](X4X2.eps){width="12cm"}
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- Hans Feldmeier
- Thomas Neff
bibliography:
- 'all.bib'
title: 'Clusters, Halos, And S-Factors In Fermionic Molecular Dynamics [^1] '
---
Fermionic Molecular Dynamics (FMD)
==================================
In the FMD approach we employ Gaussian wave packets $$\label{eq:wavepacket}
{\big\langle {{\mathbf{x}}} \big| {q} \big\rangle} = \exp\left\{-\frac{({\mathbf{x}}-{\mathbf{b}})^2}{2 a}\right\}
\otimes {\big| \,{\chi^\uparrow, \chi^\downarrow}\, \big> } \otimes {\big| \,{\xi}\, \big> }$$ as single-particle basis states. The complex parameters ${\mathbf{b}}$ encode the mean positions and momenta of the wave packets and $a$ the widths of the wave packets. The spins can assume any direction, isospin is $\pm 1$ denoting a proton or a neutron. Intrinsic many-body basis states are Slater determinants $$\label{eq:sldet}
{\big| \,{Q}\, \big> } = \mathcal{A} \left\{\ {\big| \,{q_1}\, \big> } \otimes \ldots \otimes {\big| \,{q_A}\, \big> }\ \right\} \:$$ that reflect deformation or clustering and break the symmetries of the Hamiltonian with respect to parity, rotation and translation. To restore the symmetries the intrinsic basis states are projected on parity, angular momentum and total linear momentum $${\big| \,{Q; J^\pi MK; {\mathbf{P}}=0}\, \big> } = {\hat{P}}^\pi {\hat{P}}^J_{MK} {\hat{P}}^{{\mathbf{P}}=0} \; {\big| \,{Q}\, \big> } .$$ In a full FMD calculation the many-body Hilbert space is spanned by a set of $N$ projected intrinsic basis states $\left\{\ {\big| \,{Q^{(a)}; J^\pi MK; {\mathbf{P}}=0}\, \big> } , a=1,\ldots,N \ \right\}$. By diagonalizing the Hamiltonian in this set of non-orthogonal basis states the amplitudes of the various configurations contained in the many-body eigenstate are determined.
Starting from the realistic Argonne V18 interaction [@wiringa95] we derive a phase-shift-equivalent effective low-momentum interaction using the unitary correlation operator method (UCOM). The basic idea of the UCOM approach is to explicitly include short-range central and tensor correlations by means of a unitary operator [@ucom98; @ucom03; @ucom10]. No-core shell model calculations show that the two-body UCOM interaction gives a good description of $s$- and light $p$-shell nuclei [@ucom10], indicating that the neglected induced 3-body forces cancel to a certain extent the missing genuine 3-body forces.
Cluster States in $^{12}$C
==========================
The structure of the second $0^+_2$ state in $^{12}$C, the Hoyle state, is enjoying renewed and still growing interest in nuclear structure research [@freer12; @zimmermann13; @epelbaum11; @epelbaum12; @neff12]. In [@Hoyle07] we investigated its structure with a model space spanned by angular momentum projected FMD configurations obtained by variation plus a full set of projected three-$\alpha$ triangular configurations. We found that the Hoyle state is very dilute and extended, consisting mainly of well distinguished $\alpha$-clusters. This is illustrated in the top part of Fig. \[fig:intrinsic\] where we show the density distribution of those intrinsic FMD basis states that have the largest overlap with the ground state and the Hoyle state.
------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------
{width="15.00000%"} {width="15.00000%"} {width="15.00000%"} {width="15.00000%"} {width="15.00000%"}
\[-7mm\]
\[3mm\] {width="15.00000%"} {width="15.00000%"} {width="15.00000%"} {width="15.00000%"} {width="15.00000%"}
\[-7mm\]
\[3mm\]
------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------
![Top: full lines denote two-body densities as function of distance r between particle pairs of $^{12}$C ground state rotational band members $0^+_1$(blue) and $2^+_1$ state (red); dashed lines show result when the distribution of pairs where both particles are inside the same $\alpha$-cluster are subtracted [@neff12]. This indicates distance distributions of pairs, where the two particles are in different $\alpha$-clusters. Bottom: same as top, but for the Hoyle state “rotational band” members $0^+_2$(blue) and $2^+_2$ state (red). See also Fig. \[fig:intrinsic\]. \[fig:two-body\] ](C12-tbdens-gs-band.eps "fig:"){width="35.00000%"}\
![Top: full lines denote two-body densities as function of distance r between particle pairs of $^{12}$C ground state rotational band members $0^+_1$(blue) and $2^+_1$ state (red); dashed lines show result when the distribution of pairs where both particles are inside the same $\alpha$-cluster are subtracted [@neff12]. This indicates distance distributions of pairs, where the two particles are in different $\alpha$-clusters. Bottom: same as top, but for the Hoyle state “rotational band” members $0^+_2$(blue) and $2^+_2$ state (red). See also Fig. \[fig:intrinsic\]. \[fig:two-body\] ](C12-tbdens-hoyle-band.eps "fig:"){width="35.00000%"}
While the leading intrinsic configuration of the ground state is very compact, and after projection on good angular momentum, essentially a shell model state filling the $p_{3/2}$-shell, the Hoyle state is a quantal superposition of three $\alpha$-clusters arranged in a slightly opened triangle configuration, or one may regard it also as a $^8$Be surrounded by an $\alpha$-cluster, see upper part of Fig. \[fig:intrinsic\].
The first $2^+$ state has the same leading intrinsic configuration as the ground state and may thus be regarded as the $J^\pi=2^+$ member of a rotational band based on the ground state. The analogue argument does not hold for the second $2^+$ state, it does not quite look like the $2^+$ member of a rotational band with the same intrinsic structure as the Hoyle state (lower part of Fig. \[fig:intrinsic\]). There is still the $^8$Be correlation but the third $\alpha$-cluster is pushed further away by centrifugal forces and feels attraction to only one of the $^8$Be $\alpha$-clusters, thus forming obtuse triangles.
Although intrinsic FMD basis states provide an intuitive understanding of the structure of the many-body state, they are not observable. Therefore we proposed in Ref. [@neff12] to look at the two-body density $$\rho^{(2)}({\mathbf{r}})={\big< \,{\Psi}\, \big| \,{\sum_{i<j}\delta({\hat{{\mathbf{r}}}}_i-{\hat{{\mathbf{r}}}}_j-{\mathbf{r}})}\,
\big| \,{\Psi}\, \big> }\ ,$$ which gives the probability to find a pair of nucleons at a distance ${\mathbf{r}}$. This correlation function can be calculated in any representation and can thus be used to compare different many-body approaches.
Fig. \[fig:two-body\] shows that in the $2^+_1$ state the distances between nucleons are slightly larger than in the ground state but otherwise very similar. The lower part of Fig. \[fig:two-body\] reveals much larger particle distances for the $0^+_2$ (Hoyle) and the $2^+_2$ state. In the Hoyle state a shoulder appears around $5$ fm indicating the pairs where one particle is in one $\alpha$-cluster and the other one in the neighbouring $\alpha$-cluster, compare Fig. \[fig:intrinsic\] ($5$ fm is the typical distance between the centers of the clusters). The maximum around $2$ fm originates from pairs within the same cluster. The picture becomes even more transparent when we subtract three times the pair distributions of a single $\alpha$-cluster (dashed lines). The distribution of the dilute Hoyle-like $2^+_2$ state shows a broad shoulder between 5 and 10 fm coming from pairs with one nucleon in the distant $\alpha$-cluster and one in the $^8$Be-like structure, see lower part of Fig. \[fig:intrinsic\].
Both, the recently measured energy of the $2^+_2$ resonance and its $B(E2)$-value of the transition to the ground state [@zimmermann13] compare well with our predictions, see Table \[table:12C\].
We used these many-body wave functions also to calculate the transition form factor from the ground state to the Hoyle state and compared it directly to electron scattering data [@Hoyle07; @Hoyle10]. Our results are similar to those of [@kamimura81; @funaki03] where a many-body state representing a gas of independent $\alpha$-clusters is assumed. The good agreement between calculated and measured form factors is a strong confirmation for a spatially extended cluster structure of the Hoyle state. The overall agreement with many other measured data indicates that the FMD description gives a good insight into the structure of $^{12}$C.
[lrr]{}\
Energies \[MeV\] & Exp & FMD \
\
$E(0_1^+)$ & -92.16 & -92.64\
$E^*(2_1^+)$ & 4.44 & 5.31\
$E(3\alpha)$ & -84.89 & -83.59\
$E(0_2^+)-E(3\alpha)$ & 0.38 & 0.43\
$E(2_2^+)-E(3\alpha)$ &2.76(11) & 2.77\
\
Radii \[fm\] & Exp & FMD \
\
$r_\mathrm{charge}(0_1^+)$ & 2.47(2) & 2.53\
$r(0_1^+)$ & & 2.39\
$r(2_1^+)$ & & 2.50\
$r(0_2^+)$ Hoyle state & & [**3.38**]{}\
$r(2_2^+)$ Hoyle like & & [**4.43**]{}\
\
Transitions \[fm$^2$\] or \[e$^2$fm$^4$\] & Exp & FMD \
\
$M(E0, 0_1^+\!\rightarrow 0_2^+$) & 5.4(2) & 6.53\
$B(E2, 2_1^+\!\rightarrow 0_1^+$) & 7.6(4) & 8.69\
$B(E2, 2_1^+\!\rightarrow 0_2^+$) & 2.6(4) & 3.83\
$B(E2, 2_2^+\!\rightarrow 0_1^+$) & 0.73(13) & 0.46\
Ab initio nuclear lattice calculations [@epelbaum11; @epelbaum12] seem to support this structure but due to the large lattice constant the angles and sites of the three-$\alpha$ triangles can assume only discrete values in the sampled configurations. For example the typical distance between the $\alpha$-clusters in the Hoyle state is 2 to 3 lattice spacings. It will be very interesting to see if future more refined calculations on the nuclear lattice will confirm further the FMD results on the numerous aspects of the $^{12}$C structure.
Neon isotopes and two-proton halo
=================================
![Top: charge radii of Ne isotopes measured by COLLAPS und calculated with FMD [@geithner08] Bottom: point mass radii, data from [@ozawa01] []{data-label="fig:neon-radii"}](Neon-charge-radii.eps "fig:"){width="35.00000%"}\
![Top: charge radii of Ne isotopes measured by COLLAPS und calculated with FMD [@geithner08] Bottom: point mass radii, data from [@ozawa01] []{data-label="fig:neon-radii"}](Neon-matter-radii-hfmd+cluster.eps "fig:"){width="34.50000%"}
![Top: proton and neutron density of leading intrinsic FMD state contributing to ground state of $^{17}$Ne, bottom: charge distribution calculated with FMD eigenstate showing a two-proton halo [@geithner08]. \[fig:neon-halo\] ](Ne17-d2-hals-neg.mfmd.denspn.eps "fig:"){width="40.00000%"} ![Top: proton and neutron density of leading intrinsic FMD state contributing to ground state of $^{17}$Ne, bottom: charge distribution calculated with FMD eigenstate showing a two-proton halo [@geithner08]. \[fig:neon-halo\] ](Ne17-densities-log.eps "fig:"){width="40.00000%"}
The charge radii of the neon isotopes, which have been measured in Ref. [@geithner08], do not show the usual monotonic increase with mass number, while the matter radii seem to increase monotonically from $^{18}$Ne on, see Fig. \[fig:neon-radii\]. The FMD model explains this by substantial changes in the ground-state structure. It attributes the large charge radius of $^{17}$Ne to an extended two-proton halo, as seen in Fig. \[fig:neon-halo\], with an $s^2$ component of about 40%. The leading intrinsic state (upper part of Fig. \[fig:neon-halo\]) has a far out reaching part consisting of two correlated protons, while the neutron distribution is almost spherical and only weakly polarized by the outer protons. This is in accord with the simplest picture that $^{17}$Ne consists of an $^{15}$O core plus two protons in either $s^2$ or $d^2$ configurations. Interaction cross sections [@ozawa94] and longitudinal momentum distributions [@kanungo05] support the halo picture. In $^{18}$Ne the situation is similar but in the same simple picture the core is now the doubly magic $^{16}$O, which leads to a significantly smaller $s^2$ component and hence a smaller charge radius.
The subsequent increase in charge radius for $^{19}$Ne is of different origin. The fact that the experimental $1/2^+$ and $1/2^-$ states are almost degenerate and the cluster thresholds are pretty low, hints already at possible admixtures of states with cluster structures. Therefore it is not surprising that $^{16}$O - $^3$He and $^{15}$O - $^4$He cluster configurations admix in the tail of the wave function.
This admixture of cluster configurations is still very strong in $^{20}$Ne but becomes smaller for heavier Ne isotopes explaining the dropping charge radii.
![$S$-factor for capture reaction - top: $^3$He($\alpha$,$\gamma$)$^7$Be, recent data [@narasingh04; @bemmerer06; @confortola07; @brown07; @dileva09] colored symbols, older data gray symbols - bottom: $^3$H($\alpha$,$\gamma$)$^7$Li, recent data [@brune94] colored, older data gray symbols.[]{data-label="fig:sfactor"}](sfactor-he3-alpha-gamma-be7.eps "fig:"){width="35.00000%"}\
![$S$-factor for capture reaction - top: $^3$He($\alpha$,$\gamma$)$^7$Be, recent data [@narasingh04; @bemmerer06; @confortola07; @brown07; @dileva09] colored symbols, older data gray symbols - bottom: $^3$H($\alpha$,$\gamma$)$^7$Li, recent data [@brune94] colored, older data gray symbols.[]{data-label="fig:sfactor"}](sfactor-h3-alpha-gamma-li7.eps "fig:"){width="36.00000%"}
Radiative capture reaction $\mathbf{^3\mathrm{He}(\alpha,\gamma)^7\mathrm{Be}}$
================================================================================
Another application of the FMD approach is the calculation of the $^3$He($\alpha$,$\gamma$)$^7$Be radiative capture reaction [@neff11]. As this reaction plays an important role in the solar proton-proton chains and determines the production of $^7$Be and $^8$B neutrinos [@adelberger98; @adelberger11], it has been studied extensively from the experimental side in recent years [@narasingh04; @bemmerer06; @confortola07; @brown07; @dileva09]. However, it is still not possible to reach the low energies relevant for solar burning in experiment. From the theory side this reaction has been investigated using simple potential models, where $^3$He and $^4$He are treated as point-like particles interacting via an effective nucleus-nucleus potential, e.g., [@kim81] or microscopic cluster models, e.g., [@langanke86; @kajino86] where the $^7$Be bound and scattering states are constructed from microscopic $^3$He and $^4$He clusters interacting via an effective nucleon-nucleon interaction. *Ab-initio* calculations using variational Monte Carlo [@nollett01] and no-core shell model wave functions [@navratil07] were used to calculate asymptotic normalization coefficients for the bound states but relied on potential models for the scattering phase shifts.
In the FMD calculation we divided the many-body Hilbert space into an external region, where the scattering states are antisymmetrized products of $^3$He and $^4$He clusters in their FMD ground states at various distances, and an interaction region, where FMD configurations were obtained by variation after projection on spin-parity $1/2^+$, $3/2^+$, $5/2^+$ and $3/2^-$, $1/2^-$, $7/2^-$, $5/2^-$. A constraint on the radius of the intrinsic states was used to vary the distance between the clusters. Using the microscopic $R$-matrix method [@descouvemont10] boundary conditions for bound and scattering states were implemented by matching to Whittaker and Coulomb functions at the channel radius ($a$ = 12 fm).
The capture cross section was calculated from electromagnetic transition rates between the microscopic many-body scattering and bound states. The result for the total cross section for the $^3$He($\alpha$,$\gamma$)$^7$Be capture is shown in form of the astrophysical $S$-factor in the upper part of Fig. \[fig:sfactor\]. It agrees very well with the recent experimental data, both in absolute normalization and in the energy dependence. The results for the isospin mirror reaction $^3$H($\alpha$,$\gamma$)$^7$Li is shown in the lower part of Fig. \[fig:sfactor\]. Whereas the energy dependence of the calculated $S$-factor agrees well with the data, the absolute cross section is larger then the data by Brune *et al.* by about 15%. This is surprising as the FMD results for the $^7$Li bound states and the scattering phase shifts are of similar quality as those for $^7$Be.
[^1]: Supported by the ExtreMe Matter Institute EMMI
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: '[ In this paper, the first of a series, we study the stellar dynamical and evolutionary processes leading to the formation of compact binaries containing white dwarfs in dense globular clusters. We examine the processes leading to the creation of X-ray binaries such as cataclysmic variables and AM CVn systems. Using numerical simulations, we identify the dominant formation channels and we predict the expected numbers and characteristics of detectable systems, emphasizing how the cluster sources differ from the field population. We explore the dependence of formation rates on cluster properties and we explain in particular why the distribution of cataclysmic variables has only a weak dependence on cluster density. We also discuss the frequency of dwarf nova outbursts in globular clusters and their connection with moderately strong white dwarf magnetic fields. We examine the rate of Type Ia supernovae via both single and double degenerate channels in clusters and we argue that those rates may contribute to the total SN Ia rate in elliptical galaxies. Considering coalescing white dwarf binaries we discuss possible constraints on the common envelope evolution of their progenitors and we derive theoretical expectations for gravitational wave detection by LISA. ]{}'
author:
- |
N. Ivanova $^1$[^1], C. O. Heinke$^2$[^2], F. A. Rasio$^2$, R. E. Taam$^2$, K. Belczynski$^{3}$[^3], & J. Fregeau$^{2}$\
$^1$Canadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics, University of Toronto, 60 St. George, Toronto, ON M5S 3H8, Canada\
$^2$Northwestern University, Dept of Physics & Astronomy, 2145 Sheridan Rd, Evanston, IL 60208, USA\
$^3$New Mexico State University, Department of Astronomy, 1320 Frenger Mall, Las Cruces, New Mexico 88003-8001, USA
title: 'Formation and evolution of compact binaries in globular clusters: I. Binaries with white dwarfs.'
---
\[firstpage\]
binaries: close – binaries: general – globular clusters: general – – stellar dynamics.
Introduction
============
From the earliest observations of X-ray binaries in globular clusters (GCs) it has been noted that they must be very efficient sites for the production of compact binary systems [@Clark75]. The key to the overabundance of compact binaries in clusters, as compared to the field, is close stellar encounters. The processes that influence the binary population in dense stellar environments include the destruction of wide binaries (“ionization”), hardening of close binaries, physical collisions, and exchange interactions, through which low-mass companions tend to be replaced by more massive participants in the encounter. As a result of these processes, in the dense cores of globular clusters, binaries are strongly depleted and their period distribution is very different from that of a field population [@Ivanova05]. This effect is stronger for binaries including a compact object, like cataclysmic variables (CVs).
The issue of the dynamical formation of CVs has been extensively discussed. Considering the CV formation via tidal captures, [@Bailyn90_tc] showed that dynamical formation of CVs is not expected because more massive donors lead to unstable mass transfer. On the other hand, [@DiStefano94] predicted the existence of many CVs formed via tidal captures, as many as an order of magnitude more than would be predicted by standard binary evolution, making CVs a probe of the dynamical processes in the cluster. Detection of CVs in globular clusters proved difficult [e.g. @Shara96], but a population was detected using the [*Hubble Space Telescope*]{} [@Cool95], along with a population of “nonflickerers” [@Cool98] which are understood to be young helium white dwarfs with C/O white dwarf companions [@Hansen03].
In the past few years, substantial progress has been made in optical identification of [*Hubble Space Telescope*]{} counterparts to [*Chandra*]{} X-ray sources in several GCs. Valuable information was obtained for populations of CVs, chromospherically active binaries and quiescent low-mass X-ray binaries (qLMXBs) [@Grindlay01a; @Pooley02a; @Edmonds03a; @Bassa04; @Heinke03a]. For the first time we can compare populations of such binaries in globular clusters (GCs) and in the Galactic field, and infer their rates of formation and population characteristics. In particular, 22 CVs have now been identified in 47 Tuc, allowing identification of several differences between typical CVs in globular clusters and CVs in the Galactic field. These differences include relatively high X-ray luminosities compared to field systems [@Verbunt97]; a lack of novae, and of the steady, bright blue accretion discs signifying novalike CVs, in GCs [@Shara95]; relatively low frequencies of dwarf nova outbursts (DNOs), the typical identifiers of CVs in the Galactic disc [@Shara96]; and a higher ratio of X-ray to optical flux than in most field CVs [@Edmonds03b]. These differences produce puzzles: the lack of novae, novalikes, and DNO suggests very low mass transfer rates, while the high X-ray luminosities indicate moderate mass transfer rates. The X-ray to optical flux ratio suggests the CVs are DNe, but the lack of DNO argues against this. It was suggested that CV discs in GCs are more stable due to a combination of low mass transfer rates and moderately strong white dwarf magnetic moments [@Dobrotka05]. This hints that the evolutionary paths of CVs in GCs and in the field are different. Comparisons of the numbers of CVs in clusters of different central densities also supports the idea that CVs are produced through dynamical interactions [@Pooley03], though there is an indication that CV production may depend more weakly on density than the production of low-mass X-ray binaries containing neutron stars [@Heinke03a].
This is the first of two papers where we summarize results of our studies on compact binary formation in GCs, some preliminary results of which were reported in @Ivanova04a [@Ivanova04b; @Ivanova04c]. In this paper we focus on the formation of compact binaries with a white dwarf, and in the second paper (Paper II) we will describe dynamical formation and evolution of binaries with a NS companion. We explore a large spectrum of globular cluster models, where for the first time we take into account (i) the mechanism of binary formation through physical collisions using results from smoothed-particle hydrodynamics (SPH) and (ii) the effect of metallicity on the formation and subsequent evolution of close binaries. In Section 2 we provide a complete review of the physical processes of formation and destruction of mass-transferring WD binaries. In Section 3 we outline the methods and assumptions. The major formation channels, and population characteristics for CVs and AM CVn systems (double WD systems where one WD experiences Roche lobe overflow) in different clusters are presented and discussed in Section 4. We conclude in the last section by addressing the connection between our results and the observations.
Mass-transferring WD-binaries in a dense cluster
================================================
There are several ways to destroy a primordial binary in a globular cluster. For instance, in a dense region a soft binary will very likely be “ionized” (destroyed) as a result of a dynamical encounter. A hard binary, in contrast, can be destroyed through a physical collision during the encounter. The probability of such an outcome increases strongly as the binary becomes harder [@Fregeau04]. In addition to dynamical processes, a primordial binary can be destroyed through an evolutionary merger or following a SN explosion. Overall, even if a cluster initially had 100% of its stars in binaries initially, the binary fraction at an age of 10-14 Gyr will typically be as low as $10\%$ [@Ivanova05].
To understand the evolution of a primordial binary in a dense environment and the probability of a binary becoming a CV, two steps are required: (i) compare the evolutionary time-scales with the time-scale of dynamical encounters; (ii) analyze what is the consequence of an encounter (this depends strongly on the hardness of the binary).
The time-scale for a binary to undergo a strong encounter with another single star (the collision time) can be estimated as $\tau_{\rm coll}=(n\Sigma v_\infty)^{-1}$. Here $\Sigma$ is the cross section for an encounter between two objects, of masses $m_i$ and $m_J$, with relative velocity at infinity $v_\infty$ and is given as $$\Sigma = \pi d_{max}^2 (1+v_{p}^2 / v_{\infty}^2)\ ,$$ where $d_{max}$ is the maximum distance of closest approach that defines a significant encounter and $v_{p}^2 = 2G (m_i + m_j)/d_{max}$ is the velocity at pericenter. Assuming that a strong encounter occurs when the distance of closest approach is a few times the binary separation $a$, $d_{max}\le k a$ with $k\simeq 2$, we obtain
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{tcoll_pd}
\tau_{\rm coll} = 3.4 \times 10^{13} \ {\rm yr} \ \ k^{-2} P_{\rm d}^{-4/3} M_{\rm tot}^{-2/3} n_5^{-1}
v_{10}^{-1} \times \\ \nonumber
\left( 1+913 {\frac { (M_{\rm tot} + \langle M\rangle )} {k P_{\rm d}^{2/3} M_{\rm tot}^{1/3} v_{10}^2}}\right) ^{-1}\end{aligned}$$
Here $P_{\rm d}$ is the binary period in days, $M_{\rm tot}$ is the total binary mass in $M_\odot$, $\langle M\rangle$ is the mass of an average single star in $M_\odot$, $v_{10}=v_{\infty}/(10\,{\rm km/s})$ and $n_5=n/(10^5\,{\rm pc}^{-3})$, where $n$ is the stellar number density.
The hardness of a binary system, $\eta$, is defined as $$\label{eta_def}
\eta = {\frac {G m_1 m_2} {a \sigma^2 \langle m\rangle }}\ ,$$ where $a$ is the binary separation, $\sigma$ is the central velocity dispersion, $m_1$ and $m_2$ are the masses of the binary components, and $\langle m\rangle$ is the average mass of a single star. Binaries that have $\eta < 1$ are termed soft, and those with $\eta > 1$ are termed hard.
Primordial CVs and AM CVns.
---------------------------
The typical formation scenario for CVs in the field (low density environment) usually involves common envelope (CE) evolution. In Fig. \[cv\_field\] we show parameters of primordial non-eccentric binaries that successfully become CVs. To obtain this parameter space, we used the binary population synthesis code [StarTrack]{} [@Bel02; @Bel05b][^4]. We evolved $5\times10^5$ binaries considering specifically that region of primordial binaries which, according to preliminary lower resolution runs, leads to CV formation. Our primary stars have masses between 0.5 $M_\odot$ and 10 $M_\odot$, the secondaries have masses according to a flat mass ratio distribution with initial periods distributed flatly between 1 and $10^4$ days. For demonstration purposes in Fig. \[cv\_field\], we use initially circular orbits, because the parameters leading to different formation channels can be more clearly distinguished. For our actual cluster simulations we use eccentric binaries; in comparison to Fig. \[cv\_field\], eccentric primordial binaries can have higher initial periods and still produce CVs. Progenitors of CVs with a MS donor are located in the left bottom corner, with $M_{\rm p}\la 4\,M_\odot$ and $\log P\la 2.5$. In other cases the donor star is a red giant (RG) or a (subgiant) star in the Hertzsprung gap. For primordial binaries located in a small but dense area at the left middle part of Fig. \[cv\_field\], $\log P\sim 2.7$ and $M_{\rm p}\sim 1\,M_\odot$, a CE does not occur. We note that the lifetime of a binary in the CV stage with a RG donor is about 1000 times shorter than in the case of a MS donor.
![ Distribution density of CV progenitors (initial masses of primary stars $M_{\rm p}$ and binary periods $P$) for non-eccentric binaries in the Galactic field, with Z=0.001. The total normalization of CV progenitors is scaled to unity, the grey color shows $\log_{10}$ of the normalized distribution density. The thick solid line indicates the binary period where the collision time of the binary is equal to the main sequence lifetime of the primary (using a core number density $n=10^5\,{\rm pc}^{-3}$, a central velocity dispersion 10 km/s and an average object mass of $0.5 \,M_\odot$). Dash-dotted lines are lines of constant binary hardness and dashed lines are lines of constant collision time. []{data-label="cv_field"}](fig1.eps){height=".35\textheight"}
![Distribution density of AM CVn progenitors (initial masses of primary stars $M_{\rm p}$ and binary periods $P$) for non-eccentric binaries in the Galactic field, Z=0.001. Notation as for Fig. \[cv\_field\]. []{data-label="amcv_field"}](fig2.eps){height=".35\textheight"}
In the core of a GC with core density $\rho_{\rm c} \sim 10^5$ pc$^{-3}$, a binary with an initial period typical of a CV progenitor will experience a dynamical encounter before its primary leaves the MS (see Fig. \[cv\_field\], where all CV progenitors lie above the line indicating equality of $\tau_{coll}$ and $\tau_{MS}$). The unaltered primordial channel for CV formation is therefore likely to succeed only for binaries that enter the dense cluster core after their CE event; the post-CE binary is compact enough to avoid an encounter. The contribution of the primordial channel depends therefore on the time – before or after the moment of CE – when primordial CV binaries will segregate into the central dense core. In more detail, an average initial binary in the GC is $\sim 0.7 M\odot$, which is significantly smaller than the pre-CE mass of a primordial CV binary (see Fig. \[cv\_field\]). Post-CE primordial CV binaries are also heavier than typical binaries in the halo (for which the average binary mass is $\sim 0.4 M\odot$). In both cases, primordial CV binaries, as heavier objects, will tend to sink toward the cluster core on the cluster half-mass relaxation time.
The situation is similar for the formation of AM CVn systems from primordial binaries (see Fig. \[amcv\_field\]). In this case, the main formation channel requires the occurrence of two CE events (see also [@Bel05a]), and the primordial binary is expected to be even wider. However, the second channel, with two stable MT stages (at the start of the RG stage of the primary, and when the secondary becomes a helium giant), is provided by relatively compact progenitor binaries. These binaries are expected to evolve in the same way in a GC as in the field.
Dynamical formation of CVs
--------------------------
A binary consisting of a MS star and a WD can be formed via several kinds of dynamical encounters: via an exchange interaction, via a tidal capture (TC) of a MS by a WD, or via physical collisions between a red giant (RG) and a MS star. A fraction of these dynamically formed MS-WD binary systems will start MT and become a CV. In this section we examine in detail the possible channels for CV creation.
The main angular momentum losses in a close MS-WD binary occur via magnetic braking (MB) and gravitational wave (GW) emission, both of which lead to orbital decay. In eccentric binaries, the binary orbital separation will be affected by tides, and the post-circularized periastron is larger than the pre-circularized periastron (unless tidal synchronization is significant). In Fig. \[mswd-nonecc\] we show the maximum initial periods (at the moment of the binary formation) of a non-eccentric MS-WD binary that can start MT within 2 Gyr, and within 10 Gyr, due only to GW or only to MB (for illustrative purposes, we show time-scales for two prescriptions of magnetic braking, one is standard MB according to [@RVJ] (RVJ) and the second is the MB based on dipole-field model according to [@Ivanova03] (IT03)). A maximum initial period such that a binary is able to start MT without having any other encounters is only $\sim$2 days. On Fig. \[mswd-ecc\] we again show the maximum initial periods of binaries that may start MT, but now including all angular momentum losses (GW, MB and tides), and compare the cases of non-eccentric and eccentric binaries. On this figure we also show the difference in maximum initial period between metal-poor and metal-rich GCs. In metal-poor clusters only stars with $M\la 0.85\,M_\odot$ have developed outer convective zones, allowing MB and convective tides to operate [@Ivanova06]. This effect can potentially be dramatic; for instance, among non-eccentric binaries with a MS star of $1\,M_\odot$, the range of post-exchange periods that leads to CV formation is a factor of 6 larger if the donor has Z=0.02, compared to Z=0.001. For eccentric binaries, this ratio is higher, as tidal circularization via radiative damping will reduce binary eccentricity (and therefore increase the periastron) more effectively than GW can shrink the binary orbit.
![The fate of non-eccentric MS-WD binaries produced by, e.g., dynamical encounters, where the primary is a WD of 0.6 $M_\odot$. $P$ is the post-encounter (or post-CE) orbital period and $M_{\rm MS}$ is the mass of a MS secondary. The short-dashed lines show the binary periods for constant collision times and the dotted lines delineate the binaries that will shrink within 2 and 10 Gyr due to gravitational wave emission. The long-dashed line indicates the upper period limit for binaries that will begin MT within 2 Gyr with the RVJ MB prescription, while the dash-dotted lines indicate those that will begin MT within 2 and 10 Gyr with IT03 MB. Below the solid line the binary is in contact. \[mswd-nonecc\] ](fig3.eps){height=".35\textheight"}
![The fate of post-encounter MS-WD binaries where the primary is a WD of 0.6 $M_\odot$, for post-exchange eccentricities 0 and 0.66. $P$ is the post-encounter orbital period and $M_{\rm MS}$ is the mass of the MS secondary. Thick lines delineate the maximum periods for binaries which will begin MT within 2 Gyr. Thin lines of the same type show the period at which that binary will begin MT. \[mswd-ecc\] ](fig4.eps){height=".35\textheight"}
![Formation of WD-MS binaries via physical collisions and tidal captures. The hatched area shows binaries formed via TC with a 0.6 $M_\odot$ WD. In the dense hatched area, the MS star did not overflow its Roche lobe at the minimum approach during the TC. The dashed lines show binaries formed via physical collisions of a MS star and a 0.8 $M_\odot$ RG, for different core masses, using parameterized results of SPH simulations (for illustrative purposes, we show only the case of the impact parameter to be 0.54 of the RG radius with corresponding post-collisional eccentricity of 0.7). The dotted lines show binaries formed via physical collisions of MS star and a 0.8 $M_\odot$ RG, for different core masses, assuming common envelope approach ($\alpha_{\rm CE} =\lambda=1$). \[mswd-formation\] ](fig5.eps){height=".35\textheight"}
A circular binary is most likely to be formed via tidal capture (TC), where a post-capture circularization is assumed. Using the approach described in [@Zwart_TC_93], we can estimate the post-capture binary parameters for a MS-WD binary (see Fig. \[mswd-formation\], where WD mass is assumed to be 0.6 $M_\odot$). The upper limit here corresponds to the closest approach at which tidal interactions are strong enough to make a bound system, and the lower limit corresponds to the closest approach at which the MS star overfills its Roche lobe by 1/3. We note that the parameter space for tidally captured binaries where the MS star does not overfill its Roche lobe at the closest approach is very small (see Fig. \[mswd-nonecc\]). We note that this is an optimistic estimate, as the captured star can also be destroyed during the chaotic phase of the tidal energy damping [@Mardling95_chaos2]. Most tidally captured binaries can be brought to contact by MB before either the next encounter occurs, or the MS star evolves away from the MS.
An eccentric binary can be formed via an exchange encounter or a physical collision; eccentricity can also be increased via the cumulative effect of fly-by encounters. For binaries formed through MS-RG collisions, the post-exchange binary separation $a_{\rm f}$ as well as post-exchange eccentricity $e_{\rm f}$ depends on the closest approach $p$ [@Lombardi_2006] and can be estimated using results of SPH simulations. These simulations were done for physical collisions of a NS and a RG, and therefore are not straightforwardly applicable for the physical collisions of a MS star and RG. We therefore study how strongly the choice of the treatment can affect the final results. We consider the two following prescriptions:
- Using a common-envelope (CE) prescription:
$${\frac{(M_{\rm rg}+M_{\rm ms})v_{\infty}^2}{2}} + \alpha_{\rm CE} {\frac{GM_{\rm wd}M_{\rm ms}} {2 a_{\rm f}}} =
{\frac {G M_{\rm rg} (M_{\rm rg}-M_{\rm wd} )} {\lambda R_{\rm rg}}}
\label{af_sph}$$
Here $M_{\rm rg}$, $M_{\rm ms}$ and $M_{\rm wd}$ are the masses of the RG, MS star, and RG core that will become a WD, in $M_\odot$; $R_{\rm RG}$ is the RG radius; $\alpha_{\rm CE}$ is the CE efficiency parameter; and $\lambda$ is the CE parameter that connects a star’s binding energy with its parameterized form. We assume that after a common envelope event the binary is not eccentric.
- Using parameterized results from SPH simulations:
$$e_{\rm f} = 0.88-{\frac {p} {3 R_{RG}}}$$
$$a_{\rm f} = {\frac {p} {3.3 (1-e_{\rm f}^2)}}
\label{af_ce}$$
As the parameterized SPH simulations were done for a limited set of mass ratios, we also check the energy balance. When we consider the case of the second treatment, we choose the minimum binary separation from eq. (\[af\_sph\]) and (\[af\_ce\]), as at small masses the extrapolated prescription from SPH simulations can lead to the formation of binaries with artificial energy creation. Also, in the case when a MS star at the pericenter overfills its Roche lobe, we destroy the MS star instead of forming a binary. This is consistent with the results of SPH simulations for physical collisions of a RG and a MS star (J. Lombardi 2005, priv. communication).
In Fig. \[mswd-formation\] we also show possible binary periods for binaries formed via physical collisions with a red giant. Note that it is hard to form a relatively close MS-WD binary (one that is able to start MT within a few Gyr) with a WD more massive than 0.3 $M_\odot$ via either prescription. Also, in binaries with the mass ratio $\ga 3$, Roche lobe overflow leads to delayed dynamical instability and a binary merger. This limits the MS star mass to $\la 0.9\,M_\odot$. Therefore, the CV progenitors from the channel of physical collisions of RGs and MS stars are expected to initially have rather low mass WD accretors, and donor star masses $\la 0.9\,M_\odot$. Therefore, metallicity variations should not affect this channel strongly. The evolutionary stage during He core burning lasts almost the same time as the RG branch, however, He core stars of $\la 2\,M_\odot$ are a few times more compact than at the end of the RG branch and have a larger core than during RG evolution. Therefore a collision between a He core burning star and a MS star also favors the formation of a WD-MS binary that is close enough to become a CV. This channel mainly provides binaries with a WD mass at the start of accretion of about 0.5 $M_\odot$ (just a bit above the core mass at the time of He core flash).
On the other hand, there are not many single WDs of such small masses present in a GC core. A WD with mass $\la 0.3\,M_\odot$ cannot (yet) be formed in single star evolution – it must evolve via a CE event or a physical collision. A binary containing such a WD is very hard and has $\tau_{\rm coll}\ge 10$ Gyr. If an encounter occurs, it is more likely to result in a merger rather than an exchange. We therefore expect that most CVs with a low mass WD companion will be formed either through a CE event (in a primordial binary or in a dynamically formed binary with $P\sim 10-100$ days), or as a result of a physical collision, but not via direct exchange encounter.
A typical binary formed via an exchange encounter has $e\approx 0.7$. In order to become a CV within 2 Gyr (or before the next encounter), it should have a post-encounter period of a few days (see also Fig. \[mswd-ecc\]). According to energy conservation during an exchange encounter [@Heggie96], and assuming that during an exchange encounter the less massive companion is replaced by the more massive intruding star, the post-encounter binary separation will be larger than pre-encounter. The domain of pre-encounter binaries that will be able to form a CV-progenitor binary via only exchange encounter is therefore limited to very short period binaries (with correspondingly long collision times), and these binaries are very likely to experience a physical collision rather than an exchange [@Fregeau04].
Let us consider the possibilities for an initially wider dynamically formed binary than shown on Fig. \[mswd-ecc\] to evolve toward MT. For definiteness, we consider a binary consisting of a 1 $M_\odot$ MS star and a 0.6 $M_\odot$ WD with an initial period of 10 days. There are two kinds of post-formation dynamical effects that can happen during fly-by encounters: (i) binary hardening; (ii) eccentricity pumping. Even if each hardening encounter could reduce the orbital separation by as much as $50\%$, the hardening of this binary from 10 days to 1 day (at this period MB starts to be efficient) will take about 20 Gyr. In the case of eccentricity pumping (assuming no binary energy change), the mean time between successive collisions stays at $\tau_{\rm coll}\le1$ Gyr and therefore a binary can experience many encounters. If the acquired eccentricity $e\ge0.95$, the binary can shrink through GW emission even if its initial period is larger than 10 days. The last possibility for such a wide dynamically formed binary to become a CV is a CE event that happens in a post-exchange MS-MS binary.
Dynamical formation of AM CVns
------------------------------
![The fate of post-encounter WD-WD binaries where the primary is a WD of 0.6 $M_\odot$. $P$ is the post-encounter orbital period and $M_{\rm WD}$ is the mass of the WD secondary. The dashed lines show the binary periods for constant collision times and the dotted lines delineate the binaries that will begin MT within 2 Gyr due to GW emission for different post-encounter eccentricities. The solid lines show binaries of different eccentricities that can be formed through a collision between a WD of 0.6 $M_\odot$ and a RG of 0.8 $M_\odot$ ( $\alpha_{\rm CE} \lambda=1$). \[wdwd\] ](fig6.eps){height=".35\textheight"}
For the evolution of WD-WD binaries, we adopt that only GW are important as a mechanism of angular momentum loss and neglect the possibility of tidal heating. The maximum possible periods for different post-encounter eccentricities are shown on Fig.\[wdwd\].
Let us first examine a WD-WD binary formation via direct exchange. Again, as in the case of MS-WD binaries, a typical eccentricity is $e\sim0.7$ and the separation is comparable to the pre-exchange separation. The collision time for both pre-encounter and post-exchange binaries is so long that both binary hardening and exchanges are very rare events. The main difference with MS-WD binaries is that post-exchange WD-WD binary periods that will allow a binary to evolve to mass transfer (MT) are several times smaller for the same eccentricities. Therefore, the exchange channel producing a post-exchange binary consisting of two WDs seems to be very unlikely.
A more important channel seems to be the case of an exchange encounter that leads to the formation of a MS-WD binary. If the MS star is massive enough to become a RG during the cluster lifetime, such a binary can evolve through CE and form a close WD-WD binary.
The second important channel is again a physical collision, involving a single WD with a RG (see Fig. \[wdwd\], where we show possible outcomes of a such a collision). We note that both treatments (parameterized SPH results and CE prescription) lead to the formation of WD-WD binaries that are roughly equally likely to start the MT.
We therefore expect that only a post-CE system can become an AM CVn, where the post-CE system could be from a primordial binary, a post-collision binary, or a dynamically formed binary.
Methods and assumptions
=======================
For our numerical simulations of globular clusters we use a Monte Carlo approach described in detail in @Ivanova05. The method couples the binary population synthesis code [StarTrack]{} [@Bel02; @Bel05b], a simple model for the cluster, and a small $N$-body integrator for accurate treatment of all relevant dynamical interaction processes [[FewBody]{}, @Fregeau04]. The main update of the code is the treatment of physical collisions with a RG, for which we now use the parameterized results of SPH simulations from @Lombardi_2006 as described in §2.2. In our code we keep a complete record of all events that happen to any cluster star, dynamical (like collisions, tidal captures and exchanges, as well as changes of the binary eccentricity or the binary separation after a fly-by encounter), or evolutionary (like common envelope events, mass transfers, or SN explosions). This helps to analyze the final populations and understand what factors played the most significant role in their formation.
The “standard” cluster model in our simulations has initially $N=10^6$ stars and initial binary fraction of 100%. The distribution of initial binary periods is constant in the logarithm between contact and $10^7$ d and the eccentricities are distributed thermally. We want to stress here that about 2/3 of these binaries are soft initially (the binary fraction provided by only hard binaries gives an initial binary fraction of about $20\%$ if the 1-D velocity dispersion is 10 km/s) and most very tight binaries are destroyed through evolutionary mergers. Our initial binary fraction is therefore comparable to the initial binary fractions that are usually used in $N$-body codes, where it is assumed for simplicity that very soft binaries will not live long as binaries and will only slow down the simulations. For more detailed discussion on the choice of the primordial binary fraction, see [@Ivanova05].
For single stars and primaries we adopted the broken power law initial mass function (IMF) of @Kroupa02 and a flat mass-ratio distribution for secondaries. The initial core mass is 5% of the cluster mass and, assuming initial mass segregation, an average object in the core is about twice as massive as an average cluster star. At the age of 11 Gyr the mass of such a cluster in our simulations is $\sim 2\times 10^5\,M_\odot$ and is comparable to the mass of typical globular clusters in our Galaxy.
We adopt a core number density $n_{\rm c}=10^5 \ {\rm pc}^{-3}$ (this corresponds to $\rho_{\rm c}\approx 10^{4.7}\,M_\odot \ {\rm pc}^{-3}$ at the ages of 7-14 Gyr), a half-mass relaxation time $t_{\rm rh}=1$ Gyr and a metallicity $Z=0.001$. The characteristic velocities are taken as for a King model $W_0=7$ for the cluster of this mass. We take a one-dimensional velocity dispersion $\sigma_1=10$ km/s and an escape velocity from the cluster $v_{\rm esc}=40$ km/s. If, after an interaction or SN explosion, an object in the core acquires a velocity higher than the recoil velocity $v_{\rm rec}=30$ km/s, an object is moved from the core to the halo. The ejection velocity for objects in the halo is $v_{\rm ej,h}=28$ km/s.
In addition to the “standard” model we also considered cluster models with the following modifications:
- a metal-rich cluster with $Z=0.02$ (“metal-rich”);
- central density $n_{\rm c}=10^4 \ {\rm pc}^{-3}$ (“med-dens”) or $n_{\rm c}=10^3 \ {\rm pc}^{-3}$ (“low-dens”)
- initial binary fraction 50% (“BF05”);
- RVJ magnetic braking (“fast MB”);
- treatment of physical collision using a CE prescription (“CE coll”);
- 47 Tuc-type cluster, characterized by a higher density $\rho_{\rm c}=10^{5.2}\,M_\odot \ {\rm pc}^{-3}$, higher metallicity $Z=0.0035$, $\sigma_1=11.5$ km/s, $v_{\rm esc}=57$ (with the recoil velocity of 52 km/s and $v_{\rm ej,h}=24$ km/s) and $t_{\rm rh}=3$ Gyr (“47 Tuc”).
“47 Tuc” model describes the GC where currently the largest CV population is identified. In order to find a better match with the observations, we examined several variations of this model. In particular, we considered a model with an initial binary population of 50% (“47 Tuc+BF05”), and a model with an initial binary population is 50%, and the initial core has a smaller mass - 2%, reflecting the effect of a longer half-mass relaxation time on the initial population (“47 Tuc+SCBF05”). We also examined the sensitivity of the final CV production to the CE efficiency parameter, considering the case with $\alpha_{\rm CE}\lambda=0.1$ (“47 Tuc+$\alpha_{\rm CE}\lambda$”).
In order to estimate the effects of dynamics on the population we also ran the same population as in our “standard” model (Z=0.001), but without dynamics (“non-dyn”). In order to compare to a field population, we considered the population of stars with solar metallicity Z=0.02 and with different times of star formation, assuming flat star formation rate through last 10 Gyrs (“field”). In “non-dyn” model all stars are formed at the zero age, like in GCs.
Numerical results
=================
Formation channels of CVs
-------------------------
### Main formation channels in the “standard” model {#form-chan}
In Fig. \[cv-scen-blue\] we show the formation channels for all CVs that are present in a typical cluster (our “standard” model) at the age of 10 Gyr. Most of these CVs are too dim to be detected, and we consider separately the population of CVs that can be detectable according to present observational limits, considered specifically for the globular cluster 47 Tuc. For the limiting X-ray luminosity, we take $L_{\rm x}\ga 3\cdot 10^{30}$ ergs s$^{-1}$ [@Grindlay01a], and the limiting bolometric luminosity of the donor $L_{\rm d}\ga 0.06 L_{\odot}$, set by the limiting magnitude of HST in the cluster core [@Edmonds03a].
We label channels in the following way: the first character indicates the last major dynamical event affecting the binary before it becomes a CV in the core, as follows: (1) entering the core (primordial binary); (2) companion exchange during a binary encounter; (3) merger during a binary encounter; (4) physical collision with a RG during a binary encounter that resulted in a tight binary formation with a RG core as a companion; (5) tidal capture; (6) physical collision of a single MS star with a single RG. The second character indicates a sub-channel by which the binary was modified after the last major dynamical event occurred: (a) stands for all sub-channels where no strong evolutionary or dynamical event occurred; (b) eccentricity of the formed binary was increased via binary-binary encounters; (c) common envelope occurred; (d) a previous MT episode played the most important role in the orbital decay.
The [*primordial channel*]{} ([**channel 1**]{}) – provides $37\%$ of all CVs that are present in the cluster core ( 42% of detectable CVs). We call this channel primordial as the binary keeps both its initial companions, and no mergers ever occurred to either of them. Only 3/4 of CVs formed via this channel are “purely” primordial in the sense that they did not experience a significant dynamical encounter throughout their life ([**1a**]{}, see also Fig. \[cv-scen-blue\]); most of these “purely” primordial CVs evolved via CE before they entered the core. As was predicted in § 2.1, very few CVs come from the channel where CE occurred after a binary entered the core ([**1c**]{}). 1/5 of all primordial CVs would not evolve via CE or start a MT unless their eccentricity was increased via fly-by encounters ([**1b**]{}). A small fraction of primordial CVs evolved without a CE but with only a MT episode on to a MS star ([**1d**]{}), as was described in § 2.1.
The binary encounters ([**channel 2, 3 and 4**]{}) are responsible for the formation of $46\%$ of all CVs, and the same fraction of detectable CVs. In most cases the binary that participated in the binary encounter was not a primordial binary, but a dynamically formed binary. In more than half of cases, a future accretor had been a companion in at least 3 different binaries before it acquired its final donor.
The most effective path is the [*binary exchange channel*]{} ([**channel 2**]{}) – it provides 32% of all CVs. Within this channel, $\sim 40\%$ of post-exchange binaries evolved toward the MT without further significant dynamical or evolutionary events ([**2a**]{}), in 20% of them CE occured ([**2c**]{}) and in 40% of them the MT started as a result of the eccentricity pumping during subsequent fly-by encounters ([**2b**]{}). This is the most efficient channel for eccentricity pumping.
Exchange encounters that lead to CV formation typically occur between the following participants: (i) a single, relatively heavy WD (about $0.7-1.4\,M_\odot$) and a MS-MS binary of total mass $\la 1\,M_\odot$; (ii) a single, relatively massive MS star (about turn-off mass) and a MS-WD or WD-WD binary. In the latter case, CE often follows the exchange encounter. The number of successful encounters between MS star and WD-WD binary is relatively small, and no successful four-body encounter occurred. Nearly all binaries that proceed via sub-channels 2a or 2b are WD-MS binaries, and all binaries in sub-channel 2c are MS-MS binaries after the last strong binary encounter. A post-exchange binary typically has a heavier WD than a primordial (post-CE) binary has.
A further $13\%$ of CVs are formed in binaries that experienced a physical collision during the last three- or four-body encounter – [*binary collisional channel*]{} ([**channel 3**]{}), while in 1% of cases a physical collision with a RG occurred during the encounter and a binary with the stripped RG core was formed ([**channel 4**]{}). In the evolution of post-collisional binaries the eccentricity change plays a smaller role compared to post-exchange binaries; MT is started due to the evolutionary angular momentum losses.
The [*tidal capture channel*]{} ([**channel 5**]{}) contributed very little in our standard model. When we looked at all CVs that were formed via TC over all GC ages, we find that a typical WD that captured a MS star is $\sim 1.0\pm0.2\,M_\odot$. In our simulation we allowed a star to overfill its Roche lobe radius by up to 1/3 during the tidal capture encounter and survive. If all encounters where a MS star overfills its Roche lobe lead to the stars’ merger, then the contribution of tidal captures would be even smaller.
Finally, the [*channel of physical collision with RGs*]{} ([**channel 6**]{}) provides $15\%$ of all CVs but much smaller fraction of detectable CVs. Eccentricity pumping played a very small role in both TC and physical collision channels. Typical participants of a successful physical collision (leading to CV formation) are a MS star of $0.3-0.9~M_\odot$ and a RG of about $1-1.7\,M_\odot$ with a core around $0.3\,M_\odot$ or a He core burning giant with a core mass around $0.5\,M_\odot$. CVs formed by this channel are similar to post-CE CVs from primordial binaries. We also compared the results of CVs productions in our large model with $10^6$ stars and in the model with three times less stars. We noted that, with the increase of the resolution, the total number and the number of detectable CVs per unit of the core mass is slowly decreasing. Branching ratios between sub-channels within a channel can vary slightly, but an overall picture is the same.
We outline our main findings:
- [Only $\sim 25\%$ of CVs were formed in binaries that would become CVs in the field.]{}
- [In $\sim 20\%$ of CVs the main reason for a binary to become a CV were fly-by encounters. These CVs cannot be predicted in simulations where only strong encounters are taken into account.]{}
- [In $\sim 15\%$ of CVs, the WD was formed during dynamical removal of the RG envelope. As this removal is not “clean”, and about 0.1 $M_\odot$ [see @Lombardi_2006] can remain bound to the RG stripped core, the characteristics of the WD can differ from those formed via a common envelope. ]{}
- [ $60\%$ of CVs did not evolve via CE, which is the most common formation channel for field CVs.]{}
- [Tidal captures did not play a significant role.]{}
channel 1a 1b 1c 2a 2b 2c 3a 3b 3c 4a 5a 6a
--------------------------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ----- ---- -- -- -- --
standard 0.271 0.077 0.013 0.135 0.129 0.052 0.090 0.006 0.039 0.013 0.026 0.148 209 47
metal-rich 0.204 0.056 0.031 0.148 0.143 0.046 0.051 0.015 0.015 0.020 0.031 0.230 265 16
med-dens 0.327 0.253 0.167 0.111 0.012 0.056 0.031 0.019 0.006 0.006 0.000 0.006 193 35
low-dens 0.404 0.066 0.456 0.037 0.000 0.007 0.015 0.000 0.015 0.000 0.000 0.000 156 26
fast MB 0.190 0.103 0.017 0.086 0.190 0.172 0.034 0.017 0.000 0.017 0.052 0.103 79 15
CE coll 0.212 0.106 0.006 0.159 0.194 0.041 0.041 0.029 0.029 0.006 0.000 0.176 230 47
BF05 0.206 0.119 0.024 0.135 0.135 0.056 0.040 0.032 0.024 0.024 0.008 0.175 162 36
47 Tuc 0.135 0.094 0.000 0.250 0.146 0.073 0.042 0.042 0.021 0.031 0.000 0.156 275 37
47 Tuc+BF05 0.143 0.057 0.014 0.171 0.143 0.029 0.014 0.043 0.029 0.000 0.043 0.300 190 35
47 Tuc+SCBF05 0.071 0.114 0.000 0.100 0.114 0.057 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.029 0.443 237 27
47 Tuc+$\alpha_{\rm CE}\lambda$ 0.170 0.057 0.011 0.182 0.125 0.045 0.034 0.011 0.011 0.023 0.023 0.307 253 40
non-dyn 124 16
field 117 3
Notations for channels – see text in § \[form-chan\] and also Fig. \[cv-scen-blue\]. “Total” is the number of CVs and “Detec” is the number of detectable CVs, both numbers are scaled per 50 000 $M_\odot$ stellar population mass in the core.
### Formation channels in different clusters
In Table \[tab-channels\] we give details on the formation channels for different cluster models at the same age of 10 Gyr. We note that these numbers fluctuate with time and are not defined precisely (see more below in §\[cv-ages\]), however some trends can be identified. We also show the numbers of CVs that are formed in a metal-poor environment (“non-dyn”) and in the field. The definition of “detectable” CVs is not very consistent here, as observational limits for field CVs are not the same as for GCs (and much more poorly defined), but we use the same limits for comparison. It can be seen that dynamics in the “standard” model leads to an increase of the total CV production by less than a factor of two.
In the case of the “metal-rich” model, the turn-off mass at 10 Gyr is larger than in the “standard” model – there are more massive stars in the core; the ratio between the total numbers of CVs in two models is roughly the ratio between their turn-off masses at this age.
As was expected, the role of purely primordial CVs (channel 1a) decreases in importance when density increases (see “standard”, “med-dens” and “low-dens” models), although their absolute number is about the same for all three models – once a CV is formed outside the core, it is hard to destroy it in the core. On the other hand, the number of systems that experience CE after entering the core (1c) increases as the density decreases, since it is easier for pre-CE systems to survive in a less dense environment. The production of almost all channels via dynamical encounters decreases with density, except for channel 1b, where only non-strong encounters are involved. Overall, the total number of CVs in the core does not depend strongly on the core density, as the dynamical destruction of primordial binaries that would produce CVs, and the dynamical production of CVs, compensate each other.
The “fast MB” model shows the greatest difference with the “standard” model in the total number of CVs that are present in the cluster core: the “standard” model has about 3 times more CVs, both total and detectable, although the number of CVs that are ever formed in the core is slightly smaller. The “fast MB” model employs the prescription of MB with faster angular momentum loss than in the case of the standard model, and therefore the duration of the CV stage is shorter.
The “CE coll” model does not show significant differences with our “standard” model.
The “BF05” model shows that CV formation is reduced mainly for primordial CVs and for CVs produced via binary encounters. The number of CVs produced via physical collisions between single stars is about the same.
The results for “47 Tuc” are due to a mixture of several conditions: the higher core number density favors dynamical formation, and the higher metallicity gives a wider mass range over which MB operates on the donor star. Variation of initial conditions, such as a smaller binary fraction, does not lead to significant differences except that the relative role of binaries becomes smaller than the role of physical collisions. Some decrease in the number of detectable CVs occurs when we start with a smaller initial core.
channel 1a 1b 1c 2a 2b 2c 3a 3b 3c 4a 5a 6a
--------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ----- ---- -- -- -- --
1 Gyr 0.250 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.250 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.250 15 7
2 Gyr 0.111 0.074 0.037 0.259 0.111 0.185 0.000 0.000 0.037 0.000 0.000 0.185 84 37
3 Gyr 0.185 0.046 0.015 0.154 0.169 0.123 0.015 0.000 0.015 0.031 0.015 0.231 170 62
4 Gyr 0.200 0.078 0.022 0.167 0.133 0.133 0.022 0.000 0.011 0.022 0.011 0.200 203 76
5 Gyr 0.190 0.076 0.029 0.162 0.086 0.095 0.057 0.010 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.229 210 62
6 Gyr 0.214 0.077 0.026 0.162 0.103 0.060 0.051 0.009 0.026 0.026 0.017 0.231 211 56
7 Gyr 0.268 0.049 0.016 0.163 0.114 0.041 0.049 0.008 0.024 0.024 0.016 0.220 204 43
8 Gyr 0.284 0.061 0.014 0.128 0.122 0.068 0.054 0.007 0.041 0.020 0.014 0.182 228 44
9 Gyr 0.268 0.067 0.013 0.128 0.134 0.060 0.074 0.007 0.047 0.020 0.013 0.161 214 40
10 Gyr 0.271 0.077 0.013 0.135 0.129 0.052 0.090 0.006 0.039 0.013 0.026 0.148 209 47
11 Gyr 0.253 0.084 0.006 0.157 0.139 0.054 0.078 0.006 0.042 0.012 0.030 0.139 212 51
12 Gyr 0.209 0.088 0.005 0.165 0.181 0.049 0.066 0.016 0.033 0.005 0.027 0.154 221 41
13 Gyr 0.203 0.091 0.005 0.188 0.162 0.056 0.066 0.030 0.030 0.010 0.025 0.132 228 34
14 Gyr 0.199 0.131 0.000 0.184 0.155 0.039 0.068 0.044 0.029 0.010 0.019 0.121 229 43
Notations are as in Table \[tab-channels\].
### Formation channels at different cluster ages {#cv-ages}
![Formation of CVs via different channels. The solid line shows the case of “standard” model, dotted line shows “metal-rich”.[]{data-label="cv-form4w"}](fig8.eps){height=".35\textheight"}
![Appearance of CVs (time that MT starts) formed via different channels. Notations as in Fig. \[cv-form4w\] []{data-label="cv-appear4w"}](fig9.eps){height=".35\textheight"}
![Destruction of CVs. Notations as in Fig. \[cv-form4w\]. []{data-label="cv-destr4w"}](fig10.eps){height=".35\textheight"}
In Fig. \[cv-form4w\] we show the formation rate of CVs via different channels throughout the life of a cluster (indicating the time when a dynamical event occurred, or, for primordial binaries, the time when a CE happened). In Fig. \[cv-appear4w\] we show the rate of appearance of CVs (start of mass transfer) as a function of time.
The primordial channel produces most of its CVs at the beginning of the cluster evolution, though the appearance of primordial CVs is distributed flatly in time. This contrasts with binary encounter channels, where the formation occurs rather flatly in time, but the rate of CV appearance grows after 7 Gyr. A similar delay in the appearance can be seen for CVs formed via tidal captures.
In Fig. \[cv-destr4w\] we show the number of CVs that stop MT for different reasons: (1) end of MT due to the star’s contraction (usually occurs with CVs where a donor is a RG) or evolutionary merger of the binary; (2) explosion of the WD as Ia SN or sub-Chandrasekhar SN explosion, or accretion induced collapse (AIC); (3) end of MT due to a strong dynamical encounter. Most CVs stop MT due to an evolutionary reason, while the number of SN explosions is also relatively high and is comparable to the number of CVs destroyed by dynamical encounters [for more detail on how SN Ia are calculated, see §4.4 and @Bel05_sn].
In Table \[tab-channels-age\] we show a detailed representation of CV formation by different channels in the “standard” model at different cluster ages. We note a peak in the number of detectable CVs at the age of 4 Gyr, and that the total number of CVs increases steadily until the age of 8 Gyrs and then stays constant. The weight of different channels in the relative numbers of appearing CVs does not change dramatically during the cluster evolution.
Population characteristics of CVs
---------------------------------
### Periods and masses
![The mass-distribution of hydrogen accreting WDs. The hatched area corresponds to dynamically formed binaries; the solid filled area to systems formed directly from primordial binaries. The top panel shows the case with no dynamics (different ages), the second panel from the top shows the compiled field case, the third panel shows the core of the cluster in the “standard” model and the bottom panel shows the cluster core in the model “47 Tuc”. []{data-label="cv_mass"}](fig11.eps){height=".35\textheight"}
![The period-distribution of hydrogen accreting WDs. The hatched area corresponds to dynamically formed binaries; the solid filled area to systems formed directly from primordial binaries. The top panel shows the case with no dynamics (different ages), the second panel from the top shows the compiled field case, the third panel shows the core of the cluster in the “standard” model and the bottom panel shows the cluster core in the model “47 Tuc”. Solid triangles indicates the periods of CVs that are identified in 47 Tuc from observations. []{data-label="cv_per"}](fig12.eps){height=".35\textheight"}
On Fig. \[cv\_mass\] and \[cv\_per\] we show mass and period distributions for “standard” and “47 Tuc” cluster models, as well as for the population evolved without dynamics. A remnant of the primordial population of CVs in cluster cores follows the distribution of primordial CVs evolved without dynamics at the same age. However the distribution of dynamically formed CVs shows signs of younger (non-dynamical) CV populations, and also is more populated at the high mass end. For 47 Tuc we also show the periods of the identified CVs, which have a distribution consistent with the period distribution of the “detectable” CVs in our simulations.
### MT rates and X-ray luminosities
![Simulated distribution of orbital periods versus 0.5-2.5 keV X-ray luminosity for “47 Tuc” model (at the age of 11 Gyr). Stars are CVs that could be detected, while open circles are CVs that cannot be detected (generally due to the optical faintness of the donor). The size of the symbol corresponds to the WD mass (the largest is for WDs more massive than 1 $M_\odot$, the smallest symbol is for WDs less massive than 0.6 $M_\odot$, and the medium symbol is for WDs with masses between 0.6 and 1 $M_\odot$ ). []{data-label="pl_stan"}](fig13.eps){height=".35\textheight"}
![Observed distribution of orbital periods vs. 0.5-2.5 keV X-ray luminosity for CVs in globular clusters. Known CVs in globular clusters, with known X-ray luminosities but without known orbital periods, are plotted at P=0 hours or less. CVs that have undergone recorded dwarf nova outbursts are indicated with circles, CVs with strong He II $\lambda4686$ emission (suggesting strong magnetic fields, see text) with stars (some are both). Three objects with uncertain periods or CV status (W34 in 47 Tuc might be a millisecond pulsar) are marked as open triangles; other CVs are indicated with filled triangles. Data include 23 CVs from 47 Tuc [@Edmonds03a; @Edmonds03b], 8 from NGC 6397 [@Edmonds99; @Grindlay01b; @Kaluzny03; @Shara05], 7 from NGC 6752 [@Pooley02a; @Bailyn96_ngc6752], two from M22 [@Pietrukowicz05], two from M15 [@Hann05], one from M5 [@Hakala97; @Neill02], one from M4 [@Bassa04], and one from M55 [@Kaluzny05].[]{data-label="pl_obs"}](fig14.eps){height=".35\textheight"}
We compare the distribution of orbital periods versus 0.5-2.5 keV X-ray luminosity for our simulation of 47 Tuc and observations of CVs in globular clusters (see Fig. \[pl\_stan\] and Fig. \[pl\_obs\])[^5]. Observationally, few CVs have measured orbital periods. For real CVs with unknown periods, only the X-ray luminosity is shown. To obtain the X-ray luminosity of simulated CVs for comparison to observations, we use the accretion model from [@Patterson85] for 0.5-4 keV and scale the luminosity to 0.5-2.5 keV assuming a flat energy distribution within the band:
$$L_{\rm x}(0.5-2.5{\rm \ keV}) = 0.066 \frac{GM_{\rm wd}\dot M}{2 R_{\rm wd}} \ ,$$
where $\dot M$ is the mass transfer rate and $R_{\rm wd}$ is the radius of the WD. The simulations show reasonable agreement with the observations.
However, this picture so far does not explain the rare occurrence of DNOs in globular clusters CVs, in comparison to the field. Therefore, other properties of these systems must be explored to identify the distinguishing characteristics.
![MT rates in CVs. Hatched areas indicate detectable CVs. For our no-dynamics model the detectable CV histogram is increased by a factor of 10, while for “47 Tuc” it is increased by a factor of 3. “47 Tuc” is shown at the age of 11 Gyr.[]{data-label="mt_cv"}](fig15.eps){height=".35\textheight"}
In Fig. \[mt\_cv\] we show MT rates in CVs in “standard” model, in the “47 Tuc” model and for the field. Although MT rates in our GC simulations do not exceed $10^{-9} {\rm\,M_\odot/yr}$, and field CVs can have higher MT rates, this result may be due to small number statistics. We therefore do not find significant differences between MT rates in GC CVs and field CVs. For our GC CVs, all MT rates are such that the accretion disc is partially ionized and unstable, in accordance with the disc instability model. We adopt the viscosity parameters $\alpha_{\rm hot}=0.1$ and $\alpha_{\rm cold}=0.01$, for hot and stable disc states respectively. Therefore, all our CVs should produce DNOs.
[@Dobrotka05] proposed that a combination of low MT rates and moderately strong magnetic fields can explain the absence of DNOs in GCs. Lower mass transfer rates would lead to a rarer occurrence of DNOs, and strong magnetic fields would lead to truncation of the inner disc keeping the disc in the cold stable state. As we do not find systematically lower MT rates for our GC CVs, (in fact our MT rates are two orders of magnitude higher than found in [@Dobrotka05]), we estimated the minimum magnetic field required to suppress DNOs (see Fig. \[cv\_b\]), using the criterion from ([@Dobrotka05]):
$$B_{\rm supp} \ga 5.7\times 10^5 {\rm G} \left ( \frac{\dot M}{10^{-10} \frac{M_\odot}{yr}} \right )^{1.16}
\left (\frac{M_{\rm wd}}{M_\odot} \right) ^{0.83} \left (\frac{0.01R_{\odot}}{R_{\rm wd}} \right) ^{3} .$$
We find that $B_{\rm supp}$ is a slowly increasing function of the WD mass and, for most of the WDs with masses below 1 $M_\odot$, is even below $10^6$ G. WDs with $B\la 10^6$ G are not regarded as highly magnetic. It can also be seen that a $10^7$ G field is enough to prevent DNOs in all CVs with the WDs less massive than 1.1 $M_\odot$ and the field of $~10^8$ G is strong enough to stop DNOs for WDs of all masses.
![The minimum magnetic field $B_{\rm supp}$ required to prevent dwarf nova outbursts for CVs in our simulations. Open circles show CVs in the “standard” model, filled triangles show CVs in the “metal-rich” model, and stars indicate CVs in the “47 Tuc” model.“47 Tuc” is shown at the age of 11 Gyr, other models are shown at the age of 10 Gyr.[]{data-label="cv_b"}](fig16.eps){height=".35\textheight"}
Formation Channels of AM CVns {#sec-amcv}
-----------------------------
channel 1a 1b 1c 2a 2b 2c 3a 3b 3c 4a 5a 6a
--------------------------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ----- --
standard 0.385 0.068 0.000 0.051 0.090 0.030 0.013 0.013 0.064 0.064 0.009 0.265 316
metal-rich 0.379 0.089 0.000 0.031 0.071 0.022 0.018 0.004 0.009 0.009 0.000 0.348 303
med-dens 0.732 0.141 0.056 0.010 0.010 0.015 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.076 236
low-dens 0.680 0.085 0.178 0.008 0.004 0.036 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.178 283
fast MB 0.450 0.077 0.000 0.036 0.068 0.045 0.009 0.005 0.027 0.027 0.000 0.266 303
CE coll 0.474 0.123 0.000 0.035 0.082 0.023 0.006 0.012 0.018 0.018 0.012 0.211 231
BF05 0.271 0.090 0.005 0.053 0.080 0.016 0.011 0.032 0.011 0.011 0.000 0.404 242
47 Tuc 0.246 0.070 0.000 0.026 0.070 0.035 0.035 0.018 0.009 0.009 0.000 0.491 327
47 Tuc+BF05 0.174 0.110 0.000 0.018 0.101 0.037 0.000 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.514 296
47 Tuc+SCBF05 0.217 0.101 0.000 0.029 0.043 0.043 0.000 0.000 0.014 0.014 0.000 0.551 233
47 Tuc+$\alpha_{\rm CE}\lambda$ 0.252 0.078 0.000 0.000 0.117 0.029 0.019 0.010 0.058 0.058 0.000 0.427 296
non-dyn 169
field 110
Notations for channels is the same as for CVs (see text in § \[form-chan\] and also Fig. \[cv-scen-blue\]). “Total” is the number of AM CVns, the number is scaled per 50 000 $M_\odot$ stellar population mass in the core.
![The mass-distribution of helium accreting WDs. The hatched area corresponds to dynamically formed binaries; the solid filled area to systems formed directly from primordial binaries. The top panel shows the case with no dynamics (different ages), the second panel from the top shows the compiled field case, the third panel shows the core of the cluster in the “standard” model and the bottom panel shows the cluster core in the model “47 Tuc”. []{data-label="amcv_mass"}](fig17.eps){height=".35\textheight"}
In Table 3 we show the main formation channels for AM CVns that occur in different clusters, classifying channels in an analogous manner to Sec. 4.1.1. The main differences with the formation of CVs are: (i) post-CE channels (including primordial) are more important; (ii) the role of physical collisions for AM CVns is increased; (iii) binary encounters played a much less significant role.
In most physical collisions the participants are a RG of $0.9-2.2\,M_\odot$ (the core mass is $0.2-0.3\,M_\odot$) and a WD $\ga 0.6\,M_\odot$. In $\la 20\%$ of physical collisions the participants are a He core burning giant of $1.7-2.2\,M_\odot$ (the collision in this case leads to the formation of a He star of $0.4-0.55\,M_\odot$) and a heavier WD, generally $\ga 0.9-1.1\,M_\odot$.
Overall, this channel provides AM CVns with accretors of masses from $0.8\,M_\odot$ to $1.4\,M_\odot$ at a cluster age of 10 Gyr. The field population of AM CVns would have accretors with masses typically between $0.65\,M_\odot$ and $1.0\,M_\odot$ [Fig. \[amcv\_mass\], see also @Nelemans_2001_amcvns; @Bel05_lisa]. The peak in the accretor mass distribution is shifted from $\sim 0.7\,M_\odot$ in the field population to $0.9\,M_\odot$ in the cluster population.
Explosive events {#sec-expl}
----------------
event SN Ia supraCh subCh AIC NS$_{\rm DD}$ NS$_{\rm AIC}$
--------------------------------- ------- --------- ------- ------ --------------- ----------------
standard 2.0 9.3 7.3 3.21 118 79.2
metal-rich 3.48 8.2 11.7 2.73 117 91.4
med-dens 0.48 2.4 8.0 1.45 89 64.7
low-dens 0.00 2.9 9.8 0.72 80 61.3
fast MB 3.48 8.2 11.7 2.73 117 91.4
CE coll 0.74 7.7 8.9 2.97 117 85.1
BF05 1.56 3.6 4.2 2.45 70 45.5
47 Tuc 1.22 4.9 9.3 2.44 88 70.3
47 Tuc+BF05 1.54 2.2 6.4 0.66 65 42.1
47 Tuc+SCBF05 0.66 2.4 6.2 0.88 50 36.3
47 Tuc+$\alpha_{\rm CE}\lambda$ 2.20 3.2 8.8 1.71 87 59.6
non-dyn 0.00 0.7 3.2 0.00 70 69.4
field 0.50 7.7 15.1 1.58 122.17 22.8
: Rate of explosive events.[]{data-label="tab-channels-expl"}
“SN Ia” is the number of Type Ia SN (single-degenerate channel only), “supraCh” is the number of double WD mergers where the total mass is more than $1.4\,M_\odot$, “subCh” is the number of sub-Chandrasekhar nuclear runaways, “NS” is the number of NSs that can be potentially formed via double-degenerate (NS$_{\rm DD}$) or AIC (NS$_{\rm AIC}$) channels until the age of 10 Gyrs. For cluster models, rates and numbers are given per Gyr per 200,000 $M_\odot$ total cluster mass and are averaged for the ages of 8-12 Gyr. For non-dynamical models, rates and numbers are given for the age of 10 Gyr and for the field model rates and numbers are given after 10 Gyr of continuous star formation.
As the mass distribution of accreting WDs is shifted towards higher masses compared to the field population, it is important to check what effect this has on the rates of: (i) Type Ia supernova (SN Ia, here we mean the single degenerate channel only); (ii) double WD mergers (those for which the total mass $\ge M_{\rm Ch}\simeq 1.4\,M_\odot$); (iii) sub-Chandrasekhar supernovae; and (iv) accretion induced collapse (AIC).
The type of event that occurs depends on the mass and composition of the white dwarf and the rate of mass transfer. If this is a carbon-oxygen (CO) WD and experiences stable accretion, it will accumulate mass until it reaches the Chandrasekhar limit and then explodes as a type Ia supernova. In the case of specific MT rates the accretion leads to the accumulation of He in the shell [@Kato99_ia]. If sufficient mass is accumulated, it will lead to the ignition of the CO or ONeMg core and disruption of the WD as a sub-Chandrasekhar-mass Type Ia supernova [see @Taam80_subch; @Livne91_subch; @Woosley94_subch; @Garcia99_subch; @Ivanova_04d]. In the case of accretion on to ONeMg WDs, upon reaching the Chandrasekhar limit the WD will undergo accretion-induced collapse and form a NS.
If the donor is another WD and the mass transfer is not stable, the mass of the merger product can exceed the Chandrasekhar limit – these so-called supra-Chandrasekhar mergers could lead either to a Type Ia supernova (double-degenerate channel), or to a merger induced collapse of the remnant to form a NS and perhaps a millisecond radio pulsar [@Chen93]. It was argued as well that in the latter case and, if one of the WD is magnetic, such mergers will lead to magnetar formation. Such objects may be responsible for the production of the giant flares emitted by soft $\gamma$-repeaters, which can be identified with early type galaxies. These flares may contribute to a fraction of the observed short duration burst population at higher redshift [@Levan06_SGR].
If NSs are born with natal kicks, most of them will be ejected from the shallow cluster potential, leaving few NSs to explain the observed number of millisecond pulsars [@Pfahl02]. In the case of accretion or merger induced collapse, the NSs are likely to be formed without a significant kick [@Podsi04_aic], and this can relieve the NS “retention problem”. If double WD mergers do not lead to collapse, they must contribute to the rate of Type Ia supernovae, with potential cosmological implications [for a review see @Leibundgut01].
The production of supra-Chandrasekhar mergers in our galaxy was discussed in [@Hurley02] and was estimated to be 2.6 per year in the Galactic disc (this is 8.6 per cluster per Gyr in our units). Several free parameters can have strong effects on this result, such as the common envelope prescription, the initial mass function, or the adopted star formation history. There are also differences between our models and those of [@Hurley02]: (i) their cut-off mass for WD binaries is at the initial mass of $0.8\, M_\odot$; (ii) they choose $\alpha_{\rm CE}=3$; (iii) they adopted continuous star formation through 15 Gyr (c.f. ours 10 Gyr); and (iv) our model for accretion on to WDs is more up-to-date [for details, see @Bel05b]. Overall, we find that our formation rates for the field are not significantly different from those of @Hurley02 (see Table \[tab-channels-expl\]). We also find that our rates are smaller if the star formation is taken not as flat, but with one (or several) star formation bursts that ended several Gyrs ago.
The enhanced production rate of double WD mergers in dense stellar clusters was first discussed in detail by @Shara02, who applied this to open clusters. They found that the supra-Chandrasekhar WD merger rate can be increased by an order of magnitude (although their statistics were based on only a few events). We did not find such an increase compared to the field population, where star formation is continuing, though we found some increase compared to the case without dynamical interactions (see Table \[tab-channels-expl\]). However, we note that our total number of supra-Chandrasekhar WD mergers is large. In fact, if indeed all those mergers lead to formation of NSs, and those NSs are retained by the cluster, then this channel provides about 6% of all NSs ever created. The NSs thus created become comparable in numbers to the NSs that were born with natal kicks and retained. The production of NSs via this channel can be reduced by reducing the efficiency of the common envelope. In this case, more binaries will merge during the CE phase and less supra-Chandrasekhar mergers will occur. We found however that even the reduction of $\alpha_{\rm CE}\lambda$ to 0.1 led only to a moderate decrease of the “current” (at about 10 Gyr) production rate of supra-Chandrasekhar mergers, while their total production is only a bit smaller (see different models for 47 Tuc in the Table \[tab-channels-expl\])). In addition, the production of NSs via AIC is comparable to the production of NSs via merger induced collapse, and therefore also appears to be a significant source of NSs in GCs. The question of how many NSs can be created via different channels in GCs is very important, and will be addressed in more detail in Paper II.
We estimate the contribution of SN Ia produced in GCs to total galactic SN rates. Assuming that $\sim 3\times 10^{7}\,M_\odot$ is contained in galactic GCs ($\sim 150$ galactic GCs), we find that the single-degenerate channel from GCs can provide at best 1 SN per $\sim 10^6$ yr per galaxy, and the contribution of GCs is only several times higher if the double-degenerate channel (supra-Chandrasekhar) also results in SN. In spiral galaxies the rate of SN Ia is 0.04-0.1 per century per galaxy [@Mannucci05_Iarate], and therefore the contribution of GCs is not important. However, GCs can play a larger role in elliptical galaxies, where no star formation is going on and the rate of SN Ia provided by the field population is smaller. In addition, in ellipticals the specific frequency of GCs per galaxy luminosity unit is significantly higher than in spirals [up to 8.6 compared to 0.5 in Milky Way, see e.g. @Kim04_xlf]. Also, it has been shown that the observational SN Ia rate consists of two components – a prompt piece that is proportional to the star formation rate, and an extended piece that is proportional to the total stellar mass [@Scannapiec05_Ia]. This is consistent with the behavior of the formation rates of both single degenerate and double degenerate channels in GCs, which peak during the first Gyr of the cluster evolution and have a flat distribution at later times. We therefore propose that GCs can increase the theoretically predicted rates of SN Ia in elliptical galaxies.
Coalescing compact binaries as LISA sources
-------------------------------------------
![Distribution density (averaged over time) of LISA binaries, in the space of binary periods and chirp masses, from our “standard” model (integrated over cluster ages from 9 to 13 Gyr).[]{data-label="lisa-bin"}](fig18.eps){height=".35\textheight"}
AM CVns discussed in §\[sec-amcv\], as well as most double white dwarf mergers discussed in §\[sec-expl\] (with the exclusion of a small fraction of mergers that are results of physical collision during hard binary encounters) are coalescing binaries driven by gravitational radiation. Prior to their mergers, or before and during the MT, they can be detectable as gravitational wave sources by LISA. Their detectability is significantly enhanced when their orbital periods become smaller than about $2000\,$s [@Ben01; @Nelemans05_lisa], so their signals can be distinguished from the background noise produced by Galactic binaries. As the positional accuracy of LISA will be much greater for binaries with such short periods, these sources can be associated with specific globular clusters in our Galaxy.
From our simulations we find that at any given moment, a typical cluster of 200,000 $M_\odot$ will contain 10 LISA sources on average, and at least 3 LISA binaries at any given moment; during 1 Gyr a cluster forms 180 LISA systems. A massive cluster like 47 Tuc, with mass $\sim 10^6\,M_\odot$, will have at least 10 LISA sources at any given moment, and 40 LISA binaries on average. At an age of 10 Gyrs such a cluster can produce as many as 3-15 NS-WD LISA binaries per Gyr (a typical cluster produces 1-3 NS-WD coalescing binaries per Gyr).
With the total mass in GCs of about $ 3\times 10^{7}\,M_\odot$, as many as 1500 LISA binaries can be present in all Galactic GCs (this number will decrease if the CE efficiency is smaller). The most optimistic upper limit for the galactic formation rate of NS-WD binaries in GCs is several hundred per Gyr. The lifetime of a NS-WD binary in the LISA-band during the MT is $\sim 10^8$ yr. The time prior to the onset of MT depends on the binary eccentricity, but is usually much shorter [@Ivanova05_ucxb]. With our predicted formation rates, as many as 10-50 NS-WD LISA binaries can be detected in GCs. This number is probably too optimistic, as fewer than 10 ultra-compact X-ray binaries (mass-transferring NS-WD binaries with orbital periods less than an hour) have been identified in GCs, implying that the formation rate of LISA-sources should be smaller. (One explanation could be that many globular clusters are less dense than our “standard” model and NS-WD formation is thus less frequent.) We shall address the issue of the formation rates of binaries with NSs in more detail in Paper II. Here we will only note that the LISA binaries will spend spend most of their time in the LISA band among their MT tracks, with chirp masses $\la 0.25 M_\odot$ (see Fig. \[lisa-bin\]).
Discussion
==========
With our simulations we predict that the formation rates of CVs and AM CVns in globular clusters are not very different from those in the field population. The numbers of CVs and AM CVns per mass unit are comparable to numbers in the field if the whole cluster population is considered, and they are only 2-3 times larger in the core than in the field. Dynamical formation is responsible only for 60%-70% of CVs in the core. This fraction decreases as the density decreases, and the role of primordial CVs becomes more important. We rule out tidal captures as an effective mechanism for CV formation in GCs unless the rate of TCs is significantly underestimated. Instead we propose that the population of GC CVs reflects a combination of primordial CVs, CVs in post-exchange binaries, and products of physical collisions of MS stars with RGs. There are also primordial CVs which are located in the halo and have never entered the core. The GC core density variation indeed does not play a very large role, in contrast to the case of NS binaries, where almost all systems are formed dynamically [@Ivanova04a] and whose numbers have a strong dependence on the cluster collision rate [@Pooley03]. We expect to have one detectable CV per $1000\,M_\odot$ in the core of a typical cluster and about one detectable CV per $1000-2000\,M_\odot$ in a 47 Tuc type cluster. Thus we predict 35-40 CVs in the core of 47 Tuc, in quite reasonable agreement with observations, where 22 CVs in 47 Tuc have been identified [@Edmonds03a]. Even better agreement between our simulations and the observed number of CVs can be obtained if we assume that the initial core mass in 47 Tuc is smaller than 5% of the cluster.
Although the formation rates do not differ strongly, we found significant differences in the populations, and note that these differences may have observational consequences. Indeed, cataclysmic variables in globular clusters have an unusual array of characteristics, which make them difficult to classify as members of the standard classes of CVs recognized in the galaxy. Their X-ray luminosities seem to be rather high, compared with CVs in the field [@Verbunt97]. They exhibit dwarf nova outbursts only rarely, compared to well-studied dwarf novae: only 1 dwarf nova was found in 47 Tuc by @Shara96 in a survey which would have detected 1/3 of known dwarf novae if they were located in 47 Tuc, while @Edmonds03a identify 22 firm CVs in 47 Tuc. Finally, the X-ray to optical flux ratios of CVs in globular clusters are relatively high, comparable to those of dwarf novae [@Edmonds03b].
One solution to this problem was the suggestion that CVs in globular clusters tend to be primarily magnetic in nature, compared to CVs in the field [@Grindlay95]. Magnetic CVs have no discs (AM Her or polar CVs), or truncated discs (DQ Her CVs or intermediate polars, IPs), because of the effect of the WD magnetic field. As a result, the disc instability is nonexistent or suppressed. Magnetic CVs are believed to produce X-rays through an accretion shock above the polar cap, producing high X-ray luminosities, while nonmagnetic CVs produce an optically thick boundary layer, saturating their X-ray emission [@Patterson85]. Strong He II $\lambda$ 4686 lines were observed in the spectra of three CVs in NGC 6397 [@Edmonds99], indicating a strong source of FUV radiation. This FUV radiation could indicate either evidence for an intermediate polar interpretation, or a very high mass transfer rate; the second interpretation is favored for the FUV-bright, 27-hour period CV AKO9 in 47 Tuc [@Knigge03]. Another argument in favor of the intermediate polar interpretation is the excess $N_H$ (in addition to that expected along the line of sight) observed towards many CVs in 47 Tuc [@Heinke05a]. Excess $N_H$ in CVs that are not observed at high inclinations has been considered a signature of the accretion curtains observed in the magnetic systems known as intermediate polars.
However, only two globular cluster CVs have shown clear evidence of magnetic fields in their X-ray lightcurves so far [X9 and X10 in 47 Tuc @Grindlay01a; @Heinke05a]. This may not mean that these systems are not magnetic, since the number of X-ray photons detected from globular clusters is generally small (compared with nearby, well-studied CVs). In addition, it has been suggested that the accretion in SW Sex and VY Scl CVs is governed by the WD magnetic field, without evidence of pulsations [@Rodriguez-Gil01; @Hameury02]. Another problem for the magnetic interpretation is that IPs tend to be optically brighter than typical CVs in globular clusters, which have lower ratios of X-ray to optical flux more typical of dwarf novae than IPs [@Edmonds03b]. A final problem is the observation of dwarf nova outbursts in two of the three CVs in NGC 6397 possessing strong He II emission [@Shara05]. A proposed resolution to these problems is a combination of a low mass transfer rate (which will reduce the optical brightness and increase the X-ray to optical flux ratio) with an intermediate polar nature [@Edmonds03b]. @Dobrotka05 calculated the dwarf nova recurrence times for CV discs with various mass transfer rates and WD magnetic moments, and found a parameter space that fulfilled the requirements of globular cluster CVs. Left unanswered was why globular cluster CVs might tend to have stronger magnetic fields than field systems.
Our work provides a possible answer to this question. Globular cluster dynamics has a strong effect on the composition of the binaries that form CVs, tending to place more massive WDs into binaries that will become CVs (Fig. 11). Increasing the mass of WDs in CVs increases the energy that can be extracted at a given mass transfer rate, thus increasing the X-ray luminosity and X-ray to optical flux ratio of the CVs. This effect is complementary to the effects of higher magnetic fields. However, higher mass WDs also have a higher probability of showing strong magnetic fields [@Vennes99; @Liebert03; @Wick05]. Thus the dynamical origin of WDs in globular cluster CVs may be responsible for the observational peculiarities of globular cluster CVs; their relatively high X-ray luminosities and X-ray to optical flux ratios, and their low rates of dwarf nova outbursts.
The tendency for higher mass white dwarf accretors in GC CVs in comparison to the field also affects the production of the superhump phenomenon. This behavior results from the precession of the outer disc due to the excitation of resonances within the disc caused by the 3:1 commensurability of motions in the disc with the companion’s orbital period [see @Whitehurst91]. Such systems are characterized by mass ratios (of donor to accretor) of less than 0.25-0.33. Systems of this type in the field are rarely observed at orbital periods above the period gap, but the higher white dwarf masses of CVs in GCs would increase their likelihood in GCs.
We examined also several other consequences of having a dynamically modified population of close binaries including WDs. In particular, considering supra-Chandrasekhar mergers, we found that too many NSs may be formed if these mergers lead to merger-induced collapse. We suggest that either this mechanism does not lead to NS formation, or the CE efficiency is overestimated. By our estimates, GCs do not contribute strongly to the SN Ia rates in spiral galaxies, however they may significantly increase these rates in elliptical galaxies. We have also shown that GCs can be excellent sites for LISA observations since many GCs will contain several LISA sources at any given moment, although most of those systems will have low chirp masses.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
This work was supported by NASA Grant NAG5-12044 (FAR), NSF Grant AST-0200876 (RET), and Chandra Theory Grant TM6-7007X (JF) at Northwestern University, KB acknowledges supprot by KBN grant 1P03D02228. All simulations were performed on the McKenzie cluster at CITA which was funded by the Canada Foundation for Innovation.
C. D., [Grindlay]{} J. E., [Garcia]{} M. R., 1990, , 357, L35
C. D., [Rubenstein]{} E. P., [Slavin]{} S. D., [Cohn]{} H., [Lugger]{} P., [Cool]{} A. M., [Grindlay]{} J. E., 1996, , 473, L31+
C., [Pooley]{} D., [Homer]{} L., [et al.]{} 2004, , 609, 755
K., [Benacquista]{} M., [Larson]{} S. L., [Ruiter]{} A. J., 2005a, astro-ph/0510718
K., [Benacquista]{} M., [Larson]{} S. L., [Ruiter]{} A. J., 2005b, ArXiv Astrophysics e-prints
K., [Bulik]{} T., [Ruiter]{} A. J., 2005, , 629, 915
K., [Kalogera]{} V., [Bulik]{} T., 2002, , 572, 407
K., [Kalogera]{} V., [Rasio]{} F. A., [Taam]{} R. E., [Zezas]{} A., [Bulik]{} T., [Maccarone]{} T. J., [Ivanova]{} N., 2005, astro-ph/0511811
M. J., [Portegies Zwart]{} S., [Rasio]{} F. A., 2001, Classical and Quantum Gravity, 18, 4025
K., [Leonard]{} P. J. T., 1993, , 411, L75
G. W., 1975, , 199, L143
A. M., [Grindlay]{} J. E., [Cohn]{} H. N., [Lugger]{} P. M., [Bailyn]{} C. D., 1998, , 508, L75
A. M., [Grindlay]{} J. E., [Cohn]{} H. N., [Lugger]{} P. M., [Slavin]{} S. D., 1995, , 439, 695
R., [Rappaport]{} S., 1994, , 423, 274
A., [Lasota]{} J.-P., [Menou]{} K., 2005, ApJ in press, astro-ph/0509359
P. D., [Gilliland]{} R. L., [Heinke]{} C. O., [Grindlay]{} J. E., 2003a, , 596, 1177
P. D., [Gilliland]{} R. L., [Heinke]{} C. O., [Grindlay]{} J. E., 2003b, , 596, 1197
P. D., [Grindlay]{} J. E., [Cool]{} A., [Cohn]{} H., [Lugger]{} P., [Bailyn]{} C., 1999, , 516, 250
J. M., [Cheung]{} P., [Portegies Zwart]{} S. F., [Rasio]{} F. A., 2004, , 352, 1
D., [Bravo]{} E., [Woosley]{} S. E., 1999, , 349, 177
J. E., [Cool]{} A. M., [Callanan]{} P. J., [Bailyn]{} C. D., [Cohn]{} H. N., [Lugger]{} P. M., 1995, , 455, L47
J. E., [Heinke]{} C., [Edmonds]{} P. D., [Murray]{} S. S., 2001, Science, 292, 2290
J. E., [Heinke]{} C. O., [Edmonds]{} P. D., [Murray]{} S. S., [Cool]{} A. M., 2001, , 563, L53
P. J., [Charles]{} P. A., [Johnston]{} H. M., [Verbunt]{} F., 1997, , 285, 693
J.-M., [Lasota]{} J.-P., 2002, , 394, 231
D. C., [Charles]{} P. A., [van Zyl]{} L., [Kong]{} A. K. H., [Homer]{} L., [Hakala]{} P., [Naylor]{} T., [Davies]{} M. B., 2005, , 357, 325
B. M. S., [Kalogera]{} V., [Rasio]{} F. A., 2003, , 586, 1364
D. C., [Hut]{} P., [McMillan]{} S. L. W., 1996, , 467, 359
C. O., [Grindlay]{} J. E., [Edmonds]{} P. D., [Cohn]{} H. N., [Lugger]{} P. M., [Camilo]{} F., [Bogdanov]{} S., [Freire]{} P. C., 2005, , 625, 796
C. O., [Grindlay]{} J. E., [Lugger]{} P. M., [Cohn]{} H. N., [Edmonds]{} P. D., [Lloyd]{} D. A., [Cool]{} A. M., 2003, , 598, 501
J. R., [Tout]{} C. A., [Pols]{} O. R., 2002, , 329, 897
N., 2006, , 636, 979
N., [Belczynski]{} K., [Fregeau]{} J. M., [Rasio]{} F. A., 2005, , 358, 572
N., [Fregeau]{} J. M., [Rasio]{} F. A., 2005, in [Rasio]{} F. A., [Stairs]{} I. H., eds, ASP Conf. Ser. 328: Binary Radio Pulsars [Binary Evolution and Neutron Stars in Globular Clusters]{}. pp 231–+
N., [Rasio]{} F., 2004, in Revista Mexicana de Astronomia y Astrofisica Conference Series [Compact Binaries in Globular Clusters]{}. pp 67–70
N., [Rasio]{} F. A., 2005, in [Burderi]{} L., [Antonelli]{} L. A., [D’Antona]{} F., [di Salvo]{} T., [Israel]{} G. L., [Piersanti]{} L., [Tornamb[è]{}]{} A., [Straniero]{} O., eds, AIP Conf. Proc. 797: Interacting Binaries: Accretion, Evolution, and Outcomes [Formation and evolution or compact binaries with an accreting white dwarf in globular clusters]{}. pp 53–60
N., [Rasio]{} F. A., [Lombardi]{} J. C., [Dooley]{} K. L., [Proulx]{} Z. F., 2005, , 621, L109
N., [Taam]{} R. E., 2003, , 599, 516
N., [Taam]{} R. E., 2004, , 601, 1058
J., [Pietrukowicz]{} P., [Thompson]{} I. B., [Krzeminski]{} W., [Schwarzenberg-Czerny]{} A., [Pych]{} W., [Stachowski]{} G., 2005, , 359, 677
J., [Thompson]{} I. B., 2003, , 125, 2534
M., [Hachisu]{} I., 1999, , 513, L41
D.-W., [Fabbiano]{} G., 2004, , 611, 846
C., [Zurek]{} D. R., [Shara]{} M. M., [Long]{} K. S., [Gilliland]{} R. L., 2003, , 599, 1320
P., 2002, Science, 295, 82
B., 2001, , 39, 67
A. J., [Wynn]{} G. A., [Chapman]{} R., [Davies]{} M. B., [King]{} A. R., [Priddey]{} R. S., [Tanvir]{} N. R., 2006, , pp L15+
J., [Bergeron]{} P., [Holberg]{} J. B., 2003, , 125, 348
E., [Glasner]{} A. S., 1991, , 370, 272
J. C., [Proulx]{} Z. F., [Dooley]{} K. L., [Theriault]{} E. M., [Ivanova]{} N., [Rasio]{} F. A., 2006, ApJ accepted
F., [Della Valle]{} M., [Panagia]{} N., [Cappellaro]{} E., [Cresci]{} G., [Maiolino]{} R., [Petrosian]{} A., [Turatto]{} M., 2005, , 433, 807
R. A., 1995, , 450, 732
J. D., [Shara]{} M. M., [Caulet]{} A., [Buckley]{} D. A. H., 2002, , 123, 3298
G., [Portegies Zwart]{} S. F., [Verbunt]{} F., [Yungelson]{} L. R., 2001, , 368, 939
J., [Raymond]{} J. C., 1985, , 292, 535
E., [Rappaport]{} S., [Podsiadlowski]{} P., 2002, , 573, 283
P., [Kaluzny]{} J., [Thompson]{} I. B., [Jaroszynski]{} M., [Schwarzenberg-Czerny]{} A., [Krzeminski]{} W., [Pych]{} W., 2005, Acta Astronomica, 55, 261
P., [Langer]{} N., [Poelarends]{} A. J. T., [Rappaport]{} S., [Heger]{} A., [Pfahl]{} E., 2004, , 612, 1044
D., [Lewin]{} W. H. G., [Anderson]{} S. F., [et al.]{} 2003, , 591, L131
D., [Lewin]{} W. H. G., [Homer]{} L., [et al.]{} 2002, , 569, 405
S. F., [Meinen]{} A. T., 1993, , 280, 174
S., [Verbunt]{} F., [Joss]{} P. C., 1983, , 275, 713
P., [Casares]{} J., [Mart[í]{}nez-Pais]{} I. G., [Hakala]{} P., [Steeghs]{} D., 2001, , 548, L49
E., [Bildsten]{} L., 2005, , 629, L85
M. M., [Bergeron]{} L. E., [Gilliland]{} R. L., [Saha]{} A., [Petro]{} L., 1996, , 471, 804
M. M., [Drissen]{} L., 1995, , 448, 203
M. M., [Hinkley]{} S., [Zurek]{} D. R., [Knigge]{} C., [Dieball]{} A., 2005, , 130, 1829
M. M., [Hurley]{} J. R., 2002, , 571, 830
A., [Vecchio]{} A., [Nelemans]{} G., 2005, , 633, L33
R. E., 1980, , 242, 749
S., 1999, , 525, 995
F., [Bunk]{} W. H., [Ritter]{} H., [Pfeffermann]{} E., 1997, , 327, 602
R., [King]{} A., 1991, , 249, 25
D. T., [Ferrario]{} L., 2005, , 356, 1576
S. E., [Weaver]{} T. A., 1994, , 423, 371
[^1]: E-mail:[email protected]
[^2]: Lindheimer Fellow
[^3]: Tombaugh Fellow
[^4]: For the calculations in this study, we have used the StarTrack code prior to the latest release [@Bel05b]. However, the most important updates and revisions of input physics, in particular the ones important for evolution of binaries with white dwarfs, were already incorporated in the version we have used.
[^5]: Note that our “47 Tuc” represents a cluster similar to 47 Tuc but 5 times less massive
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
We investigate the time evolution of a system of quarks interacting with $\sigma$ and pion fields starting from an initial configuration consisting of a tube of hot quark plasma undergoing a boost-invariant longitudinal expansion. We work within the framework of the linear sigma model using classical transport equations for the quarks coupled to the mean-field equations for the meson fields. In certain cases we find strong amplifications of any initial pion fields. For large-radius tubes, starting from quark densities that are very close to critical, we find that a disoriented chiral condensate can form in the centre of the tube. Eventually the collapse of the tube drives this state back to the true vacuum. This process converts the disoriented condensate, dominated by long-wavelength pion modes, into a coherent excitation of the pion field that includes significant components with transverse momenta of around 400 MeV. In contrast, for narrow tubes or larger initial temperatures, amplification occurs only via the pion-laser-like mechanism found previously for spherical systems. In addition, we find that explicit chiral symmetry breaking significantly suppresses the formation of disoriented condensates.\
PACS numbers: 12.38.Mh, 11.30.Rd, 24.85.+p, 25.75.-q
address: |
Theoretical Physics Group, Department of Physics and Astronomy,\
University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, England
author:
- 'Abdellatif Abada[^1] and Michael C. Birse'
title: |
Disoriented chiral condensate formation from tubes\
of hot quark plasma
---
Introduction
============
Relativistic heavy-ion collisions provide a way to form regions of hot, dense hadronic matter. If the temperature is high enough, this matter is expected to be in a phase where chiral symmetry is restored and quarks are unconfined. Recently there has been much interest in the possibility that, as such a system cools, it could lead to regions in which the quark condensate is misaligned with respect to the physical vacuum. These regions can also be thought of as coherent excitations of the pion fields along particular directions in isospin space. Such a state is known as a disoriented chiral condensate (DCC) and a signal for its formation would be anomalously large event-by-event fluctuations in the ratio of charged to neutral pions.[^2]
Many of the studies of DCC’s found in the literature use idealised geometries in order to simplify the calculations. These include uniform matter in a finite box[@RW], infinite matter undergoing a boost-invariant expansion in one direction[@BK; @HW; @CM; @CKMP; @BCG; @Ran1] and isotropically expanding infinite matter[@GM; @LDC; @Ran1]. An important exception is the work of Asakawa [*et al.*]{}[@AHW], who considered the classical evolution of the chiral fields for cylindrical systems undergoing boost-invariant longitudinal expansion.
In a previous paper[@AB] (hereafter referred to as I), we examined the effects of finite size on the evolution of the chiral fields in the case of spherical systems. The framework used was the linear sigma model[@GML] with explicit quark degrees of freedom. This model has also been studied by Csernai and Mishustin[@CM], for the case of infinite matter expanding in one direction.[^3] Here we extend our studies to the case of cylindrical systems undergoing a boost-invariant longitudinal expansion. This geometry should be more relevant to ultra-relativistic heavy-ion collisions, and in particular to the central regions of such collisions where particle production is expected to be independent of rapidity[@Bj83].
As in Ref.[@CM], we assume a rapid quench that leaves the quarks out of thermal equilibrium with the chiral fields. The subsequent evolution of the system is then described by the classical Euler-Lagrange equations for the fields coupled to a relativistic transport equation for the quarks[@SR]. We work in the classical limit where the transport equation reduces to a relativistic Vlasov equation for the distribution of the quarks in phase space. Further details of the model and method of solution can be found in I.
For spherical droplets of hot quark matter, our studies in I showed that the quarks stream rapidly away leaving the chiral fields in an unstable configuration. During their subsequent evolution these fields always “roll" towards the physical vacuum. This behaviour can be thought of as the inward collapse of the surface of the droplet as the quarks escape from it. Although such systems show no tendency to form DCC’s, we found that coherent amplification of any initial pion fluctuation could occur through a pion-laser-like mechanism. This is a consequence of the strong oscillations of the $\sigma$ field that can pump energy into oscillations of the pion field. Similar behaviour has also been seen in Refs.[@BVH; @MM]. We have shown in I that this mechanism is a robust one: for example, it does not require a chiral phase transition in order to produce enhanced pion fields.
For cylindrical systems studied here, we find a competition between two mechanisms. The first consists of the transverse flow of the quarks and resulting collapse of the surface of the tube. This leads to behaviour that is similar to that seen in the spherical case. The second is the dilution of the quark density inside the tube as a result of its longitudinal expansion. The latter can lead to DCC formation, as one might expect from the results of Ref.[@CM]. However, the extent to which this mechanism operates is very sensitive to details of the initial configuration. The formation time for any DCC relative to the time for the tube to collapse determines whether a DCC forms, and how long it can exist. The collapse also changes the momentum distribution of the pions from that of the initial DCC, by coherently exciting pion modes with higher momenta. In addition we find that inclusion of explicit chiral symmetry breaking, with the strength needed to give the observed pion mass, significantly suppresses DCC formation.
The paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II we present the linear sigma model that we use together with the classical transport and field equations. Since the basic approach has already been described in I, we concentrate on those features that are specific to the longitudinally expanding cylinder. Our results are described in Sec. III and we discuss their implications in Sec. IV.
Model
=====
We work here with the linear sigma model[@GML], which provides a simple model for the physics associated with chiral symmetry. The model describes quarks interacting with a chiral four-vector of meson fields $(\sigma,
\mbox{\boldmath $\pi$})$. Since we study here configurations in which only one component of the pion field is nonvanishing, we keep only one pion field and, as in I, we further simplify the model by neglecting the isospin dependence of the quark-pion coupling. The Lagrangian we use is thus $$\label{Lagr}
{\cal L} = \bar\psi[i\partial\llap/-g(\sigma+i\pi\gamma_5)]\psi
+\frac{1}{2}(\partial_{\mu}\sigma\partial^{\mu}\sigma
+ \partial_{\mu}\pi\partial^{\mu}\pi) - U(\sigma,\pi),$$ in which the meson fields of an O(2) linear sigma model are coupled to two flavours and three colours of quark.
The interactions among the meson fields are described by the potential $U$, which we take to be of the form $$\label{mespot}
U(\sigma,\pi)= \frac{\lambda^2}{4}\bigl(\sigma^2+\pi^2-\nu^2
\bigr)^2-f_{\pi} m_{\pi}^2\sigma,$$ where $f_\pi=93$ MeV is the pion decay constant. The “Mexican-hat" form of this potential leads to spontaneous breaking of the chiral symmetry through the nonzero vacuum expectation value of $\sigma$, which corresponds to the quark condensate of the QCD vacuum. The parameter $\lambda$ is chosen to give the $\sigma$ meson a mass in the range 600–1000 MeV. In the physical vacuum the quarks develop a mass $M_q=gf_\pi$. We consider values of $g$ that correspond to quark masses in the range 300-500 MeV.
For the situation considered here, it is convenient to work in terms of polar coordinates $\rho$ and $\phi$ for the transverse position, proper time $\tau=\sqrt{t^2-z^2}$, and (space-time) rapidity $\eta={1\over
2}\ln[(t+z)/(t-z)]$. For a cylindrically symmetric system undergoing a boost-invariant expansion, the fields depend only on $\rho$ and $\tau$. In this case the equations for the meson fields take the form $$\label{sig}
{1\over\tau}{\partial\over \partial\tau}\left(\tau{\partial\sigma\over
\partial\tau}\right)={1\over\rho}{\partial\over\partial\rho}\left(\rho
{\partial\sigma\over\partial\rho}\right)
-\left[\lambda^2\Bigl(\sigma^2(\tau,\rho)+\pi^2(\tau,\rho)-\nu^2\Bigr)
+ g^2 {\cal S}_{\rm q}(\tau,\rho)\right]\sigma(\tau,\rho) + f_{\pi} m_{\pi}^2,$$ $$\label{pi}
{1\over\tau}{\partial\over \partial\tau}\left(\tau{\partial\pi\over
\partial\tau}\right)={1\over\rho}{\partial\over\partial\rho}\left(\rho
{\partial\pi\over\partial\rho}\right)
-\left[\lambda^2\Bigl(\sigma^2(\tau,\rho)+\pi^2(\tau,\rho)-\nu^2\Bigr)
+ g^2 {\cal S}_{\rm q}(\tau,\rho)\right]\pi(\tau,r).$$ The source density in these equations, ${\cal S}_{\rm q}(\tau,\rho)$, is proportional to the scalar density of quarks. Its detailed form is given below.
The Vlasov equation[@SR] is conveniently expressed in terms of momentum variables defined in the local rest frame of the matter. In this frame, which is specified by the unit four-vector $u=(t,{\bf 0},z)/\tau$[@Bj83], the longitudinal momentum $p_\parallel$ corresponding to a classical particle with three-momentum [**p**]{} moving in the presence of mean scalar and pseudoscalar fields is $$p_\parallel={p_z t-Ez\over\tau},$$ where $$\label{quarkE}
E(x,{\bf p})=\sqrt{{\bf p}^2 + M^2(x)},$$ and $$\label{quarkM}
M(x)=g\sqrt{\sigma^2(x)+\pi^2(x)}.$$ Similarly, the energy of such a particle in this frame is $$\epsilon=p\cdot u={Et-p_z z\over\tau}.$$ The transverse components of the momentum, denoted ${\bf p}_\perp$, are of course unchanged by the boost to the local rest frame. In terms of these variables, the Vlasov equation for the phase-space distribution of quarks $f(\tau,\eta,{\bf r}_\perp,p_\parallel,{\bf p}_\perp)$ can be written $$\left[{\partial \over\partial\tau}
+{p_\parallel\over\tau\epsilon}{\partial\over\partial\eta}
+{1\over\epsilon}{\bf p}_\perp\cdot\nabla_{{\bf r}_\perp}
-{p_\parallel\over\tau}{\partial \over\partial p_\parallel}
-\Bigl(\nabla_{{\bf r}_\perp}\epsilon(\tau,{\bf r}_\perp,p_\parallel,
{\bf p}_\perp)\Bigr)\cdot\nabla_{{\bf p}_\perp}\right]
f(\tau,\eta,{\bf r}_\perp,p_\parallel,{\bf p}_\perp)=0,\label{Vl}$$ where we have assumed boost invariance, [*i.e.*]{} that $M(x)$ is independent of $\eta$. The antiquark distribution, denoted $\tilde f (\tau,\eta,{\bf
r}_\perp,p_\parallel,{\bf p}_\perp)$, satisfies an equation of similar form.
The Vlasov equation (\[Vl\]) describes freely streaming classical quarks and antiquarks. These particles have energies that are related to their three-momenta by Eq. (\[quarkE\]) and obey relativistic single-particle equations of motion, which, in terms of the coordinates and momenta defined above, take the form: $$\dot{\bf r}_\perp(\tau)={{\bf p}_\perp(\tau)\over \epsilon},\label{spertr}$$ $$\dot{\bf p}_\perp(\tau)=-\nabla_{{\bf r}_\perp}\epsilon,\label{speptr}$$ $$\dot\eta(\tau)={p_\parallel(\tau)\over\tau\epsilon},\label{speeta}$$ $$\dot p_\parallel(\tau)=-{p_\parallel(\tau)\over\tau},\label{speplong}$$ where the overdots denote derivatives with respect to $\tau$ and the particle’s energy in the local rest frame is $$\epsilon\Bigl(\tau,{\bf r}_\perp(\tau),p_\parallel(\tau),
{\bf p}_\perp(\tau)\Bigr)=\sqrt{M^2\Bigl(\tau,{\bf r}_\perp(\tau)\Bigr)
+p^2_\parallel(\tau)+{\bf p}^2_\perp(\tau)}.$$
The source term in the field equations, $S_q(x)$, is given by the integral of $[f(x,{\bf p})+\tilde f(x,{\bf p})]/E(x,{\bf p})$ over all three-momenta[@SR; @AB]. Changing variables to $p_\parallel$ and [ **p**]{}$_\perp$, we can write it in the form $$S_q(x) = \int dp_\parallel\,d^2{\bf p}_\perp\,
\frac{f(x,p_\parallel,{\bf p}_\perp)+\tilde f(x,p_\parallel,{\bf p}_\perp)}
{\epsilon(x,p_\parallel,{\bf p}_\perp)}.$$
Rather than solving Eq. (\[Vl\]) directly as a partial differential equation in seven dimensions, we use the test-particle method[@Won; @SG]. In this approach, the smooth distributions $f$ and $\tilde f$ are approximated by a set of classical particles obeying the equations of motion (\[spertr\])–(\[speplong\]). For the numerical results presented here, we used 40 000 test quarks and antiquarks.
The numerical techniques for solving the equations of motion (\[sig\]), (\[pi\]) and (\[Vl\]) are very similar to those applied to a soliton bag model in Ref.[@VBM]. Details of the method for the case of the linear sigma model can be found in I. In the present case, the boost invariance of the system leads to a number of simplifications. The quark distributions are independent of $\eta$ and hence we do not need to consider the longitudinal motion of the particles, Eq. (\[speeta\]). In addition, the longitudinal momenta satisfy Eq. (\[speplong\]) and so they simply scale like $1/\tau$[@CM].
Because of the longitudinal expansion, there is no finite, conserved energy for systems with this geometry. Nonetheless it is convenient to define an energy per unit rapidity in the local rest frame. This takes the form $$\begin{aligned}
E=\tau\int\!d^2{\bf r}_\perp\,\Biggl\{&&{1\over 2}\dot\sigma^2
+{1\over 2}\dot\pi^2+{1\over 2}(\nabla_{{\bf r}_\perp}\sigma)^2
+{1\over 2}(\nabla_{{\bf r}_\perp}\pi)^2+U(\sigma,\pi)\nonumber\\
&&+\int\!dp_\parallel\,d^2{\bf p}_\perp\,
\epsilon\left[f(\tau,\eta,{\bf r}_\perp,p_\parallel,{\bf p}_\perp)
+\tilde f(\tau,\eta,{\bf r}_\perp,p_\parallel,{\bf p}_\perp)\right]\Biggr\},\end{aligned}$$ where a constant has been added to $U(\sigma,\pi)$ so that it vanishes in the vacuum. By making use of the equations of motion, one finds that the rate of change of $E$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}
{dE\over d\tau}=-\int\!d^2{\bf r}_\perp\,\Biggl\{&&{1\over 2}
\dot\sigma^2+{1\over 2}\dot\pi^2-{1\over 2}(\nabla_{{\bf r}_\perp}\sigma)^2
-{1\over 2}(\nabla_{{\bf r}_\perp}\pi)^2-U(\sigma,\pi)\nonumber\\
&&+\int\!dp_\parallel\,d^2{\bf p}_\perp\,{p_\parallel^2\over \epsilon}
\left[f(\tau,\eta,{\bf r}_\perp,p_\parallel,{\bf p}_\perp)
+\tilde f(\tau,\eta,{\bf r}_\perp,p_\parallel,{\bf p}_\perp)\right]\Biggr\},\end{aligned}$$ We have used this equation as a check on our numerical integration of the equations of motion.
Results
=======
In this section, we present the results of our simulations corresponding to various initial conditions of the system. As in I, the results shown are for our “standard" choice of parameters, $m_{\sigma}=1000$ MeV, $M_{\rm q}=300$ MeV and, if chiral-symmetry breaking is included, $m_{\pi}= 139$ MeV. For these parameters, the temperature below which the phase with $\sigma\neq 0$ becomes the ground state is $T_0\simeq235$ MeV.
The initial conditions are specified by three parameters: the radius $r_0$ of the tube, the temperature $T$ of the quark plasma and the proper time $\tau_0$ at which the evolution according to Eqs. (\[sig\]), (\[pi\]) and (\[Vl\]) starts. A chemical potential $\mu$ can also be introduced to allow for a nonzero initial baryon number, but this does not qualitatively change the behaviour of the system and so we present here only cases with $\mu=0$. We assume, as before, that the plasma inside the tube is initially uniform.[^4]
In order to study whether initial pionic fields can be amplified during the evolution, we add a small pionic perturbation to the initial configuration. As in our previous work, we have considered only uniform initial fluctuations of the pion field since our aim is to study whether DCC formation is possible in these systems. A more realistic approach would be to take initial fluctuations from a thermal distribution using a method similar to that in[@Ran2]. We would then expect to find the formation of regions of differently oriented DCC’s, as seen in the work of Asakawa [*et al.*]{}[@AHW]. Such studies will require integration of the full three-dimensional equations of motion and so will be much more computationally intensive.
For many choices of initial conditions, and in particular for cases with relatively small initial tubes ($r_0<5$ fm), we find similar behaviour to that seen for the spherical droplets of quark plasma studied in I. In these cases, the rapid outward streaming of the quarks leaves the chiral fields in an unstable configuration. The surface of the tube collapses inwards, with the chiral fields “rolling" towards the physical vacuum. The $\sigma$ field then executes strong oscillations abouts its vacuum value. If a nonzero initial pion field is present, then this can be amplified by the laser-like mechanism also seen in I.
In contrast, for large enough initial tubes, we find a rather different behaviour. This is particularly clear in the chiral limit. An example of this type is shown in Figs. \[figsig\]–\[figkspec\]. These show the behaviour of a tube of initial radius $r_0=6$ fm and temperature $T=250$ MeV at $\tau_0=1$ fm/$c$. This initial proper time is the same as that used in Refs.[@HW; @CKMP; @BCG; @LDC; @AHW], but is significantly smaller than the estimates of the freeze-out time in the work of Csernai, Mishustin and coworkers[@CM; @MS; @FMC]. Note that the two examples for which we display results here are not necessarily the most realistic ones; rather they have been chosen since they most clearly illustrate the types of behaviour that are possible, and the conditions under which these can occur.
Figs. \[figsig\] and \[figpi\] show the evolution of the chiral fields for this example of large tube with an initial temperature just above $T_0$. The behaviour of the central region of the tube is dominated, at least initially, by the longitudinal expansion. In particular the quark density there drops below its critical value before the quarks have a chance to start streaming outwards. At this point the chirally restored phase becomes unstable and any small fluctuation from it can start to grow exponentially. In the present case, this happens at $\tau\sim 2.5$ fm/$c$, when the pion field at small radii can be seen to rise rapidly and then oscillate about a value close to $f_\pi$.
This pion field is uniform across the central region of the tube. It is an example of a DCC: a region of misaligned vacuum. The collapse of the surface of the tube means that the DCC does not persist in this form for proper times longer than $r_0/c$. In Figs. \[figsig\] and \[figpi\], one can see nonzero $\sigma$ fields appearing at successively smaller radii and the corresponding pion fields ceasing to oscillate in phase with that at the centre of the tube. From $\tau\sim 7$ fm/$c$ onwards, the behaviour of the system resembles that of the ones studied in I, the sigma field oscillating violently until $\tau\sim 12$ fm/$c$ and then settling down to its vacuum value.
By Fourier analysing the pion field at successive times, we have also investigated the spectrum of the pion modes that are excited. In terms of the transverse Fourier transform of the field, $$\tilde \pi(\tau,{\bf k}_\perp)=\int\!d^2{\bf r}_\perp\,
\exp(i{\bf k}_\perp\cdot{\bf r}_\perp)\pi(\tau,\rho),$$ and its proper-time derivative $\dot{\tilde\pi}(\tau,{\bf k}_\perp)$ we define the corresponding intensity in momentum space (per unit rapidity): $$\label{Epi}
{\cal E}_{\pi}(t,{\bf k}_\perp)={\textstyle{\tau\over 2}}\Bigl(
\vert\dot{\tilde\pi}(t,{\bf k}_\perp)\vert^2 + \omega_k^2 \vert\tilde
\pi(t,{\bf k}_\perp)\vert^2\Bigr),$$ where $\omega_k=\sqrt{k_\perp^2+m_\pi^2}$. At large times, when the pion fields are sufficiently weak that they are well described by a linearised equation of motion, this is just the energy density of the pion field in momentum space. A convenient measure of the total strength of the pion field is provided by $$\label{Npi}
N_{\pi}(\tau)= \int\!\frac{{\rm d}^2 {\bf k}_\perp}{(2\pi)^2}\,{1\over
\omega_k}{\cal E}_{\pi}(t,{\bf k}_\perp),$$ which, for weak fields, is equal to the total number of pions per unit rapidity.
In Fig. \[fignpi\] we show the behaviour of $N_{\pi}(\tau)$. Initially this rises very rapidly and then shows strong oscillations. This is similar to what was seen in the studies of Rajagopal and Wilczek[@RW; @Raj]. After $\tau\sim
7$ fm/$c$, these oscillations disappear and are replaced by a more gradual rise in $N_{\pi}(\tau)$. From the spectrum shown in Fig. \[figtspec\], we see that the initial oscillations are due to the strong excitation of modes with the lowest frequencies and so are characteristic of a DCC. As the tube collapses, the nearly uniform DCC is destroyed and strength is removed from the lowest modes. Nonetheless significant coherent pion fields continue to be present although, unlike the original DCC, these oscillate in space and time.
In Fig. \[figkspec\] we plot the same spectrum as a function of pion momentum at various proper times. At $\tau=4$ fm/$c$ one sees the very large strength concentrated in modes with transverse momenta of less than 150 MeV. This pattern is characteristic of the initial, nearly uniform DCC. At later times, this strength falls off and modes with higher momenta become excited. In particular, significant strength builds up in modes with transverse momenta in the range 300–500 MeV. There is also a smaller peak for momenta of 700–900 MeV Although the final pion fields are no longer dominated by the lowest momentum components, their amplitude still reflects the fact that a DCC was formed. For example, $N_{\pi}$ is enhanced by a factor of about 2000. This is far larger than the effects seen in the spherical systems studied in I, where the maximum enhancement factors were less than 100.
When explicit chiral symmetry breaking is present, in the form of the final term in the potential (\[mespot\]), there is no phase transition but only a crossover between vacua with small and large values of the $\sigma$ field. For the physical value of $m_\pi$, the crossover is fairly rapid and so some of the features of the phase transition do survive. Nonetheless explicit symmetry breaking does lead to some qualitative differences in the evolution of the chiral fields after a quench. An example is shown in Figs. \[figsigm\]–\[fignpim\]. In this case the radius of the initial tube is again $r_0=6$ fm and $\tau_0=1$ fm. The initial temperature was taken to be $T=225$ MeV, which lies within the crossover region for our standard parameter set.
The explicit symmetry-breaking term in (\[mespot\]) tilts the Mexican hat potential in the direction of the true vacuum. Hence the system never evolves towards a maximally misaligned vacuum of the sort seen in the previous example. Despite this, significant amplification of any initial pion field can occur and so a DCC can still form. This is shown in Fig. \[figpim\] by the appearance of a more-or-less uniform pion field of $\sim 20$ MeV in the centre of the tube. This field starts to oscillate around the true vacuum, $\pi=0$. In an infinite system, like those studied in Refs.[@HW; @FMC], these oscillations would continue indefinitely. In the present case, they are terminated at $\tau\simeq 7$ fm/$c$ by the collapse of the tube.
The fact that the fields inside the tube tend to roll towards the true vacuum, as a result of the tilted potential, also means that much less energy is released when the tube finally collapses. Indeed, in the example shown, the tube never completely collapses and a cylindrical region of cold quark matter is formed. Formation of such a region of quark matter was predicted by Csernai and Mishustin[@CM] and was also seen in I for parameter sets with strong quark-meson couplings. This matter is created in a highly excited configuration, as can be seen in Fig. 6 from the strong oscillations of the $\sigma$ field from $\tau\sim 10$ fm/$c$ onwards. As this matter settles down, it radiates a significant fraction of its energy in the form of pions, which is the reason for the continued growth of $N_\pi$ with proper time seen in Fig. \[fignpim\]. However, as discussed in I, we believe that the formation of such matter represents an artifact of the model and so this behaviour should not be taken too seriously. By $\tau\sim 10$ fm/$c$, before this behaviour sets in, $N_\pi$ has been enhanced by a factor of about 200. Although this enhancement is significantly less than that in the previous example, it is still much larger than that found in the spherical systems studied in I.
Discussion
==========
We have studied the evolution of systems of quarks coupled to chiral fields, starting from an initial tube of hot quark plasma undergoing a boost-invariant longitudinal expansion. Such a geometry is expected to be relevant to the central regions of ultra-relativistic heavy-ion collisions. We assume that a rapid quench occurs at some proper time $\tau_0$, leaving the quarks out of thermal equilibrium with the chiral fields. The subsequent evolution of the system is treated in the classical approximation, the quarks being described by a relativistic Vlasov equation in the presence of $\sigma$ and pion fields which satisfy the mean-field equations of the linear sigma model.
Unlike the spherical droplets studied previously in I, these cylindrical configurations can form DCC’s of the sort seen in infinite systems following a quench[@RW]. Similar behaviour is also seen in infinite systems undergoing longitudinal expansion[@BK; @CM; @CKMP; @BCG; @AHW; @FMC]. However we find that the transverse flow of the quarks out of the tube tends to act against the formation of a DCC. This effect does not occur for infinite systems. It leads to an inward collapse of the surface of the tube, which is similar to what happens for spherical droplets. Although this collapse does not generate DCC’s, it can enhance any initial pion fluctuation through a pion-laser-like mechanism whereby strong oscillations of the $\sigma$ field pump energy into the pion fields[@BVH; @MM].
In the cylindrical case, the presence of two competing mechanisms leads to considerable sensitivity to the initial conditions. We find that significant DCC formation occurs only in large tubes ($r_0>5$ fm) where the longitudinal expansion rapidly reduces the quark density below the critical value needed to keep the system in the chirally symmetric phase. For a DCC to be produced, the initial density of quarks and antiquarks should be close to the critical value ([*i.e.*]{} the temperature should be close to $T_0$) and the proper time at freeze-out should be small compared to the radius of the tube.
If the initial proper time $\tau_0$ is taken to be $\sim 1$ fm/$c$, as in Refs.[@HW; @CKMP; @BCG; @LDC; @AHW] and the illustrative examples shown here, then tubes with radii of $\sim 5$ fm or more have time to form significant DCC’s. On the other hand, if $\tau_0$ is $\sim 5-10$ fm/$c$, as suggested by Csernai and Mishustin[@CM; @MS; @FMC], then it seems unlikely that DCC’s can form in tubes of realistic radii. Clearly it is crucial to have better models for the early stages of ultra-relativistic heavy-ion collisions in order to determine the temperature and proper time at freeze-out.
We also find that the subsequent evolution of such systems can significantly affect the transverse-momentum distribution of the emitted pions. Even if a system does form an initial DCC involving only very low-momentum modes of the pion field, the energy released by the oscillations of the $\sigma$ field as the tube collapses can lead to coherent excitation of pionic modes with higher transverse momenta.
A further feature of our results is that explicit breaking of chiral symmetry has a significant effect on the evolution of these systems. In particular, by tilting the Mexican hat in the direction of the true vacuum, it reduces the degree of misalignment of the vacuum that can appear at the centre of the tube. A similar effect is also seen in infinite systems[@FMC]. As a result, the enhancement of the number of pions, as given by Eq. (\[Npi\]), is typically much smaller than that seen in the chiral limit. Nonetheless, even in the broken-symmetry example shown above, the pionic enhancement is much larger than that seen in the spherical systems studied in I, where no DCC was formed.
[99]{} K. Rajagopal, in [*Quark-Gluon Plasma 2*]{}, ed. R. Hwa, (World Scientific, Singapore, 1995). J. D. Bjorken, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A [**7**]{}, 4189 (1992); Acta Phys. Polon. [**B23**]{}, 561 (1992); J. D. Bjorken, K. L. Kowalski, and C. C. Taylor, SLAC report no. SLAC-PUB-6109 (1993); report no. hep-ph/9309235; G. Amelino-Camelia, J. D. Bjorken and S. E. Larsson, reports no. hep-ph/9610202 and hep-ph/9706530. J.-P. Blaizot and A. Krzywicki, Acta Phys. Polon. [**B27**]{}, 1687 (1996). A. A. Anselm, M .G. Ryskin, and A. G. Shuvaev, Z. Phys. A [**354**]{}, 333 (1996). K. Rajagopal, report no. hep-ph/9703258. K. Rajagopal and F. Wilczek, Nucl. Phys. B [**399**]{}, 395 (1993); [*ibid.*]{} [**404**]{}, 577 (1993). J. P. Blaizot and A. Krzywicki, Phys. Rev. D [**46**]{}, 246 (1992); [*ibid.*]{} [**50**]{}, 442 (1994). Z. Huang and X.-N. Wang, Phys. Rev. D [**49**]{}, 4335 (1994). L. P. Csernai and I. N. Mishustin, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**74**]{}, 5005 (1995). F. Cooper, Y. Kluger, E. Mottola and J. P. Paz, Phys. Rev. D [**51**]{}, 237 (1995). A. Bialas, W. Czyz and M. Gmyrek, Phys. Rev. D [**51**]{}, 3739 (1995). J. Randrup, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**77**]{}, 1226 (1996); Nucl. Phys. A [**616**]{}, 531 (1997). S. Gavin and B. Müller, Phys. Lett. B [**329**]{}, 486 (1994). M. A. Lampert, J. F. Dawson, and F. Cooper, Phys. Rev. D [**54**]{}, 2213 (1996). M. Asakawa, Z. Huang, and X.-N. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**74**]{}, 3126 (1995). A. Abada and M. C. Birse, Phys. Rev. D [**55**]{}, 6887 (1997). M. Gell-Mann and M. Lévy, Nuovo Cim. [**16**]{}, 705 (1960). I. N. Mishustin and O. Scavenius, Phys. Lett. B [**396**]{}, 33 (1997). T. S. Biró, D. Molnár, Z. Feng and L. P. Csernai, Phys. Rev. D [**55**]{}, 6900 (1997). Z. Feng, D. Molnár and L. P. Csernai, report no. hep-ph/9702246. J. D. Bjorken, Phys. Rev. D [**27**]{}, 140 (1983). G. R. Shin and J. Rafelski, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) [**243**]{}, 65 (1995). D. Boyanovsky, H. J. de Vega, and R. Holman, Phys. Rev. D [**51**]{}, 734 (1995). S. Mrowczynski and B. Müller, Phys. Lett. B [**363**]{}, 1 (1995). C. Y. Wong, Phys. Rev. C [**25**]{}, 1461 (1982). H. Stöcker and W. Greiner, Phys. Rep. [**137**]{}, 277 (1986). T. Vetter, T. S. Biro, and U. Mosel, Nucl. Phys. A [**581**]{}, 598 (1995). J. Randrup, Phys. Rev. D [**55**]{}, 1188 (1997).
[^1]: Present address: BP International Limited, Britannic House, 1 Finsbury Circus, London, EC2M 7BA, England
[^2]: For reviews of DCC’s, as well as further references, see:[@Raj; @Bjo; @BKrev; @ARS; @Raj2].
[^3]: Other recent work using this model can be found in Refs.[@MS; @BMFC; @FMC].
[^4]: For further details of the implementation of the initial conditions in this model, see Sec. IV of I.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We present a simple and unified classification of macroscopic electromagnetic resonances in finite arbitrarily inhomogeneous isotropic dielectric 3D structures situated in free space. By observing the complex-plane dynamics of the spatial spectrum of the volume integral operator as a function of angular frequency and constitutive parameters we identify and generalize all the usual resonances, including complex plasmons, real laser resonances in media with gain, and real quasi-static resonances in media with negative permittivity and gain.'
author:
- 'Neil V. Budko'
- 'Alexander B. Samokhin'
title: |
Classification of electromagnetic resonances in finite\
inhomogeneous three-dimensional structures
---
[^1]
It is hard to overestimate the role played by macroscopic electromagnetic resonances in physics. Phenomena and technologies such as lasers, photonic band-gap materials, plasma waves and instabilities, microwave devices, and a great deal of electronics are all related or even entirely based on some kind of electromagnetic resonance. The usual way of analysis consists of deriving the so-called dispersion equation, which relates the wave-vector $\bk$ or the propagation constant $\vert\bk\vert$ of a plane electromagnetic wave to the angular frequency $\omega$. The solutions of this equation may be real or complex. In the first case we talk about a [*real resonance*]{}, i.e. such that can be attained for some real angular frequency and therefore, in principle, results in unbounded fields. In reality, however, amplification of the fields is bounded by other physical mechanisms, e.g. nonlinear saturation. If solution is complex, then we have a [*complex resonance*]{} and, depending on the sign of the imaginary part, the associated fields are either decaying or growing with time. This common approach is rather limited and does not include all pertaining phenomena. Indeed, more or less explicit dispersion equations can only be obtained for infinite (unbounded) homogeneous media, as often done in plasma and photonic studies. Other approaches impose explicit boundary conditions and can handle resonators and waveguides with perfectly conducting walls, and idealistic piece-wise homogeneous objects (e.g. plane layered medium, circular cylinders, a sphere). On the other hand, very little can be said in the general case of a finite inhomogeneous dielectric object situated in free space. Due to the absence of an explicit dispersion equation and explicit boundary conditions, even the existence and classification of resonances in such objects is still an open problem.
We describe here an alternative mathematically rigorous approach to electromagnetic resonances, based on the volume integral formulation of the electromagnetic scattering, also known as the Green’s function method and the domain integral equation method. This formulation is equivalent to the Maxwell’s equations and is perfectly suited for bounded inhomogeneous objects in free space. Despite its generality, nowadays the volume integral equation is mostly used as a numerical tool, for instance, in near-field optics and geophysics. The main limitation seems to be the implicit mathematical structure of this equation resisting any straightforward analysis and interpretation. Recently, however, we have succeeded in deriving useful mathematical bounds on the spatial spectrum of the volume integral operator proving, in particular, that along with the usual discrete eigenvalues this operator has a dense essential spectrum as well [@BudkoSamokhinSIAM2005]. Below we reiterate our results and show how to use them in the analysis of resonances. Then, we proceed with a step by step classification of all known complex and real resonances. In particular, we generalize the notion of a complex plasmon, real laser resonance, and a real quasi-static resonance in an exotic material containing a negative permittivity part and a part with gain. Recently, several authors have suggested [@Bergman2001]–[@Pendry2003] that this type of material may be an answer to some urgent technological questions ranging from surface plasmon lasers (SPASER) to loss compensation in media with negative refraction (perfect lens). We believe that our analysis provides a necessary generalization and a handy analytical tool for these and other studies, especially in what concerns the resonant light confinement.
The frequency-domain Maxwell’s equations describing the electromagnetic field in a non-magnetic isotropic inhomogeneous object occupying finite spatial domain $D$ lead to the following strongly singular integral equation: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:SingularVIE}
% \begin{split}
&\bE^{\rm in}(\bx,\omega)
=
\left[{\mathbb I} + \frac{1}{3}\chi(\bx,\omega)\right]
\bE(\bx,\omega)
\\ \nonumber
& - \lim\limits_{\epsilon\rightarrow 0}
\int\limits_{\bx'\in D \setminus\vert\bx-\bx'\vert<\epsilon}
{\mathbb G}(\bx-\bx',\omega)
\chi(\bx',\omega)
\bE(\bx',\omega)
\;{\rm d}\bx',
% \end{split}
\end{aligned}$$ where ${\mathbb I}$ denotes a unit tensor ($3\times 3$ identity matrix), whereas the explicit form of the Green’s tensor ${\mathbb G}$ is of no importance here, but can be found in [@Rahola2000] and [@SamokhinBook]. Here, $\bE^{\rm in}$ is the incident field in vacuum background, where the wavenumber is $k_{\rm 0}=\omega/c$, and the total electric field in the configuration is denoted by $\bE$. Constitutive parameters of the object are contained in the so-called contrast function $ \chi(\bx,\omega)=\varepsilon_{\rm r}(\bx,\omega)-1$, where $\varepsilon_{\rm r}$ is the relative dielectric permittivity of the object. In operator notation equation (\[eq:SingularVIE\]) can be written simply as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:OperatorVIE}
Au=u^{\rm in}.
\end{aligned}$$ The spatial spectrum of operator $A$ is defined as a set $\sigma(\lambda)$ of complex numbers $\lambda$ for which operator $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Resolvent}
[A-\lambda I]^{-1}
\end{aligned}$$ fails to exist in one or another way. We need to distinguish here two cases. The first is when for some $\lambda$ the homogeneous equation $[A-\lambda I]u_{\lambda}=0$ has a nontrivial solution $u_{\lambda}\ne 0$. In addition, this solution has a finite norm, i.e. $\Vert u_{\lambda}\Vert<\infty$. If the latter condition is satisfied, then $\lambda$ is called an [*eigenvalue*]{} and the corresponding $u_{\lambda}$ – an [*eigenfunction*]{} ([*eigenmode*]{}). It happens that eigenvalues constitute, although possibly infinite, but [*discrete*]{} subset of the complex plane – a set of isolated points, in other words.
The second case is when equation $[A-\lambda I]u_{\lambda}=0$ is formally satisfied by some $u_{\lambda}$, which either does not have a bounded norm, i.e. $\Vert u_{\lambda}\Vert\rightarrow\infty$, or is localized to a single point in space. The set of $\lambda$’s corresponding to such cases is often a dense subset of the complex plane, sometimes referred to as [*essential*]{} spectrum. An even more rigorous analysis would also require distinction between the [*continuous*]{} and the [*residual*]{} spectra, however, so far we cannot come-up with a simple formal rule to identify and separate them in the electromagnetic case. It is quite easy to find the physical interpretation of $\Vert u_{\lambda}\Vert\rightarrow\infty$. For example, in the $L^{2}$ norm suggested by the electromagnetic energy considerations (Pointing’s theorem), such functions are a plane wave and the Dirac’s delta function, which both have infinite $L^{2}$ norms. The essential spectrum associated with plane waves is common for infinite periodic structures, where it surrounds photonic band gaps, and in infinite plasma models, where it gives rise to certain types of plasma waves.
In [@BudkoSamokhinSIAM2005] we prove that the strongly singular integral operator of equation (\[eq:SingularVIE\]) has both the dense essential spectrum and the discrete eigenvalues. Moreover, for any inhomogeneous object with $\chi(\bx,\omega)$ H[ö]{}lder-continuous in ${\mathbb R}^{3}$ (i.e. inside the object as well as across its outer boundary) the essential spectrum $\lambda_{\rm ess}$ is given explicitly as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:EssentialSpectrum}
\lambda_{\rm ess}=\varepsilon_{\rm r}(\bx,\omega), \;\;\;\; \bx\in{\mathbb R}^{3}.
\end{aligned}$$ In other words $\lambda_{\rm ess}$ will consist of all values of $\varepsilon_{\rm r}$, which it admits in ${\mathbb R}^{3}$. Thus it will always contain the real unit, since it is the relative permittivity of vacuum, and a curve or even an area of the complex plane emerging from the real unit and running through all other values, which macroscopic $\varepsilon_{\rm r}$ takes inside the object. This part of the spectrum does not depend on the object’s size or shape, or even the relative volume occupied by different inhomogeneities.
In addition to the essential spectrum operator $A$ has the usual discrete eigenvalues located within the following wedge-shaped bounds: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Eigenvalues}
\begin{split}
&{\rm Im}\,\varepsilon_{\rm r}(\bx,\omega)\left[1-{\rm Re}\lambda\right]+
\\
&\left[{\rm Re}\,\varepsilon_{\rm r}(\bx,\omega)-1\right]{\rm Im}\lambda
\le 0,
\;\;\bx\in D.
\end{split}
\end{aligned}$$ It is also known that $\vert\lambda\vert\le\Vert A\Vert$, and that $\Vert A\Vert<\infty$ for any $\chi$, H[ö]{}lder-continuous in ${\mathbb R}^{3}$. Exact distribution of eigenvalues in the complex plane is unknown to us and depends on the object’s shape. The eigenfunctions (modes) associated with these eigenvalues are global (not localized) and, in general, can only be found numerically.
To use these results in the analysis of electromagnetic resonances we note that both the essential spectrum and the eigenvalues are parametric functions of the angular frequency $\omega$. In general, a perfect (real) resonance would occur, if for some $\omega$ the spatial spectrum of $A$ would acquire a zero eigenvalue. If, on the other hand, for some $\omega$ the spatial spectrum does not contain zero, but gets close to it, while moves away for other $\omega$’s, then we have a complex resonance. With this in mind, one should try to visualize the dynamics of the spatial spectrum as it ‘moves’ in the complex plane, paying attention to the eigenvalues and portions of essential spectrum, which first approach zero and then move away from it. Expression (\[eq:EssentialSpectrum\]) is very important in this respect as it tells us that the motion of essential spectrum is explicitly related to the temporal dispersion of the relative permittivity. We also know (see below) that the eigenfunctions related to this spectrum are highly localized. Thus from (\[eq:EssentialSpectrum\]) and the known spatial distribution of $\varepsilon_{\rm r}(\bx,\omega)$ we can immediately tell where exactly in $D$ would a local resonance occur. The motion of discrete eigenvalues, on the other hand, is quite unpredictable, with the general tendency to spread out at higher frequencies. While doing so, some of these eigenvalues may pass through or close to zero, which will be an indication of a global resonance. We propose here a useful rule of thumb for visualizing the eigenvalue bound (\[eq:Eigenvalues\]). Imagine a line drawn through the real unit and any value of $\varepsilon_{\rm r}$ inside the object. If you now stand in the complex plane and look from the real unit towards that value of $\varepsilon_{\rm r}$, then the eigenvalues can only be to your right.
Finally, we have also been able to prove that in the static limit $\omega\rightarrow 0$ or $D\rightarrow 0$ [*all*]{} discrete eigenvalues are located within the convex envelope of essential spectrum [@BudkoSamokhinDIFUR2005], and are given by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Static}
\lambda=\frac{\int\limits_{\bx\in D}\varepsilon_{\rm r}(\bx,\omega)\vert\nabla\varphi_{\lambda}(\bx)\vert^{2}\,{\rm d}\bx}
{\int\limits_{\bx\in D}\vert\nabla\varphi_{\lambda}(\bx)\vert^{2}\,{\rm d}\bx},
\end{aligned}$$ where $\varphi_{\lambda}$ is a scalar static mode. Formally, our essential spectrum (\[eq:EssentialSpectrum\]) can be derived from this expression as well, by taking $\vert\nabla\varphi_{\lambda}(\bx)\vert^{2}\sim\delta(\bx-\bx')$. This also proves that the eigenfunctions associated with the essential spectrum are highly localized in space. Another important observation is about the discrete eigenvalues [*outside*]{} the convex envelope of essential spectrum. Since those do not exist in the quasi-static regime and appear only at higher frequencies and object sizes, we may conclude that the corresponding eigenfunctions are not of static type, but more of the wave-like type, i.e. oscillating in space.
Now, we have everything we need for a unified description of resonances. We shall illustrate our conclusions by numerically computed spectra for an inhomogeneous cube consisting of two equal halves with different permittivity values. The side of the cube is half of the vacuum wavelength.
In objects consisting of lossy dielectric materials only complex resonances can be observed. For example, in Fig. 1 (left) we show the spectrum for the case of a lossy dielectric with both ${\rm Re}\,\varepsilon_{\rm r}>0$ and ${\rm Im}\,\varepsilon_{\rm r}>0$. The actual values of relative permittivity and the real unit are given as circles. Numerical equivalent of essential spectrum (there is no such thing as dense or continuous spectrum with matrices) always looks like a set of line segments emerging from the real unit [@BudkoSamokhinSIAM2005]. One should simply keep in mind that in a continuously inhomogeneous object this spectrum may be a rather arbitrary curve or an area. Other, off-line eigenvalues are within the bounds prescribed by (\[eq:Eigenvalues\]). As the angular frequency varies, some of these latter off-line eigenvalues may get close, but not equal to zero. These are the complex resonances, corresponding to complicated global wave-like spatial modes.
In Fig. 1 (middle) we illustrate the case where due to strong anomalous dispersion one of the object’s parts has ${\rm Re}\,\varepsilon_{\rm r}<0$ and ${\rm Im}\,\varepsilon_{\rm r}>0$ at a certain angular frequency. The line of essential spectrum proceeds close to the zero of the complex plane. For other angular frequencies this line will move away from zero. It is well-known that this combination of materials supports complex plasmon resonances. Hence, we may safely conclude that we deal here with one of them. As an extra confirmation we see that this resonance is related to the highly localized modes of essential spectrum. Further we conclude that, in general, complex plasmons may exist not only at an interface between two homogeneous objects, but along rather arbitrary surfaces inside a continuously inhomogeneous object with strong anomalous dispersion. The precise location of this surface is determined by that value of $\varepsilon_{\rm r}$ inside $D$, which appears to be the closest to zero.
Recalling the rule of thumb about the location of eigenvalues we realize that a discrete eigenvalue can be equal to zero, only if the relative permittivity at some point inside the object happens to have a negative imaginary part, i.e. ${\rm Im}\,\varepsilon_{\rm r}<0$. This corresponds to the so-called negative losses or gain as in pumped laser media. In Fig. 1 (right) the numerical spectrum for a cube with one lossy half and another half with gain is shown. Two of the discrete eigenvalues are very close to zero, meaning that the whole configuration is in the vicinity of a real laser resonance. It is, however, very hard to come-up with an exact real resonance in this way. For a given temporal dispersion of the medium, one has to optimize the geometrical parameters of the object until the resonance is achieved, which is a very challenging numerical problem. One thing we can be sure about, though: for such configurations the zero eigenvalue will always be [*outside*]{} the convex envelope of the essential spectrum. Therefore, real laser resonances correspond to wave-like spatial modes and, thus, can only be achieved in structures whose size is comparable to or greater than the medium wavelength. This is confirmed by the standard theory of lasers.
As we already mentioned in the beginning, combination of a negative permittivity material and a material with gain is an attractive candidate for several applications. In the quest for a perfect lens [@Pendry2003] the gain is supposed to compensate for the inevitable losses in the frequency band where the negative permittivity is achieved. Plasmons, which are considered to be ideal candidates for the sub-wavelength manipulation of light, suffer from losses as well. Here too, combination with a gain medium is supposed to compensate for the losses. Some authors argue that in this way the surface plasmon amplification by stimulated emission of radiation (SPASER) can be achieved, similar to the usual laser [@Bergman2001]–[@Seidel2005]. While all this is true, and our bounds show that real resonances may exist in such media, we can explicitly show that these resonances are not necessarily the localized lossless plasmons, but may as well be associated with global modes. Consider the spatial spectrum corresponding to this case – see Fig. 2. The upper branch of the essential spectrum is indeed approaching zero as with the usual complex plasmon. In a continuously inhomogeneous object there may be essential spectrum going right through zero in this case. Hence, perfect real plasmons are possible in classical electromagnetics (at least mathematically). However, in Fig. 2 it is the [*discrete*]{} eigenvalue, which is now the closest to zero, and it has a global eigenfunction associated with it, not a localized one. Our numerical calculations confirm that the complex plasmon mode and the mode of this real resonance indeed look different. Note also that the angular frequency of this resonance may in practice coincide with the one of plasmon. There is an important difference, though, between the real laser resonances described above and the present resonance. If the medium parameters are such that the zero of the complex plane is situated [*inside*]{} the convex envelope of the essential spectrum, then a real [*quasi-static*]{} resonance can be achieved. Hence, the mode may be confined to a very small volume, if the object’s volume is small. It may even be enough to reduce the volume of the part with gain only to achieve confinement.
In summary, we have presented a unified approach to macroscopic electromagnetic resonances in finite inhomogeneous three-dimensional objects. We have analyzed the dynamics of the spatial spectrum of the pertaining volume integral operator as a function of the angular frequency and constitutive parameters, and were able to recover and generalize all known resonances in this way. In addition, we have confirmed the possibility and established conditions for the existence of a real quasi-static resonance in media with negative permittivity and gain leading to the volume-dependent light confinement.
[99]{} N. V. Budko and A. B. Samokhin, (under review) [ *SIAM J. Sci. Comp.*]{}, also see Arxiv version: math-ph/0505013 (2005). M. I. Stockman, S. V. Faleev, and D. J. Bergman, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**87**]{}, 167401 (2001). D. J. Bergman and M. I. Stockman, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**90**]{}, 027402 (2003). M. P. Nezhad, K. Tetz, Y. Fainman, Optics Expres,. [**12**]{}, 4072–4079 (2004) J. Seidel, S. Grafst[ö]{}m, L. Eng, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**94**]{}, 177401 (2005). S. A. Ramakrishna and J. B. Pendry, Phys. Rev. B [**67**]{}, 201101(R) (2003). J. Rahola, [*SIAM J. Sci. Comp.*]{}, Vol. 21, No. 5, pp. 1740–1754 (2000). A. B. Samokhin, [*Integral Equations and Iteration Methods in Electromagnetic Scattering*]{}, VSP, Utrecht, 2001. N. V. Budko and A. B. Samokhin, (accepted) [*Differential Equations*]{}, (2005).
[^1]: This research is supported by NWO (The Netherlands) and RFBR (Russian Federation).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The analytic description of ac-driven elastic interfaces in random potentials is desirable because the problem is experimentally relevant. This work emphasises on the mean field approximation for the problem at zero temperature. We prove that perturbation theory is regular in all orders by giving an inductive scheme how to find groups of ill-behaved graphs that mutually cancel, leaving a regular expression. In the parameter regimes for which perturbation theory is applicable it agrees with numerical results. Further, we determine the dependence of the Fourier coefficients of the mean velocity on the parameters of the model.'
author:
- Friedmar Schütze
bibliography:
- 'wand.bib'
title: 'On mean field theory for ac-driven elastic interfaces exposed to disorder'
---
\[sec:intro\]Introduction
==========================
The theory for elastic interfaces in a disordered environment, driven by an external dc-force at temperature $T=0$ is widely understood, and also in the finite temperature case some progress has been achieved [@NB:AdvPh04; @Middleton:PRB92; @Lemetal:PRL98; @CGD:PRB00; @Metetal:PRL07; @BKG:EPL08]. At $T=0$ the dc driven interface exhibits an interesting critical point, corresponding to the depinning transition. For small constant driving forces $h$, the interface adjusts its configuration to balance the driving force and the disorder, but remains pinned and does not move on large time scales. If $h$ reaches a critical threshold ${h_{\text{p}}}$, the interface starts to slide with a mean velocity $v$ that behaves as $v\sim(h-{h_{\text{p}}})^\beta$ for $h{\searrow}{h_{\text{p}}}$. The critical properties of this non-equilibrium transition have been worked out by the use of functional renormalisation group methods [@NSTL:JP2F; @NarayanFisher:PRB92; @Ertas:PRE94; @NSTL:APL; @CDW:PRL01; @CDW:PRB02; @CDW:PRE04].
Beyond constant driving forces, experimental achievements on the problem of ac-driven elastic domain walls in ferroic systems [@Kleemann:PRL07; @Kleemann:ARMR07; @Jezewski:PRB08] emphasise the importance of a theoretical understanding. Despite the experimental progress, and in contrast to the success in understanding the dc case, yet there is little advance in the theoretical description of the problem, even for $T=0$. The exact solution of the equation of motion is deemed impossible due to the complicated non-linear feedback of the interface’s configuration in the disorder force term. To make matters worse, attempts to access the problem for an ac-driving force perturbatively by an expansion in the disorder strength bring along severe problems [@FSpert09].
This underlines the importance of the mean-field approach, which is the central subject of this article. We investigate the behaviour of ac-driven domain walls in a disordered environment in the mean-field approximation and prove, that the perturbative corrections remain bounded in all orders. Further, we indicate, that for large enough driving field amplitudes, sufficiently strong elastic coupling and high frequencies, the perturbative results agree very well with the numerics for the full mean field equation of motion. The quantitative statements that rely on a special choice for the disorder correlator are worked out for elastic manifolds, like for example interfaces between two immiscible fluids or domain walls in ferroic systems, exposed to random field disorder. Our proof of the regularity of perturbation theory should also extend to similar models that describe other interesting physical systems with disorder [@Kardar:PhRep98; @Fisher:PhRep98], for example charge-density waves [@GruenerCDW:RMP88] and flux lines in type-II superconductors [@Blatter:RMP94; @GiaDou:PRL94; @NatSchei:AdvPh00].
Mean field calculations have been performed for similar problems before. D.S. Fisher [@Fisher:PRL83; @Fisher:PRB85] calculated dynamic properties of sliding charge-density waves in a mean-field model with dc-driving and argued in favour of a depinning transition in the strong pinning case. Using smooth bounded disorder, he calculated the threshold field for depinning as well as critical exponents related to the depinning transition. Furthermore, he considered the response in case of an ac-field applied in addition to the dc-driving. The perturbation expansion for dc-driven interfaces has been investigated by Koplik and Levine [@KL:PRB85], who also emphasised on the mean-field problem. Later, Leschorn [@Leschorn:JPA92] calculated the depinning force and the critical properties of the depinning transition for a three-state random field model. Narayan and Fisher [@NarayanFisher:PRB92] investigated the critical behaviour of charge density waves in the sliding regime and worked out the threshold field for scalloped disorder potentials. Lyuksyutov considered dynamical friction and instability phenomena for the interface motion [@Lyuksyutov:JPC95].
The rest of this article is organised in the following way: In the next section, we are going to deduce the mean-field equation of motion from the original model taken to describe the problem of disordered elastic domain walls. In section \[sec:pert\], we establish the diagrammatic perturbation expansion for the mean-field theory and show its regularity. The bulk part of the inductive proof (the induction step) is outsourced to the appendix. After a brief review of the problem for a constant driving force in section \[sec:adiabatic\], we focus our attention to the ac-driving case in section \[sec:ac\]. There, we start with some qualitative discussion of the numerical solution and then go on to present our attempts to extract information from the first non-vanishing perturbative terms. Due to the complicated non-linear structure of the expressions involved, numerical methods had to be employed as well. However, the perturbative approach helps a lot to improve numerical results. This makes it possible to work out the decay law of the Fourier coefficients with their order, in dependence of the strength of the driving field.
\[sec:model\]The model
======================
To model $D$-dimensional elastic manifolds in a $D+1$-dimensional disordered system, we employ an equation of motion that has been introduced in a number of earlier works [@Feigelman:JETP83; @Bruinsma:PRL84; @KL:PRB85] $$\label{eq:weom}
\partial_tz(x,t)=\Gamma\nabla_x^2z+h\cdot f(t)+
u\cdot g(x,z).$$ The equation does not involve a thermal noise term and therefore describes the (classical) system at $T=0$. The interface profile is described by the single-valued function $z(x,t)$, so we do not allow for overhangs. Here, $x$ is the $D$-dimensional set of coordinates which parameterise the interface manifold itself. $\Gamma$ denotes the elastic stiffness constant of the interface, $h$ measures the strength of the external driving force and $f(t)$ denotes its time-dependence, taken to be of order unity. We did not specify $f(t)$ yet to allow for general considerations. The disorder is modeled by $g(x,z)$, its strength is measured by $u$. We assume quenched Gaußian disorder, characterised by its first two cumulants: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:wdisorder}
{\left\langle g(x,z)\right\rangle}&=&0\nonumber,\\
{\left\langle g(x,z)g(x',z')\right\rangle}&=&\delta^D(x-x')\Delta(z-z').\end{aligned}$$ Here, ${\left\langle \ldots\right\rangle}$ denotes the average over disorder. The function $\Delta(z)$ will be specified further down. As the short-ranged elastic term suggests, long-range interactions, of dipolar type for example, are not covered.
The corresponding mean field equation (cf. e.g. [@Fisher:PRB85]) is obtained via the replacement of the elastic term by a uniform long-range coupling. To do this, we have to formulate the model (\[eq:weom\]) on a lattice in $x$-direction, i.e. the coordinates that parameterise the interface itself are discretised. The lattice Laplacian reads $$\begin{aligned}
\nabla_x^2z(x_i)&=
\sum\limits_{d=1}^D{z(x_i+ae_d)+z(x_i-ae_d)-2z(x_i)\over a^2}
\nonumber\\
&=\sum\limits_{d=1}^D\sum\limits_{j_d=1}^NJ_{ij_d}\big[z(x_{j_d})-z(x_i)\big],
\nonumber\\
J_{ij_d}&={1\over a^2}\big[\delta_{j_d+1,i}+\delta_{j_d-1,i}\big]\nonumber,\end{aligned}$$ where $a$ denotes the lattice constant. To get the mean field theory, $J_{ij}$ has to be replaced by a uniform coupling but such that the sum over all couplings $\sum_jJ_{ij}$ remains the same. Hence, we choose $$\begin{aligned}
J_{ij}^{\rm MF}={1\over a^2N}.\end{aligned}$$ Now, the disorder has to be discretised as well, which is achieved if we replace the delta function in the correlator (\[eq:wdisorder\]) by $\delta^D(x_i-x_j)\to \delta_{ij}a^{-D/2}$ (cf. [@Bruinsma:PRL84]). The resulting equation of motion should be independent of $x$, just the lattice constant $a$ and the dimension enter because the disorder scales with a factor $a^{-D/2}$. Finally, for the mean-field equation of motion, we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:mfgeom}
\partial_tz
&=c\cdot\left[{\left\langle z\right\rangle}-z\right]+h\cdot f(t)+
\eta\cdot g(z),\end{aligned}$$ where $c=\Gamma/a^2$ and $\eta=u/a^{D/2}$. We assume quenched Gaußian disorder with $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:disorder}
{\left\langle g(z)\right\rangle}&=&0\\
{\left\langle g(z)g(z')\right\rangle}&=&\Delta(z-z').\end{aligned}$$ The function $\Delta(z-z')$ shall be smooth, symmetric and should decay exponentially on a length scale $\ell$. Moreover, we require $\Delta(0)=1$, as the disorder strength shall be measured by $\eta$. For the sake of concreteness, we shall choose $$\label{eq:discorr}
\Delta(z-z')=\exp\left[-\left({z-z'\over\ell}\right)^2\right]$$ whenever we need an explicit expression for calculations. This disorder correlator correctly describes the situation for an elastic manifold in random field disorder [@NSTL:APL], sufficiently far away from the critical depinning transition point.
The physical picture of the mean field equation of motion is a system of distinct particles, moving in certain realisations of the disorder. All of them are harmonically coupled to their common mean, i.e. the elastic coupling between neighbouring wall segments $\Gamma\nabla_x^2z$ is now replaced by a uniform coupling $c\cdot\left[{\left\langle z\right\rangle}-z\right]$ to the disorder averaged position ${\left\langle z\right\rangle}$, which in turn is determined self-consistently by the single realisations.
Apart from the correlation length $\ell$ of the disorder, there is another important length scale in the system. In the absence of any driving force (i.e. $h=0$), we can easily determine the mean deviation of the coordinate $z$ of a special realisation from the disorder averaged position ${\left\langle z\right\rangle}$. For $h=0$ we expect $\dot z=0$, at least in the steady state and (\[eq:mfgeom\]) straightforwardly leads to $${\left\langle ({\left\langle z\right\rangle}-z)^2\right\rangle}\simeq {\eta^2\over c^2}.$$ So, $\eta/c$ measures the modulus of the average distance from the common mean. We will see below, that $\eta/c$ is an upper bound in the case, that the system moves under the influence of a non-zero driving $h\ne 0$. A word on notation: The disorder averaged velocity $v={\left\langle \dot z\right\rangle}$ will be denoted by the symbol $v$.
\[sec:pert\]Perturbation theory
===============================
\[sec:pert:diag\]Diagrammatic expansion
---------------------------------------
The differential equation of motion (\[eq:mfgeom\]) is non-linear, and due to the influence of the solution on the disorder it is impossible to solve it exactly. An ansatz is, to attempt an expansion in the disorder strength $\eta$. Therefore, we decompose $z=Z+\zeta$, where $Z=hF(t)$ (with $\partial_tF(t)=f(t)$) is the solution of the non-disordered problem ($\eta=0$) around which we expand, and $$\zeta=\sum\limits_{k=1}^\infty\zeta_k\eta^k\>,\quad
{{\left\langle \zeta\right\rangle}}=\sum\limits_{k=1}^\infty{{\left\langle \zeta\right\rangle}}_k\eta^k.$$ is the perturbative correction. Still, we have the equations for $\zeta_k$ depending on ${{\left\langle \zeta\right\rangle}}_k$, which is also unknown. This eventually leads us to a set of two coupled equations $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:mfpertsys1}
(\partial_t+c)\zeta&=c{{\left\langle \zeta\right\rangle}}+\eta\cdot g(Z+\zeta)\\
\label{eq:mfpertsys2}
\partial_t{{\left\langle \zeta\right\rangle}}&=\eta\cdot{\left\langle g(Z+\zeta)\right\rangle},\end{aligned}$$ that we can solve iteratively for every order of the perturbation series, if we expand $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:mfdisexpansion}
g(Z+\zeta)=\sum\limits_{n=0}^\infty{g^{(n)}(Z)\over n!}\zeta^n.\end{aligned}$$ If one is interested to keep small orders, this expansion of the disorder can only work if $\zeta\ll\ell$, because $\ell$ is the typical scale on which $g(z)$ changes. We will come back to that point, when discussing the special cases for $f(t)$ in sections \[sec:adiabatic\] and \[sec:ac\]. For the moment, we just do it.
The propagator corresponding to the left hand side of Eq. (\[eq:mfpertsys1\]) reads $$G(t)=\Theta(t)\cdot{\text{e}}^{-ct}.$$ Using this propagator, we can formally write down the solution and express it order by order in a power series in $\eta$. Up to the second order, the solutions are $$\begin{aligned}
{{\left\langle \zeta\right\rangle}}_1(t)&=0,\\
\zeta_1(t)&=\int\limits_0^t{\text{d}}t_1\>{\text{e}}^{-c(t-t_1)}g(Z(t_1)),\\
\label{eq:diszeta2}
{{\left\langle \zeta\right\rangle}}_2(t)&=\int\limits_0^t{\text{d}}t_1\int\limits_0^{t_1}{\text{d}}t_2
\>{\text{e}}^{-c(t_1-t_2)}\Delta'[Z(t_1)-Z(t_2)],\\
\label{eq:zeta2}
\zeta_2(t)&=\int\limits_0^t{\text{d}}t_1{\text{e}}^{-c(t-t_1)}\left[c{{\left\langle \zeta\right\rangle}}_2(t_1)+g'(Z(t_1))
\cdot\zeta_1(t_1)\right].\end{aligned}$$Since we assume Gaußian disorder, the disorder averaged corrections ${{\left\langle \zeta\right\rangle}}_n$ vanish for odd $n$. Due to the nested structure, a diagrammatic representation of the perturbation expansion seems most suited. For the interesting quantities ${{\left\langle \zeta\right\rangle}}_k$, the first two non-vanishing orders are given by:
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:diagexpand}
{{\left\langle \zeta\right\rangle}}_2=&\quad
\parbox{17mm}{\includegraphics{zdiag.1}}
\nonumber\\&\phantom{=}\nonumber\\
{{\left\langle \zeta\right\rangle}}_4=&\quad
3\cdot\parbox{17mm}{\includegraphics{zdiag.2}}\quad+\quad
\parbox{25mm}{\includegraphics{zdiag.3}}\quad+\quad
2\cdot\parbox{25mm}{\includegraphics{zdiag.4}}\quad+
\nonumber\\&\phantom{=}\\&\quad
2\cdot\parbox{25mm}{\includegraphics{zdiag.5}}\quad+\quad
2\cdot\parbox{25mm}{\includegraphics{zdiag.6}}\quad+\quad
2\cdot\parbox{25mm}{\includegraphics{zdiag.7}}\quad+
\nonumber\\&\phantom{=}\nonumber\\&\quad
\parbox{33mm}{\includegraphics{zdiag.8}}\quad+\quad
\parbox{33mm}{\includegraphics{zdiag.9}}\quad+\quad
\parbox{33mm}{\includegraphics{zdiag.10}}
\nonumber\end{aligned}$$
The diagrammatic rules are fairly simple: we draw all rooted trees with $k$ vertices, and add a stem. Each vertex corresponds to a factor $g^{(m)}(Z(t))/m!$, where $m$ counts the number of outgoing lines (away from the root). The line between two vertices represents a propagator $G(t)$. Then Wick’s theorem is applied to carry out the disorder average. Each two vertices, that are grouped together for the average, will be connected by a dashed line. Finally, we replace every straight line which, upon removing it, makes the whole graph falling apart into two subgraphs, by a curly line, corresponding to the propagator of (\[eq:mfpertsys2\]), which is just a Heaviside function $\Theta(t)$. In the framework of equilibrium quantum statistical physics, those graphs that involve an internal curly line are called one-particle reducible (1PR). In our classical problem loops only occur due to the dashed lines originating from the Gaußian average.
\[sec:pert:consistency\]Consistency of the perturbative series
--------------------------------------------------------------
The perturbation expansion leaves some questions, that have to be addressed. It is not immediately obvious, that taking the disorder average of (\[eq:zeta2\]) gives the result in (\[eq:diszeta2\]), i.e. ${{\left\langle \zeta\right\rangle}}_2(t)={\left\langle \zeta_2(t)\right\rangle}$. However, a short calculation, using integration by parts reveals this relation to hold.
Another, much deeper problem is related to the diagrams involving a curly line in their interior. Due to the curly line, they grow linearly in time. In the following, we call diagrams non-regular, if they correspond to terms which grow unboundedly in time. Koplik and Levine [@KL:PRB85] explicitly checked for a time independent driving up to sixth order, that the problematic terms of the diagrams mutually cancel. We give a very general version, that holds for any $f(t)$ and covers all perturbative orders. To illustrate, how this works, we present the calculation for the fourth order here. The somewhat technical induction step, which extends our argument to all orders is given in appendix \[app:reg\]. For simplicity, we work with the velocity diagrams, that are obtained by just removing the curly line from the root.
$$\begin{aligned}
2\cdot\>\parbox{16mm}{\includegraphics{vdiag.1}}=&\int\limits_0^t{\text{d}}t_1\>{\text{e}}^{-c(t-t_1)}
\Delta''[Z(t)-Z(t_1)]\int\limits_0^t{\text{d}}t_2\int\limits_0^{t_2}{\text{d}}t_3\>
{\text{e}}^{-c(t_2-t_3)}\Delta'[Z(t_2)-Z(t_3)]\nonumber\\
\parbox{24mm}{\includegraphics{vdiag.2}}=&\int\limits_0^t{\text{d}}t_1\>{\text{e}}^{-c(t-t_1)}
(-\Delta''[Z(t)-Z(t_1)])\int\limits_0^{t_1}{\text{d}}t_2\int\limits_0^{t_2}{\text{d}}t_3\>
{\text{e}}^{-c(t_2-t_3)}\Delta'[Z(t_2)-Z(t_3)]\nonumber\\
=&-2\cdot\>\parbox{16mm}{\includegraphics{vdiag.1}}+S\nonumber\\
S=&\int\limits_0^t{\text{d}}t_1\int\limits_0^{t_1}{\text{d}}t_2\>{\text{e}}^{-c(t-t_2)}
\Delta''[Z(t)-Z(t_2)]\int\limits_0^{t_1}{\text{d}}t_3\>
{\text{e}}^{-c(t_1-t_3)}\Delta'[Z(t_1)-Z(t_3)]\nonumber\end{aligned}$$
The modification of the second diagram to express it as the sum of the first and $S$ is merely integration by parts. The term $S$ now corresponds to the sum of the two diagrams. It is not straightforward to see, how $S$ behaves generally, but it is easy to see, that it remains bounded for large times. Every time integral carries an exponential damping term. Basically, we have thereby established, that at least up to the fourth order, the perturbation series exists and is well-behaved in the sense, that there are no terms that lead to an overall unbounded growth in time.
Our analysis how the cancellations among non-regular diagrams (i.e. those that involve an internal curly line) generalise to higher orders is presented in appendix \[app:reg\].
\[sec:adiabatic\]Time-independent driving force
===============================================
Let us consider the mean field equation (\[eq:mfgeom\]) for the special choice $f(t)=1$. Particular cases of this problem have already been addressed [@Fisher:PRL83; @Fisher:PRB85; @KL:PRB85; @Leschorn:JPA92; @NarayanFisher:PRB92]. Assuming that the disorder correlator is cusped, e.g. $$\label{eq:cdiscorr}
\Delta_{\rm c}(z-z')=\exp\left[-{|z-z'|\over\ell}\right],$$ it is expected, that the system, described by (\[eq:mfgeom\]) shows a depinning transistion. The special feature of a cusped disorder potential is, that the resulting disorder force $g(z)$ exhibits jumps. At such jumps, the system is pinned and a finite threshold force is needed to move it in a certain direction. The critical depinning force has been determined in [@NarayanFisher:PRB92] for the parabolic scalloped potential and for a three-state random field model in [@Leschorn:JPA92]. In both works, the critical exponent was found to be $\beta=1$.
For a disorder correlator given by (\[eq:discorr\]), numerical investigations suggest, that pinning is exponentially suppressed for large $c$. More precisely, the depinning field ${h_{\text{p}}}$ obeys ${h_{\text{p}}}\propto\exp[-C\cdot c\ell/\eta]$ with some numerical prefactor $C$. This is reasonable, since $\eta/c$ is a measure for the typical deviation of each single realisation from the mean, so for $\eta/c\ll\ell$, the system is prevented from adopting to the minima of the disorder potential by the elastic force. Thus, pinning should be diminished. On the other hand, for $\eta/c>\ell$, the equilibrated system for $h=0$ does place itself at the local disorder minima (for all realisations), since on a scale $\ell$ it is expected to find a local minimum. So the existence of a finite perceptable threshold force ${h_{\text{p}}}$ is possible for small enough $c$. Fisher [@Fisher:PRB85] analytically found a threshold field for bounded disorder (strong enough) in the case of charge density waves. The critical exponent has been found to be $\beta=3/2$ for the smooth disorder potential, in contrast with $\beta=1$ for the cusped case. Thus, as pointed out in [@NarayanFisher:PRB92], the exponents for the depinning transition in the mean-field case are non-universal. Well above the depinning threshold, i.e. for $h\gg{h_{\text{p}}}$, perturbation theory should give a good estimate of the mean velocity. However, it is not clear, why our perturbative approach via a systematic expansion in the disorder (essentially equal to the calculations in [@KL:PRB85]) can work, since truncating the Taylor expansion (\[eq:mfdisexpansion\]) at a finite order is only a good estimate, if $\zeta\ll\ell$. But, the true velocity $v$ is certainly different from $h$, thence $\zeta=(v-h)t$ grows linearly in time. In appendix \[app:resum\] we illustrate, how a resummation of the perturbation scheme leads to a perturbative programme that works. To take only small orders into account a necessary condition is that $\eta/c\ll\ell$. Choosing (\[eq:discorr\]) for the disorder correlator, the first non-vanishing order reads $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:pert4o}
{v\over h}=&1-{\eta^2\over vh}\left[1-\phi\left({c\ell\over 2v}
\right)\right]
+{\cal O}\left({\eta^4\over hv^3}\right),
$$ where we have introduced the function $$\label{eq:phifkt}
\phi(x)=\sqrt{\pi}\cdot x\>\exp\left({x^2}\right)\>\left[1-{\text{erf}}(x)\right]$$for convenience. Its asymptotic expansion reads $$\begin{aligned}
\phi(x)&=\left\lbrace
\begin{matrix}
\sqrt{\pi}x-2x^2+{\cal O}(x^3)&x\ll 1\\
1-{1\over 2x^2}+{\cal O}(x^{-4})&x\gg 1
\end{matrix}\right.\,.\end{aligned}$$ For $\ell\to\infty$, in (\[eq:pert4o\]) all perturbative corrections vanish, hence we get $v=h$. This was expected, since, if the disorder force is correlated over an infinite range, it is essentially constant. Taking the average over all possible values of the disorder (positive and negative) gives zero, hence there is no disorder effect any more. For finite $\ell$ the velocity is reduced, the smaller $c\ell$, the more. For large $h\gg{h_{\text{p}}}$, the difference $h-v$ is expected to be small, hence it does not cause much harm if one replaces $v$ by $h$ on the right hand side of (\[eq:pert4o\]), rearriving at the explicit expansion in the disorder.
The results from above mainly agree with those in [@KL:PRB85]. The major difference is, that Koplik and Levine have been working with $\Delta_{\rm c}/(2\ell)$ instead of (\[eq:discorr\]) and therefore get an expansion in $\eta^2/(\ell h^2)$, whereas we have a power series in $\eta^2/h^2$.
\[sec:ac\]Considerations for ac driving forces
==============================================
\[sec:ac:numerics\]Qualitative behaviour and numerical results
--------------------------------------------------------------
To get an idea about how the system, corresponding to the equation of motion with an ac-driving (cf. (\[eq:mfgeom\])) $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:acmfeom}
\partial_tz=c\cdot[{\left\langle z\right\rangle}-z]+h\cdot\cos\omega t+\eta\cdot g(z)\end{aligned}$$ behaves, we implemented a numerical approach. The disorder is modelled by concatenated straight lines, the values of the junction points are chosen randomly from a bounded interval. The correlator has been checked to be perfectly in agreement with (\[eq:discorr\]).
![\[fig:qbild\] Numerical solution of (\[eq:acmfeom\]) for different driving field strengths and $c=1.0$, $\eta=2.5$. For the simulation, $t$ and $z$ are measured in units such that $\omega=\ell=1$.](qbild.eps){width="0.9\columnwidth"}
Before discussing the numerical trajectories, we note a first property of the equation of motion (\[eq:acmfeom\]). It contains a symmetry of the (disorder averaged) system, namely that all disorder averaged quantities are invariant under the transformation $h\to -h$ and $z\to -z$, which implies $v\to -v$. We have hereby fixed the initial condition to be $z(0)=0$ for all realisations. If one chooses another initial condition, its sign has to be inverted as well, of course. In the steady state, i.e. for $t\gg c^{-1}$ (as $c^{-1}$ is the time-scale on which transience effects are diminished, see below), the trajectory must therefore obey the symmetry $h\to -h$, $v\to-v$. This symmetry is obviously reflected in the numerical solutions (see fig. \[fig:qbild\]).
An interesting consequence of this symmetry is, that the even Fourier coefficients of the solution $v(t)$ (which is periodic with period $2\pi/\omega$) vanish. Once the steady state is reached, the symmetry requires $v(t)=-v(t+\pi/\omega)$. For the even Fourier modes this means $$\begin{aligned}
c_{2N}&=\int\limits_0^{2\pi\over\omega}{\text{d}}t\>v(t){\text{e}}^{{\text{i}}2N\omega t}\\
&=\int\limits_0^{\pi\over\omega}{\text{d}}t\>v(t){\text{e}}^{{\text{i}}2N\omega t}+
\int\limits_0^{\pi\over\omega}{\text{d}}t\>v\left(t+{\pi\over\omega}\right)
{\text{e}}^{{\text{i}}2N\omega t}
=0.\end{aligned}$$
The typical picture of a $v$-$h$-plot is that of a single hysteresis for $h\ll\eta$ and a double hysteresis for $h\gg\eta$. In an intermediate range, we find a single hysteresis with a cusped endpoint. The qualitative shape of the solution trajectories agrees with numerical results [@GNP:PRL03; @Glatz:phd], that have been obtained as solutions for (\[eq:weom\]) in the case of finite interfaces with periodic boundary conditions.
![\[fig:wto0\] Numerical solution of equation (\[eq:acmfeom\]) for $h=6.0$, $c=1.0$ and $\eta=2.5$ for different frequencies, $t$ and $z$ being measured in units such that $\omega_0=\ell=1$.](wto0.eps){width="\columnwidth"}
Moreover, as the frequency is sent to zero $\omega\to 0$, the hysteretic trajectory approaches the depinning curve for an adiabatic change of the driving field. This is shown in fig. \[fig:wto0\].
In the following, we want to give a qualitative discussion of the hystereses in the case of small elasticity $c$.
*Weak fields $h\ll\eta$:*In the case of weak driving fields, the typical system in a certain disorder configuration remains in a potential well of the disorder. The elastic force may slightly shift the centre around which $z(t)$ oscillates, but this is not very important, since we can instead think of an effective potential. To understand the hysteretic behaviour, it is instructive to think of the force field $g(z)$ instead of the potential. Starting at $h(t)=0$ for large enough $t$ (i.e. in the steady state) we expect a certain realisation to be located at the zero point $g(z_0)=0$ of a falling edge, since this corresponds to a stable configuration. As the field grows, the system starts to move in the direction of growing $z$, where the disorder force competes with the driving. Because in the vicinity of the potential minimum, the disorder force $g(z)$ behaves approximately linear in $z$, the acceleration is approximately zero and the velocity almost constant. This changes when the driving is about to reaching its maximum. The slower the growth, the smaller the velocity. At the maximum, the velocity equals zero, as the driving and the restitutional disorder force compensate. For decreasing $h(t)$, the restitution force wins and pushes the system back in the direction of the potential minimum. Hence, the velocity $v$ turns negative short-time after the field has reached its maximum and is still positive. Once the stable position $z_0$ is reached again, the same starts in the negative direction.
Certainly, the restitutional disorder force need not continuously grow with $z$, but may exhibit bumps or similar noisy structure, but those details average out when taking the mean over all disorder configurations.
![\[fig:ceinfl\] Numerical solution of equation (\[eq:acmfeom\]) for different elastic constants and $h=40.0$, $\eta=10.0$. The units of $t$ and $z$ are chosen such that $\omega=\ell=1$.](ckurve.eps){width="\columnwidth"}
*Strong fields $h\gg\eta$:*In the case of strong driving amplitudes, we encounter the situation of a double hysteresis. Again, starting at $h(t)=0$ for $t\gg c^{-1}$, we assume the system to be located at the zero $g(z_0)=0$ of a falling edge of the (effective) disorder force field. As $h(t)$ grows, we first have the same situation as in the case of weak driving: The disorder acts restitutionally and thus keeps the velocity small and leads to a small slope ${\text{d}}v/{\text{d}}h$. Once the field is of the order $\eta$, the typical maximum of a disorder force, the system is no longer locked into a potential well, but a cross-over to sliding behaviour sets in. On further increasing $h$, the system finally arrives at a slope $s={\text{d}}v/{\text{d}}h$, which depends mainly on $\eta$ and $c$. After the field reaches its maximum, the velocity decreases with the field, the slope being ${\text{d}}v/{\text{d}}h\approx s$, also if this slope has been different just before the field amplitude has been reached. This slope approximately remains, until the field is weaker than the typical disorder force, when the system is again trapped in a potential well. Since on rising edges of the disorder force, driving and disorder point in the same direction, the system will rarely sit there (it moves away very fast). The velocity becomes negative before $h=0$, since the system slides down the falling edge (${\text{d}}g/{\text{d}}z<0$) of the disorder force. At $h=0$ everything starts again in the negative direction. An example for fairly large field amplitudes is shown in fig. \[fig:ceinfl\].
So far, our discussion has emphasised on small $c$ by absorbing its effect into an effective disorder picture. The effect of larger $c$ is to couple the configuration $z(t)$ of every realisation strongly to the mean ${\left\langle z(t)\right\rangle}$. This wipes out the effect of disorder in the time regime when $h(t)$ takes on small values. As we have discussed above, in those time intervals the possibility to explore the shape of the individual disorder landscape plays an important rôle. Thus for larger $c$ the double hysteresis winds around a straight line, connecting the extremal velocities. This can be seen in fig. \[fig:ceinfl\].
\[sec:ac:valpert\]Validity of perturbation theory
-------------------------------------------------
For an oscillating driving force, the question is still open, whether one may assume $\zeta$ to be small compared to $\ell$. If $c$ is large, any particle moving in a particular realisation of a disorder potential is strongly bound to the disorder averaged position. This prevents it from exploring the own disorder environment and thus large $c$ effectively scale down $\eta$. All realisations stay close to the disorder averaged position, the mean deviation being $\eta/c$. A problem now occurs, if the disorder averaged position deviates strongly from the $\eta=0$ solution. For $h\gg\eta$ this can only happen during those periods, where $h\>\cos\omega t$ takes on small values. The time, that has to elapse, until every system has adopted to its own disorder realisation, and hence the time until the system can be pinned, is $c^{-1}$ (see below). For perturbation theory to work, this time must be large compared to the length of the period during which $h\le\eta$, which we roughly estimate as $\eta/(\omega h)$. This gives us a second condition for the applicability of perturbation theory: $h/\eta\gg c/\omega$.
In summary, the conditions for perturbation theory to hold are the following. The driving force amplitude $h$ has to be large compared to $\eta$, $h/\eta\gg\max\{c/\omega,1\}$ to make the series expansion work and to guarantee that the disorder averaged solution stays close to the $\eta=0$ trajectory (around which we expand). Moreover, $c$ must be large ($c\gg\eta/\ell$) to ensure proximity of each realisation to the disorder average.
\[sec:ac:width\]Simple perturbative estimates
---------------------------------------------
Before embarking on conclusions that can be drawn from the perturbative solution of the equation of motion (\[eq:mfgeom\]), we shall determine the typical deviation of the position of a single realisation $z(t)$ from the mean ${\left\langle z(t)\right\rangle}$. This has the following bound $$\begin{aligned}
{\left\langle ({\left\langle z\right\rangle}-z)^2\right\rangle}&=\eta^2{\left\langle \zeta_1^2\right\rangle}+{\cal O}(\eta^4)\nonumber\\
&=\eta^2\int\limits_0^t{\text{d}}t_1{\text{d}}t_2\>{\text{e}}^{-c(2t-t_1-t_2)}\Delta[Z(t_1)-Z(t_2)]\nonumber\\
&\le\int\limits_0^t{\text{d}}t_1{\text{d}}t_2\>{\text{e}}^{-c(2t-t_1-t_2)}={\eta^2\over c^2}
\left(1-{\text{e}}^{-ct}\right)^2.\end{aligned}$$ The estimate simply replaces the disorder correlator $\Delta$ by its maximum and therefore gives an upper bound. Strictly, it is only true to order ${\cal O}(\eta^2)$. This confirmes our claim from section \[sec:model\], that an estimate for the mean deviation from the averaged solution is given by $\eta/c$.
\[sec:ac:harmon\]Perturbative harmonic expansion
------------------------------------------------
![\[fig:stvollvgl\] Comparison of the numerical solution of equation (\[eq:acmfeom\]) with the result obtained from the first non-vanishing perturbative order for (1) $h=3.0$, $c=3.0$, $\eta=1.5$ and (2) $h=1.0$, $c=1.0$, $\eta=0.6$. The units of $t$ and $z$ are chosen such that $\omega=\ell=1$.](stvollvgl.eps){width="\columnwidth"}
As has been discussed in section \[sec:ac:valpert\], for $h/\eta\gg\max\{c/\omega,1\}$ and $\eta/(c\ell)\ll 1$, perturbation theory should do pretty well. A direct comparison, shown in fig. \[fig:stvollvgl\], confirms an excellent agreement. So, at least for weak disorder, when perturbation theory is valid, one can hope to extract some information from the lowest order. For an ac driving force, even this lowest perturbative order for the velocity is a very complicated expression. The diagrammatic prescription yields up to the order ${\cal O}(\eta^2)$ $$\label{eq:v1stop}
v(t)=h\cos\omega t+\eta^2\int\limits_0^t{\text{d}}t'\>
{\text{e}}^{-c(t-t')}\Delta'[Z(t)-Z(t')].$$ Remember, that $Z(t)=(h/\omega)\sin\omega t$ is the solution for the problem without disorder, around which we expand. It seems reasonable to aim a harmonic expansion of the mean velocity $v$. The ansatz therefore is $$\begin{aligned}
v(t)=\sum\limits_{N=1}^\infty\big[a_N\cos N\omega t+b_N\sin N\omega t\big],\end{aligned}$$ for $N$ odd. Recall, that, for reasons of the $h\to-h$ and $v\to-v$ symmetry of the trajectory, which has been discussed in the previous section, the Fourier coefficients for even $N$ vanish.
Starting from the first order result for $v$ (\[eq:v1stop\]), we express the disorder correlator by its Fourier transform $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta'[Z(t)-Z(t')]=\int\limits{{\text{d}}q\over 2\pi}({\text{i}}q)\Delta(q)
{\text{e}}^{{\text{i}}q{h\over\omega}[\sin\omega t-\sin\omega t']}\end{aligned}$$ and expand the exponential term in a double Fourier series in $t$ and $t'$, respectively: $$\begin{aligned}
{\text{e}}^{{\text{i}}a\sin\omega t}&=&\sum\limits_{n=-\infty}^\infty
J_n(a){\text{e}}^{{\text{i}}n\omega t}\\
\int\limits_0^t{\text{d}}t'\>{\text{e}}^{-c(t-t')-{\text{i}}a\sin\omega t'}&=&
\sum\limits_{n=-\infty}^\infty
J_n(-a){{\text{e}}^{{\text{i}}n\omega t}-{\text{e}}^{-ct}\over c+{\text{i}}n\omega}.\end{aligned}$$ Here, $J_n(a)$ are the Bessel functions of the first kind. As we are interested only in the behaviour for large enough times (the steady state solution), we remove all terms that are damped out exponentially for $t\gg c^{-1}$ from the very beginning. Note, that $c^{-1}$ is indeed the time scale for the transience, as has been claimed before.
For the mean velocity, we obtain
$$\begin{aligned}
v(t)=h\cos\omega t+\eta^2\sum\limits_{m,n=-\infty}^\infty
\int{{\text{d}}q\over2\pi}({\text{i}}q)\Delta(q)J_m\left(q{h\over\omega}\right)
J_n\left(-q{h\over\omega}\right)
{{\text{e}}^{{\text{i}}(m+n)\omega t}(c-{\text{i}}n\omega)\over c^2+n^2\omega^2}\end{aligned}$$
In principle, this is already a Fourier series representation, not very elegant, though. The argument $(m+n)\omega t$ of the expansion basis exponentials promises a rather complicated structure for the coefficients. A first observation, however, can already be made: Under the $q$ integral we find an odd function $({\text{i}}q)\Delta(q)$ and a product of two Bessel functions of order $m$ and $n$, respectively. For the $q$-integral to result in a finite value, a function is required that is not odd in $q$. This necessitates the product of the two Bessel functions to be odd, or, equivalently, $m+n$ to be an odd number. Whence, we conclude, that to first perturbative order, our symmetry argument (Fourier coefficients for even $N$ must vanish) is fulfilled exactly.
It requires some tedious algebra to collect all contributions belonging to a certain harmonic order from the double series. Eventually, we obtain the series expansion
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:mf1sto}
{{v}(t)\over h}&=\cos\omega t+
\sum\limits_{N=1}^\infty\left[A_N\cos N\omega t+
B_N\sin N\omega t\right]\\
\label{eq:1stoan}
A_N&=2{\eta^2\over h^2}{\omega^2\over c^2}\left[
\sum\limits_{n=1}^{N-1}{(-1)^nnK_{N-n,n}\over 1+n^2\omega^2/c^2}
-\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty{nK_{N+n,n}\over 1+n^2\omega^2/c^2}
-\sum\limits_{n=N}^\infty{nK_{n-N,n}\over 1+n^2\omega^2/c^2}
\right]+{\cal O}(\eta^4)\\
\label{eq:1stobn}
B_N&=2{\eta^2\over h^2}{\omega\over c}\left[
-\sum\limits_{n=1}^{N-1}{(-1)^n K_{N-n,n}\over 1+n^2\omega^2/c^2}
-\sum\limits_{n=0}^\infty{K_{N+n,n}\over 1+n^2\omega^2/c^2}
+\sum\limits_{n=N}^\infty{K_{n-N,n}\over 1+n^2\omega^2/c^2}
\right]+{\cal O}(\eta^4)\end{aligned}$$
For convenience, we introduced the following abbreviation (depending only on the parameter ratio $h/(\omega\ell)$), in which ${}_3F_3$ denotes the generalised hypergeometric function [@Gradshteyn]. $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:mfkmnsym}
K_{m,n}=&{h\over\ell}\int{{\text{d}}q\over2\pi}\>q\Delta(q)\cdot
J_m\left(q{h\over\omega}\right)J_n\left(q{h\over\omega}\right)\\
=&2\left({h\over\omega\ell}\right)^{m+n+1}{\Gamma([m+n+2]/2)\over
\sqrt\pi\cdot m!\cdot n!}\times\\
&{}_3F_3\left[\left\{{m+n+1\over 2},{m+n+2\over 2},{m+n+2\over 2}\right\},
\{m+1,n+1,m+n+1\},-{4h^2\over\omega^2\ell^2}\right].\nonumber\end{aligned}$$
Note, that taking $\omega\to 0$ is forbidden here, as we used $\omega\ne 0$ while deriving the coefficients and moreover perturbation theory breaks down (recall that $h/\eta\gg c/\omega$). The same holds for $\ell\to 0$. The remaining extreme limits $\omega\to\infty$ and $\ell\to \infty$ are not interesting, since in these limits the disorder is rendered unimportant. Therefore, in the following, we assume finite (positive) values for $\ell$ and $\omega$ and moreover set them equal to one $\omega=\ell=1$, by appropriately choosing the units for $z$ and $t$.
Now, we are left with three dimensionless parameters: $h$, $c$ and $\eta$. The dependence of the first order perturbative Fourier coefficients on $\eta$ is trivial. The dependence on $c$ is also evident, as can be read off from (\[eq:1stoan\],\[eq:1stobn\]). For larger $c$, the system is more tightly bound to the non-disordered solution, supressing perturbative corrections.
![\[fig:habh1\]Plotting the logarithms of $|A_N|$ and $|B_N|$ reveals the exponential decay with $N$. In the regime where numerical errors do not dominate the result, a linear regression seems appropriate. ](bsplog.eps){width="\columnwidth"}
![\[fig:habh2\]Performing the linear regression for many $h$ yields slopes $\alpha$ and $\beta$ appearing to depend on $h$ in a power-law fashion.](habhlog.eps){width="\columnwidth"}
The most interesting but also the most difficult is the dependence of the Fourier coefficients on $h$. Actually, there are two competing effects. On the one hand, large driving strengths render the disorder unimportant in all cases accessible through perturbative methods. In a nutshell, the expansion parameter is $\eta/h$. On the other hand, if one thinks of $g(Z(t))$ as a function of time, the more rapid $Z(t)$ changes the more $g$ fluctuates on short time scales and thus brings higher frequency contributions to $v(t)$. The first remark is reflected in the overall weight of the Fourier coefficients as corrections to the non-disordered case, decreasing with $h$. The second idea is expected to express itself in the decay of the Fourier coefficients with $N$. The larger $h$, the weaker we expect this decay to be.
In equations (\[eq:mf1sto\]) and (\[eq:mfkmnsym\]), the dependence of the higher harmonics on $h$ is hidden in the $K_{m,n}$ as functions of $h$: The maximum of the $K_{m,n}$ as functions of the parameter $h/(\omega\ell)$ shifts to larger values as $m$ or $n$ increase. In the integral representation this can be seen, as the Bessel functions take their first extrema at large arguments for large indices. However, the complicated way in which the $K_{m,n}$ functions enter $A_N$ and $B_N$ hinders an analytic access to the decay law. A numerical determination of the Fourier coefficients for the perturbative result reveals an exponential decay, cf. fig. \[fig:habh1\]. The noisy behaviour for $N\ge 40$ is due to numerical fluctuations. Note, that these fluctuations are of the order $10^{-14}$, which is quite reasonable. The plot in fig. \[fig:habh1\] is mere illustration of a more general phenomenon. This exponential decay has been found for many sets of parameters, thus one is led to the ansatz $$|A_N|\sim{\text{e}}^{-\alpha N}\quad;\quad |B_N|\sim{\text{e}}^{-\beta N},$$ where $\alpha$ and $\beta$ can be estimated through a linear regression up to a suitable $N_{\text{max}}$. Of course, it is not expected, that $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are distinct, nor that they depend on the parameters in different ways. Determining both just doubles the amount of available data.
As our results are first-order perturbative, $\alpha$ and $\beta$ must not depend on $\eta$. The main interest now focusses on the dependence of the decay constants on $h$. The results from a linear regression for a series of $h$-values, $c$ and $\eta$ kept fixed, suggest a power-law dependence $$\label{eq:regression}
\alpha(h)=C_\alpha\cdot h^{-\xi_\alpha},\quad\beta(h)=C_\beta\cdot h^{-\xi_\beta}.$$ Fig. \[fig:habh2\] displays this relation for a particular example. Repeating this data collection and subsequent regression for different values for $c$ and $\eta$ yields the results summarised in table \[tab:habh\].
$c$ $\eta$ $C_\alpha$ $C_\beta$ $\xi_\alpha$ $\xi_\beta$
----- -------- ------------ ----------- -------------- -------------
1.0 0.6 1.52 1.52 0.61 0.61
1.5 0.6 1.56 1.56 0.58 0.59
2.0 0.6 1.56 1.59 0.58 0.60
2.5 0.6 1.63 1.62 0.61 0.61
3.0 1.0 1.66 1.66 0.63 0.63
3.5 1.0 1.71 1.68 0.62 0.62
4.0 1.0 1.69 1.65 0.61 0.60
4.5 1.0 1.72 1.68 0.62 0.62
5.0 2.0 1.71 1.67 0.61 0.60
5.5 2.0 1.73 1.73 0.61 0.62
6.0 2.0 1.77 1.72 0.62 0.62
6.5 3.0 1.76 1.77 0.62 0.62
: \[tab:habh\]Results for the regression (\[eq:regression\]).
While the exponent $\xi$ appears constant $\xi\approx 0.6$, the prefactor seems to depend on $c$.
![\[fig:vorfc\]Plot of the change of the prefactor $C(c)$ in (\[eq:regression\]) on $c$. The linear fit yields a fairly tiny slope.](vorfc.eps){width="\columnwidth"}
An attempt to redo the same procedure, done for $h$, with the parameter $c$ to gain information about the functional dependence of $\alpha$ and $\beta$ on $c$ yields a complicated but rather weak dependence, which gives no further insight. The obvious approach is to visualise the dependence of $C_\alpha$ and $C_\beta$ on $c$. The linear fit in fig. \[fig:vorfc\] gives a fairly tiny slope, so the dependence of the decay constants on $c$ may be assumed to be weak.
Certainly, it is desirable to ascertain the validity of this decay law beyond perturbation theory. In a few words, it ought to be explained, why we have not been able to do it. First of all, the logarithmic plots of the Fourier coefficients in fig. \[fig:habh1\] exhibit fluctuations around the linear decrease. This “noise” is authentic and not attributed to numerical inaccuracies. The exponential decay of the Fourier coefficients is superimposed on a true, complicated dependence. Hence, it requires a lot of data points to obtain reasonable data. Since the Fourier coefficients for even $N$ vanish, in the example of fig. \[fig:habh1\] the regression can be carried out over around 15-20 data points. This is a fair number. The quality relies heavily on the accuracy of the numerical determination of the Fourier coefficients. In Fourier analyses of the numerics for the full equation of motion (\[eq:acmfeom\]), we did not manage to get a precision better than of the order of $10^{-3}$. This means, the regression has to be stopped at $N_{\text{max}}$, where $\log A_{N_{\text{max}}}\approx -7$. In the example of fig. \[fig:habh1\], this leaves us with less than 5 data points. In view of the natural fluctuations, a linear regression is not sensible any more.
\[sec:conclusions\]Conclusions
==============================
The mean-field version of the problem of ac-driven elastic interfaces in disordered media admits a regular perturbative treatment that, where applicable, agrees very well with the numerics for the full equation of motion. It has been shown, that diagrammatic contributions with an unbounded increase in time cancel among each other, leaving a well-behaved perturbative expansion.
The solutions to the mean-field equation of motion are found to share many features with the numerical solutions of the original problem, like the hysteretic behaviour of the $v$-$h$-plots.
Unfortunately, the perturbative expressions are very complicated and thus only of little use for analytic insights. However, they improve numerical results tremendously which made possible to establish the dependence of the decay constants of the Fourier modes on $h$ as a power law $\alpha,\beta(h)=C(c)\cdot h^{-\xi}$ with $\xi\simeq 0.6$.
For fruitful discussions, inspiration and ideas I am grateful to T. Nattermann. Further, I want to thank A. Glatz and Z. Ristivojevic for discussions. Finally, I would like to acknowledge financial support by Sonderforschungsbereich 608.
\[app:reg\]Regularity of the perturbation expansion
===================================================
In section \[sec:pert:consistency\] we have analysed, how the unbounded contributions, contained in the two diagrams that involve a curly line, mutually cancel in the second non-vanishing perturbative order. In this appendix, we are going to explain how this cancellation process generalises to all orders in perturbation theory. As before, for simplicity, we work with the diagrams for the disorder-averaged velocity, that arise by just removing the curly lines from the root of the diagrams for ${{\left\langle \zeta\right\rangle}}$ (cf. equation (\[eq:diagexpand\])). In a velocity diagram contributing to the $n$-th order (recall, that only for even $n$ the corrections are non-zero), any curly line connects two trees of order $p$ and $q$ (both even) with the restriction $p+q=n$. Both trees appear in the expansion of lower orders, namely $p$ and $q$, respectively. In the following, we want to sketch an inductive proof for the claim that the unbounded terms originating from trees with curly internal lines cancel among each other.
Let us assume, that for order $n$ we have achieved to ensure regularity. For every unbounded tree $T$, there is thus a set $T^1,\ldots,T^a$ of, let us call them *cancelling trees*, such that $T+T^1+\ldots+T^a$ is a regular, bounded expression in time. As a starting point for the induction, take $n=4$, where the validity of the claim has been verified in section \[sec:pert:consistency\]. It is now the task to validate the regularity for order $n+2$. First of all, we consider the process of attaching the root of a regular tree $S$ (with no internal curly line) of order $s$ by a curly line to a vertex $v$ of another regular tree $R$ of order $r=n+2-s$ to obtain a new irregular tree $A$ of order $n+2$. The vertex $v$ must be connected to another vertex $w\in R$ by a dashed line, to carry out the Gaußian disorder average. Without loss of generality, we assume that $v$ is connected to $w$ by a path that first makes a step towards the root. The rules for the diagrammatic expansion ensure, that there is a maximal regular subtree $T\subset R$, which contains $v$ and $w$.
Using partial integration, it is possible to move the vertex to which $S$ is connected (via the curly line) to a neighbouring vertex in $T$. Thus, it is possible to move the connection vertex along the unique way (in $T$) from $v$ to $w$. We are going to show, that once $w$ is reached, we have obtained the cancelling tree which is unique. Diagrammatcially, the process of moving the connection vertex from $v$ to $w$ reads: $$\begin{aligned}
\parbox{21mm}{\includegraphics{cdiag.1}}
&=&
\>\>\parbox{21mm}{\includegraphics{cdiag.2}}+D\end{aligned}$$ Here, the blank circle represents $S$, the lightgrey circle stands for the subtree $R_1$ of $R$, to which $v$ connects and the darkgrey shaded circle denotes trees which run out of $v$ (summarised in the following as $R_2$). Certainly, in general there may be dashed lines between the dark- and the lightgrey circle, which we have omitted as they are not relevant for the forthcoming discussion. The dotted line just serves as a joker - it is not important to specify how many trees go out of $v$. The last term $D$ collects the left-over terms from the partial integration. Note, that, if it takes several steps to go from $v$ to $w$, the intermediate expressions (in the partial integration) are no valid diagrams.
To illustrate the procedure, we take a look at the first step:
$$\begin{aligned}
\parbox{21mm}{\includegraphics{cdiag.1}}
&=&R_1(t)\int\limits_0^{T_1}{\text{d}}t_1\>{\text{e}}^{-c(T_1-t_1)}(-1)^\nu\Delta^{(\mu+\nu)}[Z(\tau)-Z(t_1)]
R_2(t_1)\int\limits_0^{t_1}{\text{d}}t_2 S(t_2)\\
&=&R_1(t)\int\limits_0^{T_1}{\text{d}}t_2 S(t_2)
\int\limits_0^{T_1}{\text{d}}t_1{\text{e}}^{-c(T_1-t_1)}(-1)^\nu\Delta^{(\mu+\nu)}[Z(\tau)-Z(t_1)]R_2(t_1)\\
&&-R_1(t)\int\limits_0^{T_1}{\text{d}}t_1\>{\text{e}}^{-c(T_1-t_1)}S(t_1)\int\limits_0^{t_1}
{\text{d}}t_2\>{\text{e}}^{-c(t_1-t_2)}(-1)^\nu\Delta^{(\mu+\nu)}[Z(\tau)-Z(t_2)]R_2(t_2)\end{aligned}$$
The order of the derivative (i.e. the number of outgoing lines) of $w$ and $v$ are denoted by $\mu$ and $\nu$, respectively. The time, at which the whole diagram is to be evaluated, is $t$, the time corresponding to the vertex to which $v$ is connected is given by $T_1$, $t_1$ is thus the time associated to $v$ and so on. The time of $w$ is $\tau$. Thus, we see, that if $w$ is not the vertex to which $v$ is directly connected (then $T_1\ne\tau$ in general), the first expression after partial integration cannot be a valid diagram: $v$ has lost one order of derivative ($\nu-1$ lines go out instead of $\nu$), but the derivative of the correlator $\Delta$ has not changed. A valid diagram is then obtained, when the connection of $S$ has reached $w$. Then, $v$ has lost an outgoing line, but $w$ received one more and we indeed have achieved a cancelling tree: the factor $(-1)^\nu$ remains, the true diagram, however, has $(-1)^{\nu-1}$. The signs are different, thus the two trees cancel. The left-over term from the partial integration is again regular, as can be seen since all time integrals carry an exponential damping term. It is clear, that this is generally true for every partial integration step.
To go one step further, we assume now $S$ to be irregular. Essentially, the same procedure works, but there are more cancelling trees: one has take all cancelling trees $\{S^i\}$ for $S$ into account (which exist by induction hypothesis), thus $S$ is replaced by $\sum S^i$ and thence the left-over terms are again regular.
A possible irregularity of $R$ can be accounted for in the same way. It is, however, important to explain why this is possible, i.e. what is $v$ and $w$ in the cancelling trees for $R$. In the case of irregular $S$ the problem was easy, since all trees have a unique root. As we have seen already, the procedure of creating cancelling trees does not change the structure of regular subtrees. Thence, all cancelling trees for $R$ contain $T$. This makes clear, which $v$ and $w$ have to be chosen in the cancelling trees: they are well-defined in $T$ and $T$ is a well-defined subtree of the cancelling trees. Thus, repeating the whole procedure described above for all cancelling trees of $R$ yields the complete set of cancelling trees for $A$ in the most general setting.
\[app:resum\]Resummation of the perturbation expansion
======================================================
For a constant driving force, it is not clear, why a perturbative approach using (\[eq:mfdisexpansion\]) should work. So, we approach the perturbation expansion from another direction, which will turn out to be a resummation of our former expansion in the disorder. Take our original equation of motion $$\begin{aligned}
\partial_tz&=c\cdot\left[{\left\langle z\right\rangle}-z\right]+h\cdot f(t)+
\eta\cdot g(z)\end{aligned}$$ and decompose $z=X+\xi$, where $X={\left\langle z\right\rangle}$. Thus ${\left\langle \xi\right\rangle}=0$. This gives us two non-linearly coupled non-linear differential equations $$\begin{aligned}
\partial_tX(t)&=h\cdot f(t)+\eta\cdot{\left\langle g(X+\xi)\right\rangle}\\
\label{eq:xidgl}
(\partial_t+c)\xi(t)&=\eta\big[g(X+\xi)-{\left\langle g(X+\xi)\right\rangle}\big]\end{aligned}$$ If $c$ is large enough, one can always achieve $\xi\ll\ell$ and thus a Taylor expansion of the disorder around $X(t)$ keeping only lowest order-terms seems reasonable. Instead of a systematic expansion in the disorder, we now perform power-counting in $\xi$. This leads to a recursive structure for $\xi$: $$\begin{aligned}
(\partial_t&+c)\xi=\eta\sum\limits_{n=0}^\infty{1\over n!}\left[
g^{(n)}(X)\xi^n-{\left\langle g^{(n)}(X)\xi^n\right\rangle}\right]\\
&=\eta\left[g(X)+g'(X)\xi-{\left\langle g'(X)\xi\right\rangle}+{1\over 2}g''(X)\xi^2+\ldots\right]\end{aligned}$$ and thus a self-consistent equation for $X(t)$
$$\begin{aligned}
\partial_tX&=h\cdot f(t)+\eta\sum\limits_{n=0}^\infty{1\over n!}{\left\langle g^{(n)}(X)\xi^n\right\rangle}\\
&=h\cdot f(t)+\eta
\Big\langle g(X)+\eta g'(X)\int\limits_0^t{\text{d}}t'{\text{e}}^{-c(t-t')}
\big[g(X)+\ldots\big]+
\ldots\Big\rangle\end{aligned}$$
The graphical structure is now similar to that of section \[sec:pert:diag\]. It reads $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:diagXexp}
\partial_tX=&h\cdot f(t)+\>
\parbox{9mm}{\includegraphics{mvdiag.1}}\>+3\cdot\>
\parbox{9mm}{\includegraphics{mvdiag.2}}\>+\>
\parbox{17mm}{\includegraphics{mvdiag.3}}\>+\>
2\cdot\>\parbox{17mm}{\includegraphics{mvdiag.4}}\>+\nonumber\\
&\nonumber\\&
2\cdot\>
\parbox{17mm}{\includegraphics{mvdiag.5}}\>+2\cdot\>
\parbox{17mm}{\includegraphics{mvdiag.6}}\>+\>
\parbox{25mm}{\includegraphics{mvdiag.7}}\>+\>
\parbox{25mm}{\includegraphics{mvdiag.8}}\>+
{\cal{O}}(\xi^4)\end{aligned}$$
This series only consists of “irreducible” (1PI) graphs, where no line can be cut such that the whole graph falls apart into two and no curly lines occur. Otherwise the diagrammatic rules are essentially the same as before. Every vertex corresponds to $g^{(m)}(X)/m!$, where $m$ counts the number of outgoing lines. The full lines are propagators of the differential equation (\[eq:xidgl\]) for $\xi$.
On analysing the expansion of the first and simplest diagram in the disorder (up to ${\cal O}(\eta^6)$) $$\begin{aligned}
\parbox{9mm}{\includegraphics{demvdiag.1}}\>
&=\>
\parbox{9mm}{\includegraphics{demvdiag.2}}\>+2\cdot\>
\parbox{17mm}{\includegraphics{demvdiag.3}}\>+\>
\parbox{25mm}{\includegraphics{demvdiag.4}}\\
g(X)&=g(Z+{{\left\langle \zeta\right\rangle}})=g(Z)+g'(Z){{\left\langle \zeta\right\rangle}}+\ldots,\end{aligned}$$ one inspects that the “new” diagrammatic expansion (\[eq:diagXexp\]) is merely a resummation of our old one. However, if a constant driving force is exerted, $\xi(t)$ remains bounded (and, depending on $c$, also small) at all times, in contrast to $\zeta(t)$. This can be seen by confirming the earlier estimate for the mean deviation of a realisation from the mean position (cf. section \[sec:model\]), which is exactly $\xi$. We observe that $$\begin{aligned}
{\left\langle ({\left\langle z\right\rangle}-z)^2\right\rangle}&={\left\langle \xi^2\right\rangle}
={\eta^2\over c^2}\cdot\phi\left({c\ell\over 2v}\right)+{\cal O}(\eta^4).\end{aligned}$$ As $\phi\le 1$, to this order $\eta/c$ is an upper bound for the typical distance from the mean. Thus this perturbation expansion should work fine for $\eta/c\ll\ell$. As far as there is overlap, this also agrees with the result in [@KL:PRB85]. For a constant driving force $h$, the first order correction to the velocity yields a self-consistent integral equation $$\label{eq:dcv1stoscp}
v=h+\eta^2\int\limits_0^t{\text{d}}t'\>
{\text{e}}^{-c(t-t')}\Delta'[v(t-t')]+{\cal O}(\eta^4),$$ which has been used in computing equation (\[eq:pert4o\]).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Light carries both spin and momentum. Spin-orbit interactions of light come into play at the subwavelength scale of nano-optics and nano-photonics, where they determine the behaviour of light. These phenomena, in which the spin affects and controls the spatial degrees of freedom of light, are attracting rapidly growing interest. Here we present results on the spin-momentum locking in the *near field* of metal nanostructures supporting localized surface resonances. These systems can confine light to very small dimensions below the diffraction limit, leading to a striking near-field enhancement. In contrast to the *propagating* evanescent waves of surface plasmon-polariton modes, the electromagnetic near-field of localized surface resonances does not exhibit a definite position-independent momentum or polarization. Close to the particle, the canonical momentum is almost tangential to the particle surface and rotates when moving along the surface. The direction of this rotation can be controlled by the spin of the incident light.'
author:
- Claudia Triolo
- Adriano Cacciola
- Salvatore Patanè
- Rosalba Saija
- Salvatore Savasta
- Franco Nori
bibliography:
- 'SMLp2.bib'
title: |
Spin-Momentum Locking\
in the Near Field of Metal Nanoparticles
---
.
[**Spin-Momentum Locking in the Near Field of Metal Nanoparticles**]{}, C. Triolo, A. Cacciola, S. Patanè, R. Saija, S. Savasta. F. Nori.
Schematic representation of the configuration used for the scattering calculations. Under the resonance condition, the exciting incident wave induces a strong enhancement of the electromagnetic field around the sphere, that rapidly decays from the particle surface and produces interesting effects related to the orbital and spin momenta of light and their SOI. The force and the torque produced by the orbital and spin momentum, respectively, acan be investigated by considering a probe-particle near the gold nanosphere.
According to Maxwell’s theory of electromagnetism, an electromagnetic wave carries both momentum and angular momentum (AM), which can be transferred to a reflecting or absorbing surface hit by the wave [@Molina2007; @loudon2012]. The simplest example of an optical field carrying momentum and spin angular momentum is an elliptically-polarized plane wave. Assuming the free space propagation along the $z$-axis, the complex electric field of this wave can be written as, $$\label{planewave1}
{\bf E} ({\bf r}) = A \left( \bar {\bf x}\, \cos \frac{\theta}{2} + \bar {\bf y} \sin \frac{\theta}{2}\, e^{i \phi} \right) e^{i k z}\, ,$$ where $A$ is the wave amplitude, $\bar {\bf x}$ and $\bar {\bf y}$ are unit vectors, $k = \omega/c$ is the wave number, and the angles $\theta$ and $\phi$ determine the polarization state. Throughout the paper we imply monochromatic fields, omitting the time-evolution factor $e^{-i \omega t}$.
The momentum ${\bf p}$ and spin AM ${\bf s}$ densities of the wave described by Eq. (\[planewave1\]) are longitudinal: $$\label{planewave2}
{\bf p} = \frac{w}{\omega} k\, \bar {\bf z}\, , \hspace{1 cm} {\bf s} = \frac{w}{\omega}\, \sigma\, \bar {\bf z}\, ,$$ where $w = \gamma \omega A^2$ is the energy density \[$\gamma = (8 \pi \omega)^{-1}$ in Gaussian units\], and $\sigma = \sin \theta\, \sin \phi \in [-1,1]$ is the helicity parameter. The momentum ($\propto k$) describes the propagation of the wave, while the spin AM ($\propto \sigma$) characterizes the independent polarization degree of freedom.
Real optical beams can differ significantly from the idealized plane wave described in Eq. (\[planewave1\]). However, traditional macroscopic optics can maintain this picture, still treating the spatial and polarization properties of light as independent. For example, the first can be manipulated by lenses or prisms, while the latter can be independently affected by polarizers or waveplates. At the subwavelength scales of nano-optics, photonics and plasmonics, however, spin and orbital properties become strongly coupled with each other.
The spin-orbit interactions (SOI) of light are nowadays a rapidly growing area of research, which is of both fundamental and practical interest [@bliokh2015; @bliokh2015spin; @Antognozzi2016]. These studies reveal interesting connections between optical SOI and fundamental quantum mechanics or field-theory problems involving optical momentum and spin. Moreover, the miniaturization of optical devices and the fast development of nano-photonics require to consider the SOI of light. Indeed, it turns out that most optical processes (e.g., propagation, reflection, focusing, scattering, and diffraction) are strongly influenced by the SOI at subwavelength scales [@petersen2014chiral; @Donato2014; @o2014spin; @Zhang2017].
Spin-dependent perturbations of the light trajectory, which is a manifestation of the spin-Hall effect, in a gradient-index medium is a first important example of SOI [@bliokh2015quantum; @bliokh2015]. Optical spin-momentum locking was recently observed in many experiments exploiting evanescent waves. For example, coupling incident circularly-polarized light to the evanescent tails of surface or waveguide modes, results in a strong spin-controlled unidirectional excitation of these modes. This is a direct manifestation of the extraordinary transverse spin of evanescent waves related to the quantum spin-Hall effect of light. It has also been shown that the focusing of circularly polarized light by a high-numerical-aperture lens, or the scattering by a small particle, generates a spin-dependent optical vortex in the output field.
Here we investigate optical SOI in the near-field region of metallic nanoparticles. When light interacts with metal nanoparticles and nanostructures, it can excite collective oscillations, known as localized surface plasmons (LSPs), which can confine light to very small dimensions below the diffraction limit [@giannini2011plasmonic; @triolo2015near]. The angular spectrum representation shows that radiation re-emitted by a localized source is a combination of travelling and evanescent waves [@moreno2013]. The latter largely dominate the near-field region around metallic nanoparticles supporting LSPs. In contrast to the surface plasmon-polariton modes, the near field of LSP resonances does not exhibit a definite position-independent momentum or polarization. Very recently, the concept of local angular momentum as a figure of merit for the design of nanostructures that provide large field gradients has been proposed [@Alabastri2016]. These systems offer the opportunity to investigate spin-momentum locking and more general SOI of light for complex multimode evanescent fields. The results presented here show that spin-momentum locking, spin controlled unidirectional propagation of light, and spin-controlled optical forces can also be observed in the *near field* of metal nanoparticles.
Results {#results .unnumbered}
=======
For a vector field, the momentum of light is usually defined by the Poynting vector ${\bf p}$ which, in the simplest case of a homogeneous plane electromagnetic wave, is aligned with the wavevector $\bf k$ \[see Eq. (\[planewave2\])\]. However, in more complicated (yet typical cases of) structured optical fields (such as optical vortices and near-field phenomena), the direction of the Poynting vector can differ from the wavevector direction [@bekshaev2015transverse; @rodriguez2013near; @bliokh2012spatiotemporal; @shitrit2011optical]. In these cases, the Poynting vector $\bf p$ acquires an additional spin momentum density $\bf p^{\rm s}$, introduced for the first time by Belifante [@belinfante1940; @ohanian1986spin], and can be expressed [@bliokh2015] as a sum of canonical and spin contributions: ${\bf p}= {\bf p}^{\rm o} +{\bf p}^s$.
In terms of the electric ${\bf E}$ and magnetic [**H**]{} components of the optical field, we have [@Bliokh2014]: $$\label{planewave3}
{\bf p}^{\rm o} = \frac{\gamma}{2} {\rm Im}[\bf E^\ast \cdot (\bf \nabla) \bf E+ \bf H^\ast \cdot (\bf \nabla) \bf H]\,$$ $$\label{planewave4}
{\bf s}= \frac{\gamma}{2} {\rm Im} [\bf E^\ast \times \bf E + \bf H^\ast \times \bf H]\, , \hspace{1 cm}
{\bf p}^{\rm s}= \frac{1}{2} \bf \nabla \times \bf s \, .$$ The optical momentum and spin densities can be measured experimentally by placing a small absorbing particle in the field and observing its linear $(\bf F \propto \bf p)$ and spinning $(\bf T \propto \bf s)$ motion [@Bliokh2014; @adachi2007orbital; @Antognozzi2016; @rodriguez2015lateral]. This description is also valid for the canonical and the spin momenta of evanescent waves. Considering the total internal reflection of a polarized plane wave at the glass-air interface, the canonical momentum density in the evanescent field in air is proportional to its longitudinal wavevector ${\bf p}^{\rm o} \propto k_z \bf \bar{z}$ (where $\bf \bar{z}$ indicates the propagation direction). However, at the same time, the Poynting vector has an unusual transverse component, which depends on the spin [@Bliokh2014]: $$\label{planewave5}
{\bf s} = \frac{\tilde w}{\omega}\left(\sigma \frac{k}{k_z} {\bf \bar{z}} + \frac{\kappa}{k_z} {\bf \bar{y}}\right)\, , \hspace{1 cm}
{\bf p}^{\rm s} = \frac{\tilde w}{\omega}\left(- \frac{\kappa^2}{k_z} {\bf \bar{z}} + \sigma \frac{\kappa k}{k_z} {\bf \bar{y}}\right)$$ where $\tilde {w}=\gamma \omega |A|^2 e^{-2\kappa x}$, $k_z$ is the longitudinal wavenumber and $\kappa = \sqrt{k_z^2 - k^2}$ is the exponential decay rate. The second term in each of the two Eqs. in (\[planewave5\]), provides a transverse component to the spin and momentum. These are specific features of the evanescent fields. The transverse component of the momentum becomes proportional to the helicity $\sigma$, while that acquired by the spin turns out to be helicity independent [@Bliokh2014]. Considering a dipole Rayleigh particle with equal electric and magnetic polarizabilities $\alpha = \alpha_{\rm e} = \alpha_{\rm m}$, the radiation pressure force on it is [@Bliokh2014] ${\bf F} = \gamma^{-1} {\rm Im}(\alpha) {\bf p}^o$. The resulting radiation pressure (longitudinal) force “per photon” is therefore $8 \pi \hbar \omega {\rm Im}(\alpha) k_z$. Since $k_z$ can exceed $k$ for evanescent waves, the force from the evanescence field can be higher than the force from a plane wave with the same local wave vector ${\bf k}$.
If we compare the radiation force that acts on a probe particle generated by a propagating wave or by an evanescent wave, in the latter this force will be larger than $k$ per photon. It turns out that, for ideal dipole Rayleigh particles, ${\bf p}^{\rm s}$ does not contribute to the force exerted on it by the field. However, for larger or anisotropic probe particles, its value can be different from zero. The spin produces two radiation torque components on a probe particle. The longitudinal torque depends on the spin state, while the transverse torque is $\sigma$-independent and it occurs even for linearly-polarized incident light [@Bliokh2014].
![(a) Schematic representation of the configuration used for the scattering calculations. The incident field propagates along the $z$-axis. Under the resonance condition, the exciting incident wave induces a strong enhancement of the electromagnetic field around the sphere, that rapidly decays from the particle surface and produces interesting effects related to the orbital and spin momenta of light and their SOI. The force and torque produced by the orbital and spin momentum, respectively, are calculated by considering a probe-particle near the gold nanosphere. (b) Near-field enhancement $|E/E_{\rm inc}|^2$ (red curve) calculated on the equatorial plane, at a distance $d=4$ nm from the particle surface, and the extinction efficiency cross-section spectra (blue curve) for a gold spherical nanoparticle (radius $a=40$ nm), calculated beyond the quasistatic approximation, by employing the Mie theory implemented within the T-matrix formalism [@borghese2007scattering; @borghese2013superposition]. The resonance condition occurs in correspondence of the maximum near-field enhancement of the optical field at $\lambda=531$ nm (black vertical line). The dotted vertical line indicates an out-of-resonance wavelength ($\lambda=735$ nm), where we also calculated the canonical and spin momenta. \[fig:1\]](figura1.pdf)
Here we propose to exploit the near-field enhancement of LSPs resonances in order to investigate the orbital and spin momenta of light and their SOI in the near-field region of metallic nanoparticles.
Circularly-polarized incident field {#circularly-polarized-incident-field .unnumbered}
-----------------------------------
Figure 1a shows a schematic representation of the configuration used here for the scattering calculation. The simplest possible geometry considered here involves only an incident propagating plane wave with amplitude $E_{\rm inc} = A$ \[see Eq. \[planewave1\]\] and a metallic sphere. Below, we analyze the characteristics of the scattered field ${\bf E}_{\rm sc}$ and of the total field, ${\bf E} = {\bf E}_{\rm inc} + {\bf E}_{\rm sc}$, in conjuction with the incident field characteristics ${\bf p}_{\rm inc}$, $w_{\rm inc}$, and ${\bf s}_{\rm inc}$, determined by Eq. (\[planewave2\]). Conventionally, the quantities related with the incident (scattered) field are marked by the subscripts “inc” (“sc”), and the total field characteristics are shown without subscript. For convenience, the momentum densities are normalized by the incident field momentum density, e.g., ${\bf p}^o \to {\bf p}_{\rm n}^o = {\bf p}^o / |{\bf p}_{\rm inc}|$, and the spin density is normalized by the incident field energy density according to ${\bf s} \to {\bf s}_{\bf n} = (\omega / w_{\rm inc}) {\bf s}$. Let the incident field be a circularly-polarized plane wave travelling along the $z$-axis. Under the resonance condition, the exciting wave induces a strong enhancement of the electromagnetic field around the sphere. We calculate the orbital momentum and the spin on the equatorial plane that goes through the center of the sphere and normal to the propagation direction. We consider a gold spherical nanoparticle of radius ($a=40$ nm) smaller than the effective wavelength $\lambda/\sqrt{\varepsilon_d}$, where $\varepsilon_d$ is the dielectric constant of the surrounding medium (through this work we use $\varepsilon_d =1$). Figure 1b displays the near-field enhancement $|E/E_{\rm inc}|^2$ (red curve), and the extinction efficiency (blue curve) for a gold spherical nanoparticle.
Figure 2a shows the orbital momentum enhancement $|{\bf p}^{\rm o}|/|{\bf p_{\rm inc}}|$ and the module of the Poynting vector $|{\bf p}|/|{\bf p_{\rm inc}}|$ as a function of the distance $d$ from the nanoparticle surface. Close to the particle surface, due to the strong confinement of the scattered field, the Poynting vector acquires an additional component that depends on the spin, as defined in Eq. (\[planewave4\]). This additional component, so-called *spin momentum* ${\bf p}^{\rm s}$, produces a “supermomentum" effect that causes the enhancement of $|{\bf p}^{\rm o}|$ (almost one order of magnitude greater than $|{\bf p}|$). A similar feature characterizes also the spin density (calculated, but not shown). Figure 2b displays the amplitude of the normalized spin density ${\bf s}_{\rm n} = (\omega/ w_{\rm inc}) {\bf s}$ as a function of $d$. This ratio can vary between $-1$ and 1. For the scattering contribution, the curve decays approximately linearly with increasing $d$. This shows that the spin density associated with the scattered field decays with the distance more rapidly than the energy density. The spin density of the total field is significantly smaller than that of the scattered field for $d \lesssim 20$ nm. This lower spin density of the total field is caused by the interference between the incident and the scattered field that produces a spin reduction in the local field. The values of ${\rm s}_{n}$ for the scattered field indicate an intermediate spin state between $\sigma = \pm 1$ (purely circular polarization) and $\sigma = 0$ (linear polarization), describing an elliptical polarization. However, the incident field is characterized by an exact spin state ($\sigma= \pm 1$). It results that the spin direction of the scattered field is almost opposite to that of the incident field. Owing to the rapid decay of the scattered field, moving away from the particle surface, spin cancellation rapidly increases, giving rise to a strong lowering of the spin of the total field. Increasing even more the distance $d$, the scattered field becomes negligible, the incident field prevails, and the spin value increases approaching 1. This explains the minimum value observed in Fig. 2b.
The presence of the transverse component of the spin can be demonstrated considering the angle $\theta$ between the ${\bf p}^{\rm o}$ and $\bf s$ vectors (see Fig. 2c). In contrast to the longitudinal spin of the incident wave, the spin of the scattered field turns out to be almost completely transverse to the canonical momentum ${\bf p}^{\rm o}$, independently on the helicity ($\sigma=\pm 1$) of the incident light (see dotted curves in Fig. 2c). We observe, however, that the angle is slightly larger than $90^{○\circ} $ for $\sigma= -1$ and smaller for $\sigma=1$.
Figure 2c shows also the angle between ${\bf p}^{\rm o}$ and ${\bf s}$ for the total field. We notice that at the particle surface, where the scattered field largely dominates, the transverse component of the spin prevails and $\theta \approx 80^{\circ}$ (for $\sigma=+1$) and $\theta \approx 100^{\circ}$ (for $\sigma= - 1$). As expected, at increasing distances, the two angles (for $\sigma= \pm 1$) tend towards those describing the (longitudinal) spin direction of the incident waves: $\theta_+ = 0^{\circ}$, and $\theta_- = 180^{\circ}$. We observe that the dependence of the angles on the distance is not monotonous. A local minimum (maximum) can be observed around $d \approx 10$ nm. It originates from the same cancellation effect determining the minimum in Fig. 2b. Figure 2d displays the angle $\phi$ between $\bf p$ and ${\bf p}^{\rm o}$ as a function of $d$ and calculated for the scattered and total fields. We observe that, for the scattered fields, $\phi$ decays approximately linearly with increasing $d$, as the spin of the scattered field (see Fig. 2b). This behaviour can be understood noticing that the spin momentum is defined as ${\bf \nabla \times s}$. Note that the values of $\phi$ are very small (its maximum value is about $6^{\circ}$) and indicate that the Poynting vector is almost coincident with the canonical momentum. The behavior of the $\phi$ angle is more complex for the total field, due to the interference between the incident and scattered fields. Indeed, because within $30$ nm from the particle surface the spin undergoes considerable variations (see red curve in Fig. 2b), in this region ${\bf p}^{\rm s}$ is larger, giving rise to a larger difference between the two vectors. The maximum value reached by the angle $\phi$ between them is almost $24^{\circ}$. This value is comparable to that calculated for an evanescent wave generated by a polarized propagating wave that undergoes total internal reflection at the glass-air interface. Considering an incidence angle of $45^{\circ}$ and a refractive index of glass $n=1.5$, the angle between $\bf p$ and ${\bf p}^{\rm o}$ is $\phi \sim 20^{\circ}$.
The results described above, obtained by resonantly exciting the LSPs of a gold nanosphere, have shown that the optical field in the near-field region possesses remarkable properties related to the SOI. These interactions induce: (*i*) the rise of a transverse spin which close to the particle surface is dominant; (*ii*) the appearence of an extraordinary spin-dependent momentum, so that, in the near field, the canonical momentum ${\bf p}^{\rm o}$ differs significantly from the Poynting vector $\bf p$, as in the case of propagating surface waves [@bliokh2015; @Bliokh2014].
Recently, several experiments and numerical simulations have demonstrated notable spin-controlled unidirectional coupling between circularly-polarized incident light and transversely propagating surface or waveguide modes, which can be associated with the quantum spin-Hall effect of light [@bliokh2015; @bliokh2015spin; @bliokh2015quantum]. Now we investigate this SOI effect in the near-field of a metallic nanoparticle. Figures 3a and 3b, displaying the directions of the canonical momentum and of the spin on the equatorial plane of the particle, clearly show that the spin of the incident light is able to control the direction of the canonical momentum ${\bf p}^{\rm o}$. Very close to the particle surface, the canonical momentum lies almost completely on the equatorial plane, with a small tilt along the propagation direction $\bar {\bf z}$ of the exciting field independent on the incident polarization. The position-dependent ${\bf p}^{\rm o}$ wraps around the sphere with the same clockwise or counter-clockwise rotation of the incident polarization. Hence, the helicity ($\sigma = \pm 1$) of the incident light determines the rotation direction of the canonical momentum near the surface of the particle. Note that, close to the particle surface, the spin is almost opposite to the spin direction of the incident field and forms an angle of $ \approx 90^{\circ}$ with the canonical momentum. As shown in Fig. 2c, the angle is larger (smaller) than $90^{\circ}$ for $\sigma = -1$ ($+1$). This difference is due to the spin-independent tilt of the momentum along the incident direction, mainly due to the contribution of the incident field to the total field. This contribution, owing to the rapid decay of the scattered field, becomes more relevant with the distance from the particle surface and it significantly affects both canonical momentum and spin. Specially, ${\bf p}^{\rm o}$ tends to align with the Poynting vector of the total field, and ${\bf s}$ varies much rapidly within 30 nm from the particle surface, rotating through the equatorial plane $xy$ of the nanosphere, and finally reaching the same longitudinal direction of the spin of the incident light. These effects represent a confirmation of the spin-orbit coupling [@bliokh2015spin] in the near-field region around a metallic nanoparticle which, due to the LSPs resonance, is dominated by the evanescent field.
Figure 4 displays the vectors $\bf p^{\rm o}$ and ${\bf s}_{\rm n}$ calculated on a plane 20 nm above the equatorial plane of the sphere, at the plasmonic resonance $\lambda = 531$ nm, for $\sigma = -1$ incident light. In agreement with the results obtained on the equatorial plane, also in this case the vectors $\bf p^{\rm o}$ and ${\bf s}_{\rm n}$ (close to the particle) remain orthogonal to each other and tangent to the sphere surface.
In order to better understand the impact of LSP resonances, we consider a second excitation wavelength at $735$ nm, quite far from the LSPs near-field peak (see Fig. 1b). Figure 5a shows the orbital momentum enhancement $|{\bf p}^{\rm o}|/|{\bf p_{\rm inc}}|$ and the module of the Poynting vector $|{\bf p}|/|{\bf p_{\rm inc}}|$, normalized with respect to the Poynting vector of the incident field, as a function of the distance $d$ from the nanoparticle surface. The system still gives rise to a significant “supermomentum" effect [@Bliokh2014]. Figure 5b displays the normalized spin density $s_{\rm n}$ for the scattered and total fields as a function of $d$. For the scattering contribution, the curve decays approximately linearly with increasing $d$, analogously to the resonant case. This indicates that the contribution of the scattering field is largely independent from the resonance condition. A different behaviour characterizes the total field. The spin density of the total field becomes significantly smaller than that of the scattered field for $d \lesssim 20$ nm and on the particle surface it achieves its minimum value. Comparing Figs 2(a,b) and 5(a,b), it is interesting to observe that the two minima in (b) occur approximately in correspondence to the same enhancement $|{\bf p}^{\rm o}|/|{\bf p_{\rm inc}}|$. Hence the results in Fig. 4b share the same explanation with those in Fig. 2b. Analogous considerations can be done for Figs. 2c and 5c. Figure 5d displays the angle $\phi$ between $\bf p$ and ${\bf p}^{\rm o}$ as a function of $d$ and calculated for the scattered and total fields. We observe that the angle for the total field is higher with respect to the resonant case and reach its maximum at $d \approx 0$. These differences can be understood observing that the spin of the total field displayed in Fig. 5b shows a rapid variation starting from $d \approx 0$, giving rise to a significant spin momentum. Figures 6a and 6b display the directions of the canonical momentum and of the spin on the equatorial plane of the particle for the two incident helicities $\sigma = \pm 1$, for $\lambda = 735$ nm. In this case, as expected after looking at Fig. 5c, even close to the sphere surface the two vectors are far from being orthogonal. However, interestingly, Fig. 6 shows that also out-of-resonance the incident spin is able to determine the rotation direction of the canonical momentum around the nanosphere.
Linearly-polarized incident field {#linearly-polarized-incident-field .unnumbered}
---------------------------------
We now consider a linearly-polarized (zero-spin) plane-wave incident field. Specifically, the incident direction is along the $z$-axis and the polarization direction along the $y$ axis. The system and the incidence direction of the input field are the same as those used for the circular polarization calculations (see Fig. 1a).
Figure 7a displays the logarithm map of the canonical momentum ${\bf p}^{\rm o}$ and of the normalized spin ${\bf s}_{\rm n}$ on the equatorial plane of the nanoparticle. The figure shows that around the nanosphere the field acquires spin. This effect origins from the large contribution of evanescent waves in the near-field of a metallic nanoparticle at wavelengths close to a LSP resonance. Indeed, as shown in Eq. (5), evanescent waves can display a transverse spin even in the absence of an incident spin [@Bliokh2014]. The spin reaches its maximum (${\bf s}_{\rm n} \simeq 0.96$) on the particle surface along the polarization direction ($y$) of the incident field, corresponding also to the direction where the field-enhancement and hence ${\bf p}^{\rm o}$ reach their maximum values. In this direction, the spin vector is along the $x$-axis (orthogonal to both the incident and polarization directions). We also observe that the angle $\theta$ between ${\bf s}_{\rm n}$ and ${\bf p}^{\rm o}$ is close to $90^\circ$. However, the canonical momentum is not exactly along the incident direction. It acquires a small $x$-component. Moving away from the polarization direction, around the nanosphere, both ${\bf s}_{\rm n}$ and ${\bf p}^{\rm o}$ change significantly. The canonical momentum decreases quite rapidly. Moving clockwise, the spin direction acquires a non-negligible component along the $z$-direction, so that $\theta$ becomes much larger than $90^\circ$. In the $x$-direction, orthogonal to the incident polarizion, close to the particle surface, the two vectors become antiparallel and both of them reach their minimum (on the surface).
Figure 7b displays the same results reported in Fig. 7a, calculated for an incident wave at $\lambda = 735$ nm (out of the LSP resonance). We notice that the main difference is that in this case the direction of ${\bf p}^{\rm o}$ almost coincides with the direction of the incident light, in all the points on the equatorial plane.
It is interesting to observe that the results in Fig. 7 cannot be understood in the dipole (or Rayleigh scattering) approximation [@Maier2007a], where it is assumed that the scattered field from a small sphere is well approximated by the field of the dipole moment induced by the incident electromagnetic wave. For example, according to the dipole approximation, the normalized spin ${\bf s}_{\rm n}$ calculated along both the $x$ and $y$ directions is zero, in contrast to the results of the full calculations displayed in Fig. 7. These results have been obtained by considering that in the vicinity of the surface of the sphere, the scattered field can be expanded in terms of a series of vector spherical Hankel multipole fields [@borghese2007scattering]. These fields, solutions to the Maxwell equations and eigenvectors of $L^2$ and $L_z$ as well as of the parity, form a complete set of vectors mutually orthogonal to each other (see, e.g., [@borghese2007scattering]). Unlike what happens in the framework of the Rayleigh scattering approximation, the scattered field, even to the lowest multipole order $L=1$, contains both radial and transversal parts that significantly affect both the ${\bf s}_{\rm n}$ and ${\bf p}^{\rm o}$ vectors. For example, according to the Rayleigh approximation, the electric field along the direction parallel to the incident field (in the present case the $y$-direction) contains only a radial (longitudinal) contribution, while the exact calculation (even limited to the lowest multipole order $L=1$) contains also a non-negligible transverse contribution. The presence of both contributions determines a non-zero spin.
Conclusions {#conclusions .unnumbered}
===========
We have investigated the orbital momentum and spin of light and their SOI in the near-field region of a metallic nanoparticle supporting LSP resonances. Specifically, we considered circularly or linearly polarized plane waves exciting a gold nanoparticle of radius $a= 40$ nm, considering both the resonant and the non-resonant excitation of the LSP. All the calculations have been carried out beyond the quasistatic approximation, using the Mie theory implemented within the $T$-matrix formalism [@borghese2007scattering].
We found that the SOI of light in the near-field region gives rise to several interesting features. We summarize the most relevant results: ([*i*]{}) Due to the strong confinement of the scattered field, the Poynting vector acquires an additional component that depends on the spin. This additional component, so-called spin momentum ${\bf p}^s$, produces a “supermomentum" effect that causes a strong enhancement of the canonical momentum, which becomes much larger than the Poynting vector. ([*ii*]{}) The helicity of the circularly polarized incident light is able to control the rotation direction of the canonical momentum ${\bf p}^{\rm o}$ near the surface of the particle (this effect occurs both in the resonant and non-resonant cases). ([*iii*]{}) In the case of circularly-polarized incident light and for resonant excitations, close to the particle surface the spin is almost opposite to the spin direction of the incident field and is almost orthogonal to the canonical momentum. ([*iv*]{}) The evanescent waves around the nanoparticle can give rise to significant transverse spin even in the absence of an incident spin.
Knowledge of the spin and canonical momentum distributions opens way to investigation of optical forces and torques around nanoparticles and nanostructures, which is interesting for experimental studies and applications, since the huge light concentration around metal nanoparticles can give rise to very strong optical forces and torques, even with moderate illumination. The present study can be extended to more complex nanostructures, considering for example metal nano-dimers were very high field-amplification effects in the dimer gap can be obtained at specific wavelengths (see e.g. [@nordlander2004plasmon]), and also hybrid nanostructures in the strong [@Savasta2010; @Ridolfo2011] or ultrastrong [@Cacciola2014] light-matter coupling regimes. Moreover, it would be interesting to apply these concepts to enhanced optical fields and subwavelength-field confinement induced by organic molecules with giant oscillator strength [@Gentile2014; @Cacciola2015], and to anisotropic nanoparticles [@Bliokh2016]. Finally, we observe that the analysis developed here, could be useful for the design of optical nano-motors for controlling the motion of even smaller nanoparticles or molecules (see, e.g., Refs. ).
Methods
=======
All the calculations presented here were carried out beyond the quasistatic approximation, using the generalized Mie theory [@borghese2007scattering; @borghese2013superposition]. Near-field and scattering calculations were carried out on a gold nanosphere with radius $a=40$ nm, using a frequency-dependent dielectric permittivity gathered interpolating the experimental data of Ref. . Calculations have been carried out for $\lambda = 531$ nm, corresponding to the maximum near-field enhancement, and for $\lambda = 735$ nm. At $\lambda = 531$ nm, the interpolated dielectric permittivity of gold is $\varepsilon = -4.616687 + i\,2.3487562$. At $\lambda = 735$ nm, we obtained $\varepsilon = -19.036045 + i\,1.173802$. In the near-field region, the incident, the internal, and the scattered electromagnetic fields are expanded in vector spherical harmonics (VSH) [@borghese2007scattering]. The analytical relations between the incident and scattered multipolar amplitudes are obtained thanks to the linearity of the Maxwell’s equations and of the boundary conditions, taking advantage of the expansion of the electromagnetic fields in terms of VSH. From a computational point of view, the numerical calculation of the fields requires the truncation of the multipole expansion of the fields to a suitable order to ensure the numerical stability of the results. Once the fields around the nanoparticle were obtained, we calculated the orbital momentum and the spin density in the near-field region of the nanoparticle by using Eqs. (\[planewave3\]) and (\[planewave4\]) below. In the far-field region, the optical properties of the scatterer have been calculated using the multipolar amplitudes that enter in Mie theory implemented within the T-matrix formalism [@borghese2007scattering; @borghese2013superposition]. The transition matrix contains all the information on the microphysical properties of the scatterer, being independent from the state of polarization of incidence field and from the incident and observation direction. The elements of the T-matrix define analytically in the far field the optical cross section.
[**Acknowledgements**]{}
FN was partially supported by the RIKEN iTHES Project, MURI Center for Dynamic Magneto-Optics via the AFOSR Award No. FA9550-14-1-0040, the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (KAKENHI), the IMPACT program of JST, JSPS-RFBR grant No 17-52-50023, CREST grant No. JPMJCR1676, and the Sir John Templeton Foundation. RS and SS were partially supported by the MPNS COST Action MP1403 Nanoscale Quantum Optics.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We prove an asymptotic formula for the number of partitions of $n$ into distinct parts where the largest part is at most $t\sqrt{n}$ for fixed $t$. Our method follows a probabilistic approach of Romik, who gave a simpler proof of Szekeres’ asymptotic formula for distinct parts partitions when instead the number of parts is bounded by $t\sqrt{n}$. Although equivalent to a circle method/saddle-point method calculation, the probabilistic approach motivates some of the more technical steps and even predicts the shape of the asymptotic formula, to some degree.'
address: |
Louisiana State University\
Department of Mathematics
author:
- Walter Bridges
title: Partitions into Distinct Parts with Bounded Largest Part
---
Introduction
============
A [*distinct parts partition*]{} $\lambda$ of [*size*]{} $|\lambda|=n$ is a set of strictly decreasing positive integers whose [*parts*]{} sum to $n$: $$\lambda: \qquad \lambda_1 > \lambda_2 > \dots > \lambda_{\ell} > 0; \qquad \sum_{j=1}^{\ell} \lambda_j = n.$$ For example, the distinct parts partitions of $5$ are $5,$ $4+1,$ and $3+2$. Let $d(n)$ denote the number of $\lambda$ with $|\lambda|=n$. These numbers are easily seen to be generated by the following infinite product: $$\sum_{k \geq 0}d(n) x^n = \prod_{k \geq 1} (1+x^k).$$ Pioneering work of Hardy and Ramanujan used the modular properties of the infinite product to obtain an asymptotic series for $d(n)$ (and similar enumerations) after representing these coefficients as contour integrals around the origin ([@HR], $\S 7.1$). The main term in Hardy and Ramanujan’s asymptotic series is $$\label{E:HRasymp}
d(n) \sim \frac{1}{4\sqrt[4]{3} n^{\frac{3}{4}}}e^{\frac{\pi}{\sqrt{3}}\sqrt{n}}.$$ The [*circle method*]{} is now often used as an umbrella term for the asymptotic analysis of contour integrals, including Hardy-Ramanjuan’s method and its many variants, as well as certain cases of the [*saddle-point method*]{}. For an exposition of Hardy, Ramanujan, and Rademacher’s original work, see [@A] Ch. 5-6 and for the saddle-point method, see [@FS] Ch. VIII.
A more recent approach to these asymptotic statistics, begun by Fristedt in [@F] and used by Romik in [@R], is to reformulate the proof using probability theory. This can make some of the steps more intuitive. We explain these ideas further in Section \[S:Outline\].
Let $t>0$ be fixed. We study a restriction of $d(n)$ defined as the coefficient of $x^n$ in the following generating function: $$d_{t}(n):=\text{Coeff} \ [x^n] \ \mathcal{D}_{t,n}(x), \qquad \text{where} \qquad {\mathcal{D}}_{t,n}(x):= \prod_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} (1+x^k).$$ Thus, $d_t(n)$ is the number of distinct parts partitions of $n$ with largest part is at most $t\sqrt{n}$. The smallest possible largest part in a distinct parts partition of $n$ with largest part at most $t\sqrt{n}$ is $k$, where $$1+2+\dots + (k-1) = \frac{k(k-1)}{2} < n \leq \frac{k(k-1)}{2}.$$ Thus, we ignore the range $t\leq \sqrt{2}$, where often $d_t(n)=0$, and consider only $t> \sqrt{2}$. We prove the following asymptotic formula for $d_t(n)$. Here and throughout, $\floor{\alpha}$ denotes the greatest integer less than or equal to $\alpha$ and $\{\alpha\}:= \alpha - \floor{\alpha}$.
\[T:dtasymp\] Let $t > \sqrt{2}$. Define $\beta:(\sqrt{2}, \infty)\to \left(-\infty, \frac{\pi}{2\sqrt{3}}\right)$ implicitly as a function of $t$ so that $$\label{E:betadef}
1=\int_0^t \frac{ue^{-\beta u}}{1+e^{-\beta u}}du.$$ Let $$\label{E:B(t)andA_n(t)def}
B(t):= 2\beta + t \log \left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right) \qquad \text{and} \qquad A_n(t):= \frac{e^{\frac{\beta t}{2}}+e^{-\frac{\beta t}{2}}}{2\left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right)^{\{t\sqrt{n}\}}}\sqrt{\frac{\beta'(t)}{\pi t}}.$$ Then $$d_t(n) \sim \frac{A_n(t)}{n^{3/4}}e^{B(t)\sqrt{n}}.$$
The oscillatory factor $\left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right)^{-\{t \sqrt{n}\}}$ is present because $t\sqrt{n}$ is not always an integer. Numerically, this oscillation is also reflected in $d_t(n)$, which appears not to be increasing for $t$ close to $\sqrt{2}$.
\[R:betaBAlimits\] We record properties of the functions $\beta(t), B(t)$ and $A(t):=A_n(t) \cdot \left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right)^{\{t\sqrt{n}\}}$ in Section \[S:functionproperties\]. In particular, we show that $\beta$ and $B$ are strictly increasing, and we show that $\beta(t)$, $B(t)$ and $A(t)$ tend to $\frac{\pi}{2\sqrt{3}}, \frac{\pi}{\sqrt{3}}$ and $ \frac{1}{4\sqrt[4]{3}}$, respectively, as $t \to \infty$. Thus, Theorem \[T:dtasymp\] is consistent with Hardy and Ramanujan’s asymptotic formula, and could be recovered if we were allowed to take $t \to \infty$.
\[R:dt0percent\] It has been shown that the largest part of a typical distinct parts partition of $n$ is $c\sqrt{n} \log n$ for some $c$ ([@F], Thm. 9.4), so that our $d_t(n)$ counts (asymptotically) $0\%$ of distinct parts partitions of $n$. In fact, since $B(t)$ is strictly increasing to $\frac{\pi}{\sqrt{3}}$, it follows that $d_{t}(n) = o\left(d(n) \right)$ for any fixed $t$. Thus, Theorem \[T:dtasymp\] too implies that $0\%$ of partitions of $n$ have largest part at most $t\sqrt{n}$, as $n \to \infty$. Perhaps this is why, to the best of our knowledge, the present paper is the first occurrence of an explicit asymptotic for $d_t(n)$.
A weak form of Theorem \[T:dtasymp\] was used recently in the author’s proof of limit shapes for unimodal sequences [@B], and the methods of [@B] suggest that a limit shape for the partitions enumerated by $d_t(n)$ is $$f_t(x):= \frac{1}{\beta} \log\left(\frac{1+e^{-\beta x}}{1+e^{-\beta t}}\right).$$ See Figure \[F:limitshape\]. It is curious that the concavity of the curves $y=f_t(x)$ changes at $t=2$.
![Plots of $y=f_t(x)$ when $t=1.42$, $\sqrt{3}$, $2$, $3$ and $4$, generated using Maple. The $x$-intercepts occur at $t$.[]{data-label="F:limitshape"}](limitshape){width=".9\textwidth"}
Szekeres found an asymptotic formula for distinct parts partitions when instead the [*number of parts*]{} is at most $t\sqrt{n}$ ([@S1], [@S2]). When parts are allowed to repeat, bounding the number of parts and bounding the size of the largest part give the same enumeration function due to a simple symmetry on the Ferrer’s diagrams of partitions called conjugation (see [@A], $\S 1.3$). But here, when parts are distinct, these two notions are different.
Szekeres’ proof in [@S2] is based on the saddle-point method, and later Romik [@R] recast and simplified this proof using Fristedt’s probabilistic machinery [@F]. Although equivalent to a circle method calculation, Romik’s proof motivates some of the more technical steps in the proof and even predicts the shape of the asymptotic formula, to some degree. Our proof here closely follows Romik.
In Section \[S:Outline\], we outline the proof, motivating the probabilistic model; we then state three propositions that together imply Theorem \[T:dtasymp\]. In Section \[S:functionproperties\] we record some properties of the functions $\beta(t)$, $B(t)$ and $A(t)$, including those mentioned in Remark \[R:betaBAlimits\]. In Section \[S:Proofs\], we prove Propositions \[P:logDtasymp\], \[P:expvar\] and \[P:Probasymp\]. Section \[S:lemmaproofs\] provides the proofs of two technical lemmas used in Section \[S:Proofs\]; these could be useful in similar asymptotic analysis and may be of independent interest.
Proof Outline and Probabilistic Model {#S:Outline}
=====================================
Throughout the paper $x$ will be a positive real number. We prove Theorem \[T:dtasymp\] through three propositions. Proposition \[P:logDtasymp\] anticipates the asymptotic behavior of $\log d_{t}(n)$ through classical saddle-point bounds, while Propositions \[P:expvar\] and \[P:Probasymp\] complete the proof using Fristedt’s probabilistic machinery.
Saddle-Point Bounds {#S:SPB}
-------------------
We begin with the trivial inequality, $$\label{E:saddlepointbound}
d_t(n) \leq x^{-n}{\mathcal{D}}_{t,n}(x).$$ As explained in the book of Flajolet and Sedgewick ([@FS], p. 550), the right-hand side of , as a function of $x \in (0, \infty)$ has positive second derivative with respect to $x$ and tends to $+\infty$ when $x \to 0$ and $x \to \infty$. Thus, there is a unique saddle-point $x=x_n$ on the positive real axis for the function $|z^{-n}{\mathcal{D}}_{t,n}(z)|$ of a complex variable $z$. In fact, $x$ will approach 1 as $n \to \infty$, from below when $t>2$ and from above when $t<2$. As in many similar cases, we anticipate that this $x$ concentrates the mass of the right-hand side of into the $n$-th term, so that we expect the logarithm of the two to be asymptotic: $$\log d_t(n) \sim \log \left(x^{-n} {\mathcal{D}}_{t,n}(x) \right).$$ Thus, with this $x$ in hand, we ascertain an upper bound for $d_t(n)$ by finding the asymptotic behavior of the right-hand side of the above.
More explicitly, we will set $x= e^{-\frac{y}{\sqrt{n}}}$ for $y \in \mathbb{R}$ and write $$\log\left(x^{-n}{\mathcal{D}}_t(x)\right)= \sqrt{n}f_n(y), \qquad \text{where} \qquad f_n(y):= y+ \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}} \log {\mathcal{D}}_t(x).$$ One computes $$\label{E:fnprime}
f'_n(y) = 1-\frac{1}{n} \sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} \frac{kx^k}{1+x^k},$$ so that the saddle-point occurs at (or very near) $x$ when $f'_n(y) \sim 0.$ We will show in Proposition \[P:expvar\] that this is accomplished by choosing $y=\beta$; indeed, the sum in is just a Riemann sum for the integral defining $\beta$. With $\beta$ in hand, an application of Euler-MacLaurin summation leads to the following.
\[P:logDtasymp\] With $x=e^{-\frac{\beta}{\sqrt{n}}}$, we have $$\label{E:logDtasymp}
\log \left(x_n^{-n}{\mathcal{D}}_{t,n}(x_n)\right) = B(t)\sqrt{n} -\log\left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right) \{t\sqrt{n}\} + \log\left(\sqrt{\frac{1+e^{-\beta t}}{2}}\right) + o(1),$$ where $B(t)$ is as defined in Theorem \[T:dtasymp\].
As observed above, Proposition \[P:logDtasymp\] implies $\log d_t(n) \ll B(t)\sqrt{n}$, but we will see later that the two are actually asymptotic.
Probabilistic Model
-------------------
From probability theory we will require the elementary notions of expectation, variance and distribution of discrete random variables, as well Fourier inversion of characteristic functions (which in this context is equivalent to an application of Cauchy’s Theorem from complex analysis). We will also mention central and local limit theorems. All of these topics are covered in most standard probability texts; for instance see [@Bi].
We now repair the inequality by introducing a certain probability measure depending on $x$ as $$\label{E:repairineq}
P_x(N=k)= \frac{d_t(k)x^k}{{\mathcal{D}}_{t,n}(x)}, \qquad \text{so that} \qquad d_t(n)= x^{-n}{\mathcal{D}}_t(x)P_x(N=n).$$ We define $P_x$ and the random variable $N$ below. As in section \[S:SPB\], we will eventually choose $x=e^{-\frac{\beta}{\sqrt{n}}}$. At any rate, $P_x(N=n)\leq 1$ and we will see that it does not affect the exponential part of the asymptotic for $d_t(n)$.
Our probability measure $P_x$ is similar to the ones introduced by Fristedt [@F], who invented an early variant of a [*Boltzmann model*]{} for partitions and used it to prove many far-reaching results on the structure of partitions. When applied to partitions, Boltzmann sampling algorithms select partitions of size roughly $n$, roughly uniformly and in nearly linear time, assuming $n$ is large. (See [@DFLS] for more on Boltzmann sampling for combinatorial structures.)
Following Fristedt, we define a probability measure $P_x$ on the set of partitions $\lambda$ generated by ${\mathcal{D}}_{t,n}$ by setting $$P_x(\lambda):= \frac{x^{|\lambda|}}{{\mathcal{D}}_{t,n}(x)},$$ where $|\lambda|$ is the size of the partition $\lambda$, i.e. the sum of its parts. Here, $P_x$ depends on $n$, but we will refrain from notating this because $x$ will depend on $n$ as in Section \[S:SPB\].
Let $\{X_k\}_{k=1}^{t\sqrt{n}}$ be random variables giving the multiplicity of $k$ in a partition $\lambda$. Since our partitions have distinct parts, $X_k$ is Bernoulli and one computes $$P_x(X_k=0) = \frac{1}{1+x^k} \qquad \text{and} \qquad P_x(X_k=1) = \frac{x^{k}}{1+x^k}.$$ It is also straightforward to show that the $X_k$’s are independent under $P_x$. Now set $N:= \sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} kX_k$, a random variable representing the size of a partition. Using independence, its expectation and variance under $P_x$ are $$\label{E:expvardef}
{\rm E}_x(N)=\sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} \frac{kx^k}{1+x^k}, \qquad \sigma_n^2:= {\rm Var}_x(N)= \sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}}\frac{k^2x^{k}}{(1+x^k)^2}.$$
Returning to , we see that $f_n'(y) \sim 0$ if and only if $E_x(N) \sim n$, so the choice $y=\beta$ ensures that the expectation of $N$ is asymptotically $n$ under $P_x$ with $x=\exp\left(-\frac{\beta}{\sqrt{n}}\right)$. Thus, we prove the following.
\[P:expvar\] With $x=\exp\left(-\frac{\beta}{\sqrt{n}}\right)$, we have $$\label{E:expasymp}
{\rm E}_{x}(N) = n + O(\sqrt{n}),$$ and $$\label{E:varasymp}
\sigma^2_n= {\rm Var}_{x}(N)= \frac{t}{(1+e^{\beta t})\beta'(t)} n^{\frac{3}{2}}+ O(n).$$
In fact, we will show that $\frac{N-n}{\sigma_n}$ is asymptotically normally distributed under $P_x$ (see Figure \[F:Px\]), and so a sort of central limit theorem holds for the $X_k$. Heuristically, this suggests that $P_x(N=n) \sim \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi} \sigma_n}$, as follows: $N$ takes only integer values, so we expect
![Plots of $P_x(N=k)$ when $t=3$ and $n=$ [ 400]{}, [ 900]{} and [ 1600]{}, generated using Maple.[]{data-label="F:Px"}](Pxnormal){width=".7\textwidth"}
$$P_x(N=n) = P_x\left(-\frac{1}{2}\leq N-n\leq \frac{1}{2}\right)= P_x\left(-\frac{1}{2\sigma_n} \leq \frac{N-n}{\sigma_n} \leq \frac{1}{2\sigma_n}\right)$$ $$\approx \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int_{-\frac{1}{2\sigma_n}}^{\frac{1}{2\sigma_n}} e^{-\frac{u^2}{2}} du \sim \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma_n}.$$ Since $d_t(n)= x^{-n}{\mathcal{D}}_{t,n}(x)P_x(N=n)$, the above local limit theorem, together with Proposition \[P:logDtasymp\], implies Theorem 1. Our final proposition is a formal statement of the asymptotic normality of $\frac{N-n}{\sigma_n}$ together with the above heuristic.
\[P:Probasymp\] With $x=\exp\left(-\frac{\beta}{\sqrt{n}}\right)$, we have $$\label{E:Nnormal}
\lim_{n \to \infty} P_x\left( \frac{N-n}{\sigma_n} \leq v \right) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \int_{-\infty}^v e^{-\frac{u^2}{2}} du, \qquad \text{for $v \in \mathbb{R}$.}$$ Moreover, $$\label{E:Probasymp}
P_{x}(N=n) \sim \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma_n}.$$
The proof of Proposition \[P:Probasymp\] proceeds via Fourier inversion of the characteristic function for $N$; it is here that the circle method is hidden and here that we need our most technical estimates.
The functions $\beta(t), B(t)$ and $A(t)$. {#S:functionproperties}
==========================================
In this section, we prove the claimed limits in Remark \[R:betaBAlimits\] and record some additional properties of the functions $\beta(t)$, $B(t)$ and $A(t):= A_n(t)\left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right)^{\{t\sqrt{n}\}}$. Here and in later sections, we require properties of the dilogarithm function, Li$_2(z)$, defined for $z \in {\mathbb{C}}\setminus (-\infty,-1)$ by the integral $${\rm Li}_2(z):= -\int_0^z \frac{\log(1-w)}{w}dw,$$ taking the principal branch of the complex logarithm. We also have the Taylor expansion Li$_2(z)= \sum_{n \geq 1} \frac{z^{n}}{n^2}$ for $|z| \leq 1$, and hence Li$_2(1)=\frac{\pi^2}{6}$. (See [@AS], §27.7, where $f(x)= {\rm Li}_2(1-x)$.)
\[P:beta\] The function $\beta=\beta(t)$ satisfies the following properties.
- We have $$\begin{cases} \beta(t)< 0 & \text{if $\sqrt{2} < t< 2$,} \\ \beta(t)=0 & \text{if $t=2$} \\ \beta(t)> 0 & \text{if $t > 2$.} \end{cases}$$
- $\beta$ is well-defined by ; in particular, $\beta$ is strictly increasing with $$\label{E:betaprimedef}
\beta'(t)=\begin{cases} \frac{\beta t}{2(1+e^{\beta t})-t^2} & \text{for $t\neq 2$,} \\ \frac{3}{2} & \text{for $t = 2$.} \end{cases}$$
- The following limits hold: $$\label{E:betalimits}
\lim_{t \to \sqrt{2}^+} \beta(t)=-\infty \qquad \lim_{t \to \infty} \beta(t)=\frac{\pi}{2\sqrt{3}}.$$
If $t>2$, then we must have $\beta(t)>0$, for if not, $$1=\int_0^t \frac{u}{1+e^{\beta u}}du > \frac{1}{2} \int_0^t udu= \frac{t^2}{4},$$ which leads to the contradiction $2>t$. A similar argument proves the remaining statements in part (a).
For $t \neq 2$, we rewrite as $$\label{E:beta^2int}
\beta^2(t)= \int_0^{\beta(t)t} \frac{u}{1+e^{u}}du,$$ and take the derivative of both sides to get $$\beta'(t)= \frac{\beta t}{2(1+e^{\beta t})-t^2}, \qquad \text{for $t \neq 2.$}$$ To find $\beta'(2)$, we use the first two terms of the Taylor series for the integrand in to write $$\beta^2 = \frac{\beta^2 t^2}{4}- \frac{\beta^3t^3}{12} + O\left(\beta^5 t^5\right),$$ for $t$ near 2 (so $\beta$ near 0). This implies $$\beta = \frac{3}{t}-\frac{12}{t^3} + O(\beta^3t^2),$$ and thus by L’Hospital’s Rule, $$\beta'(2)= \lim_{t \to 2} \frac{\beta(t)}{t-2}= \lim_{t \to 2} \frac{\frac{3}{t}-\frac{12}{t^3} + O(\beta^3t^2)}{t-2}= \lim_{t \to 2} \frac{-3}{t^2}+\frac{36}{t^4}= \frac{3}{2}.$$ We see that $\beta'(t) > 0$ for $t>2$ by observing $$\label{betapos}
1=\int_0^t \frac{u}{1+e^{\beta u}}du > \frac{1}{1+e^{\beta t}}\int_0^t u du = \frac{1}{1+e^{\beta t}} \cdot \frac{t^2}{2}.$$ A similar argument shows that $\beta'(t) > 0$ for $\sqrt{2} < t < 2$ also. Thus, part (b) is proved.
The first limit in is easy to see, for $$1 = \int_0^t \frac{u}{1+e^{\beta u}}du \leq \int_0^t u du = \frac{t^2}{2},$$ and thus as $t \to \sqrt{2}^+$, we must have $\beta(t) \to -\infty$. We evaluate the second limit in by expressing the integral in in terms of the dilogarithm. Thus, implies that for $t >2$, we have $$\label{E:betadef2}
\beta(t)^2=\int_0^{t\beta(t)} \frac{u}{1+e^{u}}du= \text{Li}_2(1-e^{-\beta(t)t})- \frac{1}{2}\text{Li}_2(1-e^{-2\beta(t)t}).$$ Hence, $\lim_{t \to \infty} \beta(t)^2= \frac{\pi^2}{6}-\frac{\pi^2}{12}$, so $\lim_{t \to \infty} \beta(t)= \frac{\pi}{2\sqrt{3}}$, and part (c) is proved.
\[P:B(t)andA(t)limits\] The function $B(t)$ in is strictly increasing, and we have the following limits for $B(t)$ and $A(t):= A_n(t) \left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right)^{\{t \sqrt{n}\}}$: $$\lim_{t \to \infty} B(t) = \frac{\pi}{\sqrt{3}} \qquad \text{and} \qquad \lim_{t \to \infty} A(t)= \frac{1}{4\sqrt[4]{3}}.$$
We compute $$\begin{aligned}
B'(t) &= 2\beta'(t)- \frac{te^{-\beta(t)t}}{1+e^{-\beta(t)t}}\left(\beta'(t)t+\beta(t)\right)+\log\left(1+e^{-\beta(t)t}\right) \\
&=\beta'(t)\left(2-\frac{t^2e^{-\beta(t)t}}{1+e^{-\beta(t)t}}\right)-\frac{\beta(t)te^{-\beta(t)t}}{1+e^{-\beta(t)t}}+ \log\left(1+e^{-\beta(t)t}\right) \\ &=\log\left(1+e^{-\beta(t)t}\right).\end{aligned}$$ Thus, $B(t)$ is a strictly increasing function, and one easily sees that $\lim_{t\to \infty} B(t)=\frac{\pi}{\sqrt{3}}$.
Finally, we can rewrite $A(t)$ using $\beta'(t)$ found in , and get $$A(t)= \frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\frac{\beta(t) \left(1+e^{-\beta(t)t}\right)}{\pi\left(2-\frac{t^2}{1+e^{\beta(t)t}}\right)}},$$ from which it is clear that $\lim_{t \to \infty} A(t)= \frac{1}{4\sqrt[4]{3}}$.
Proofs of Propositions \[P:logDtasymp\], \[P:expvar\] and \[P:Probasymp\] {#S:Proofs}
=========================================================================
Recall that $x$ depends on $n$ and $\beta$ as $x=e^{-\frac{\beta}{\sqrt{n}}}.$ In the proofs of Propositions \[P:logDtasymp\] and \[P:Probasymp\], we will need to separate the cases $x>1$, $x<1$ and $x=1$, which after Proposition \[P:beta\] correspond to $\sqrt{2}<t<2$, $t>2$ and $t=2$, respectively. With this in mind, we define $$\label{E:gammadef}
\gamma(t):= -\beta(t), \qquad \text{for $\sqrt{2} < t< 2$,}$$ so that $\gamma(t)>0$ and $x^{-1}=e^{-\frac{\gamma}{\sqrt{n}}}<1$.
It is also necessary to account for the fact that $t\sqrt{n}$ is not always an integer. Thus, we define $$\label{E:t_ndef}
t_n:= \frac{\floor{t\sqrt{n}}}{\sqrt{n}}= t-\frac{\{t\sqrt{n}\}}{\sqrt{n}},$$ so that $t_n\sqrt{n} \in \mathbb{N}$, and a sum over $k \leq t\sqrt{n}$ is really a sum from $k=1 \dots t_n\sqrt{n}$. Also, we may replace any differentiable function $f(t_n)$ with $f(t)+o(1)$. We will often do this below when $f(t_n)$ is part of the constant term.
Case 1: $t>2$. The first iteration of Euler-MacLaurin summation ([@MV], Appendix B) picks off the claimed main term and constant term: $$\begin{aligned}
\log D_t\left(x \right)
&= \sum_{k=1}^{t_n\sqrt{n}} \log \left(1+e^{\frac{-\beta k}{\sqrt{n}}}\right) \nonumber \\
&= \int_1^{t\sqrt{n}} \log \left(1+e^{\frac{-\beta u}{\sqrt{n}}}\right)du-\int_{t_n\sqrt{n}}^{t\sqrt{n}} \log \left(1+e^{\frac{-\beta u}{\sqrt{n}}}\right)du \nonumber \\
&\qquad+ \frac{1}{2}\left(\log \left(1+e^{\frac{-\beta }{\sqrt{n}}}\right) + \log \left(1+e^{-\beta t_n}\right) \right) -\int_1^{t_n\sqrt{n}} \frac{\frac{\beta }{\sqrt{n}}e^{-\frac{\beta }{\sqrt{n}}u}}{1+e^{-\frac{\beta }{\sqrt{n}}u}}\left(\{u\}-\frac{1}{2}\right)du \nonumber \\
&= \frac{\sqrt{n}}{\beta }\int_{\frac{\beta }{\sqrt{n}}}^{\beta t} \log \left(1+e^{-v}\right)dv - \frac{\sqrt{n}}{\beta}\int_{\beta t_n}^{\beta t} \log\left(1+e^{-v}\right)dv \nonumber \\
&\qquad+ \frac{1}{2}\log \left(1+e^{\frac{-\beta }{\sqrt{n}}}\right) + \frac{1}{2}\log \left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right) +o(1)-\int_{\frac{\beta }{\sqrt{n}}}^{\beta t} \frac{e^{-v}}{1+e^{-v}}\left(\left\{\frac{\sqrt{n}v}{\beta }\right\}-\frac{1}{2}\right)du \nonumber \\
&= \frac{\sqrt{n}}{\beta }\left(\text{Li}_2\left(-e^{-\beta t}\right)-\text{Li}_2\left(-e^{-\frac{\beta }{\sqrt{n}}}\right) \right) -\{t\sqrt{n}\}\log\left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right) \nonumber \\
&\qquad+ \frac{1}{2}\log \left(1+e^{\frac{-\beta }{\sqrt{n}}}\right) + \frac{1}{2}\log \left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right) +o(1) -\int_{\frac{\beta }{\sqrt{n}}}^{\beta t} \frac{e^{-v}}{1+e^{-v}}\left(\left\{\frac{\sqrt{n}v}{\beta}\right\}-\frac{1}{2}\right)dv \label{E:above}.\end{aligned}$$ The latter integral is $o(1)$ because it is the product of an $L^1$ function and a bounded oscillating function—as in the proof of the Riemann-Lebesgue Lemma, we prove this first when $\frac{e^{-v}}{1+e^{-v}}$ is replaced by a step function, then we approximate $\frac{e^{-v}}{1+e^{-v}}$ in $L^1$ by step functions. For the rest of the expression, we apply the following identity for the dilogarithm ([@AS], 27.7.6): $$\label{E:Li2id}
\text{Li}_2(-x)=-\frac{\pi^2}{12} + \text{Li}_2(1-x)- \frac{1}{2}\text{Li}_2(1-x^2)- \log x \cdot \log(1+x).$$ Thus, recalling , we obtain the following from , applying the relevant Taylor series for the logarithm and dilogarithm: $$\begin{aligned}
&\frac{\sqrt{n}}{\beta }\left(\beta^2+t\beta \log\left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right) - \text{Li}_2\left(1-e^{-\frac{\beta }{\sqrt{n}}}\right) + \frac{1}{2}\text{Li}_2\left(1-e^{-\frac{2\beta }{\sqrt{n}}}\right) - \frac{\beta }{\sqrt{n}}\log\left(1+e^{-\frac{\beta }{\sqrt{n}}}\right) \right) \\
&\qquad + \frac{1}{2}\log \left(1+e^{\frac{-\beta }{\sqrt{n}}}\right) + \frac{1}{2}\log \left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right) + o(1) \\
&=\sqrt{n}\left(\beta +t\log\left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right)\right) - 1+1-\log(2) + \frac{1}{2}\log(2) + \frac{1}{2}\log\left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right)+ o(1) \\
&= \sqrt{n}\left(\beta +t\log\left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right)\right) + \log\left(\sqrt{\frac{1+e^{-\beta t}}{2}}\right) + o(1).\end{aligned}$$
Combining this with $\log \left(x^{-n}\right)= \beta\sqrt{n}$ proves Proposition \[P:logDtasymp\] when $t>2$.
Case 2: $\sqrt{2}<t<2$. We first write $$\begin{aligned}
&\log \left(x^{-n}{\mathcal{D}}_{t,n}(x)\right) \nonumber\\
&= -\gamma\sqrt{n} +\sum_{k =1}^{t_n\sqrt{n}} \log\left(1+e^{\frac{\gamma k}{\sqrt{n}}}\right) \nonumber\\
&= -\gamma\sqrt{n} +\sum_{k =1}^{t_n\sqrt{n}} \left( \frac{\gamma k}{\sqrt{n}} +\log\left(1+e^{-\frac{\gamma k}{\sqrt{n}}}\right)\right) \nonumber \\
&= -\gamma\sqrt{n} + \frac{\gamma t_n(t_n\sqrt{n}+1)}{2}+\sum_{k =1}^{t_n\sqrt{n}}\log\left(1+e^{-\frac{\gamma k}{\sqrt{n}}}\right) \nonumber\\
&= \gamma\sqrt{n}\left(\frac{t_n^2}{2}-1\right)+ \frac{\gamma t_n}{2}+\sum_{k =1}^{t_n\sqrt{n}}\log\left(1+e^{-\frac{\gamma k}{\sqrt{n}}}\right) \nonumber\\
&= \gamma\sqrt{n}\left(\frac{t^2}{2}-1\right)- \gamma t \{t\sqrt{n}\}+ \frac{\gamma t}{2}+\sum_{k =1}^{t_n\sqrt{n}}\log\left(1+e^{-\frac{\gamma k}{\sqrt{n}}}\right) + o(1). \label{E:logDtgamma1}\end{aligned}$$ We then analyze the sum with Euler-MacLaurin summation as before: $$\begin{aligned}
&\sum_{k=1}^{t_n\sqrt{n}} \log\left(1+ e^{-\frac{\gamma}{\sqrt{n}}}\right) \nonumber \\
&= \frac{\sqrt{n}}{\gamma}\left({\rm Li}_2(-e^{-\gamma t}) -{\rm Li}_2(-e^{-\frac{\gamma}{\sqrt{n}}})\right) + \frac{1}{2}\log\left(1+e^{-\frac{\gamma}{\sqrt{n}}}\right) + \frac{1}{2}\log(1+e^{-\gamma t}) \nonumber \\ & \qquad -\{t\sqrt{n}\}\log(1+e^{-\gamma t})+ o(1). \label{E:above2}\end{aligned}$$ This time we rewrite , the integral definition for $\beta=-\gamma$, to get $$\label{E:gammadef2}
\gamma^2= \int_0^{t\gamma} \frac{u}{1+e^{-u}}du=-\frac{\pi^2}{12} + \frac{\gamma^2t^2}{2}+ \gamma t \log(1+e^{-\gamma t})- {\rm Li}_2(-e^{-\gamma t}).$$ We then apply this and the dilogarithm identity to get the following from , in a manner similar to Case 1: $$\begin{aligned}
&\frac{\sqrt{n}}{\gamma}\left(\gamma^2\left(\frac{t^2}{2}-1\right) + \gamma t \log(1+e^{-\gamma t}) - {\rm Li}_2(1-e^{-\frac{\gamma}{\sqrt{n}}})+ \frac{1}{2}{\rm Li}_2(1-e^{-2\frac{\gamma}{\sqrt{n}}}) - \frac{\gamma}{\sqrt{n}}\log(1+e^{-\frac{\gamma}{\sqrt{n}}})\right) \\ & \qquad + \frac{1}{2}\log(1+e^{-\gamma t}) -\{t\sqrt{n}\}\log(1+e^{-\gamma t})+ o(1) \\
&= \sqrt{n} \left(\gamma \left(\frac{t^2}{2}-1\right) + t\log(1+e^{-\gamma t})\right) + \log \sqrt{\frac{1+e^{-\gamma t}}{2}} -\{t\sqrt{n}\}\log(1+e^{-\gamma t})+ o(1).\end{aligned}$$ Combining with , we have the following expression for $\log\left(x^{-n}{\mathcal{D}}_{t,n}(x)\right)$: $$\begin{aligned}
&\sqrt{n} \left(\gamma \left(t^2-2\right) + t\log(1+e^{-\gamma t})\right) + \log \sqrt{\frac{1+e^{-\gamma t}}{2}} +\frac{\gamma t}{2}-\{t\sqrt{n}\}\left(\gamma t +\log(1+e^{-\gamma t})\right)+ o(1) \\
&=\sqrt{n} \left(-2\gamma + t\log(1+e^{\gamma t})\right) + \log \sqrt{\frac{1+e^{\gamma t}}{2}} -\{t\sqrt{n}\}\log(1+e^{\gamma t})+ o(1).\end{aligned}$$ Replacing $\gamma(t)$ with $-\beta(t)$ completes the proof when $\sqrt{2}<t<2.$
Case 3: $t=2$. Here, we have $\beta=0$ and $x=1$, and so $$x^{-n}{\mathcal{D}}_{2,n}(x)= 2^{t_n\sqrt{n}}= 2^{2\sqrt{n}-\{2\sqrt{n}\}}= e^{2\log 2 \sqrt{n} - \log 2 \{2\sqrt{n}\}},$$ as required.
The proof when $t=2$ (and so $x=1$) is straightforward. Now let $t \neq 2$. We need only recognize the Riemann-Sums: $$\begin{aligned}
{\rm E}_{x}(N)
&= \sum_{k\leq t\sqrt{n}} k \frac{e^{-\frac{\beta k}{\sqrt{n}}}}{1+e^{-\frac{\beta k}{\sqrt{n}}}} \\
&= n\sum_{k\leq t\sqrt{n}} \frac{k}{\sqrt{n}} \frac{e^{-\frac{\beta k}{\sqrt{n}}}}{1+e^{-\frac{\beta k}{\sqrt{n}}}} \cdot \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}} \\
&= n\left(\int_0^t \frac{ue^{-\beta u}}{1+e^{-\beta u}}du + O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}\right)\right) \\
&= n + O(\sqrt{n}),\end{aligned}$$ by . We calculate the variance similarly, using integration by parts to evaluate the integral. We also use the fact that $\frac{e^{-u}}{(1+e^{-u})^2}=\frac{e^{u}}{(1+e^{u})^2}.$ Thus, $$\begin{aligned}
{\rm Var}_{x}(N)
&= \sum_{k\leq t\sqrt{n}} k^2 \frac{e^{\frac{-\beta k}{\sqrt{n}}}}{\left(1+e^{-\frac{\beta k}{\sqrt{n}}}\right)^2} \\
&=n^{\frac{3}{2}}\sum_{k\leq t\sqrt{n}} \left(\frac{k}{\sqrt{n}}\right)^2 \frac{e^{\frac{-\beta k}{\sqrt{n}}}}{\left(1+e^{-\frac{\beta k}{\sqrt{n}}}\right)^2} \cdot \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}} \\
&=n^{\frac{3}{2}}\left(\int_0^t \frac{u^2e^{-\beta u}}{\left(1+e^{-\beta u}\right)^2}du +O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}\right) \right) \\
&=\frac{n^{\frac{3}{2}}}{\beta^3}\int_0^{\beta t} \frac{u^2e^{ u}}{\left(1+e^{ u}\right)^2}du +O\left(n\right) \\
&= \frac{n^{\frac{3}{2}}}{\beta^3}\left(-\frac{u^2}{1+e^u} \Bigg|_0^{\beta t} + 2 \int_0^{\beta t} \frac{u}{1+e^u} du \right) + O(n) \\
& = \frac{n^{\frac{3}{2}}}{\beta^3}\left(-\frac{\beta^2 t^2}{1+e^{\beta t}} + 2\beta^2\right) + O(n).\end{aligned}$$ by . Combining and recalling finishes the proof.
The proof of Proposition \[P:Probasymp\] is the most technical and will require the following two lemmas.
\[L:f\_xbound\] Let $$\label{E:f_xdef}
f_x(s):= \log\left(\frac{1+e^{is}x}{1+x}\right) - is\frac{x}{1+x} + \frac{s^2}{2} \frac{x}{(1+x)^2}.$$ There exists a constant $c>0$ such that for any $x\in (0,1)$ and any $s\in {\mathbb{R}}$, we have $$|f_x(s)|\leq c\frac{x|s|^3}{(1-x)^3}.$$
\[L:rothszekeres\] Let $\epsilon \in \left(0, \frac{1}{2}\right]$ and let $\|\alpha\|$ denote the distance between $\alpha$ and the nearest integer. Then $$\inf_{\frac{\epsilon}{n} \leq \alpha \leq \frac{1}{2}} \sum_{k \leq n} \left\|k\alpha\right\|^2 \gg n.$$
We append the proofs of these lemmas to Section \[S:lemmaproofs\]. The proof of Lemma \[L:f\_xbound\] is similar to the proof of Lemma 1 in [@R]. Roth and Szekeres [@RS] proved Lemma \[L:rothszekeres\] for $\frac{1}{2n} \leq x \leq \frac{1}{2}$ when $\{k\}$ is replaced by a much more general sequence, but with a weaker lower bound.
To determine the asymptotic behavior of $P_{x}(N=n)$, we will apply Fourier inversion to the characteristic function for $N$: $$\phi_x(s):= E_x(e^{isN})= \sum_{k \geq 0} P_x(N=k)e^{isk}=\frac{1}{{\mathcal{D}}_{t,n}(x)}\sum_{k \geq 0} \left({\rm Coeff} [x^k] {\mathcal{D}}_{t,n}(x)\right) x^k e^{isk}= \frac{{\mathcal{D}}_{t.n}(xe^{is})}{{\mathcal{D}}_{t,n}(x)}.$$ Note that $\phi_x$ depends on $n$, although we refrain from notating this. We have $$\label{normalint}
P_{x}(N=n) = \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi} \phi_{x}(s)e^{-ins}ds =\frac{1}{2\pi\sigma_n}\int_{-\pi\sigma_n}^{\pi\sigma_n} \phi_{x}\left(\frac{u}{\sigma_n}\right) e^{-i\frac{nu}{\sigma_n}}du.$$
We break up this integral as $$\label{E:intbreak}
\left(\int_{|u|\leq \frac{\sigma_n}{\sqrt{n}}v_0} + \int_{ \frac{\sigma_n}{\sqrt{n}}v_0 \leq |u| \leq \pi\sigma_n} \right)\phi_{x}\left(\frac{u}{\sigma_n}\right) e^{-i\frac{nu}{\sigma_n}}du,$$ where $v_0$ is a sufficiently small constant, depending on $t$ and chosen below. Note that $\sigma_n \asymp n^{\frac{3}{4}}$, so $\frac{\sigma_n}{\sqrt{n}} \to \infty$. We show that the integral on the right in tends to 0, while for the left integral we show that, pointwise in $u$, $$\label{phitobellcurve}
\lim_{n \to \infty} \phi_{x}\left(\frac{u}{\sigma_n}\right) e^{-i\frac{nu}{\sigma_n}} = e^{-\frac{u^2}{2}}.$$ We then show that for some $A'>0$, the integrand $\phi_{x}\left(\frac{u}{\sigma_n}\right)$ is dominated by $e^{-A'u^2} \in L^1(\mathbb{R})$. Thus, applying the Dominated Convergence Theorem, $$\label{E:limitsqrt2pi}
\lim_{n \to \infty} \int_{|u|\leq \frac{\sigma_n}{\sqrt{n}}v_0} \phi_x\left(\frac{u}{\sigma_n}\right)e^{-i\frac{nu}{\sigma_n}}du = \int_{\mathbb{R}} e^{-\frac{u^2}{2}} = \sqrt{2\pi},$$ which when combined with proves that $P_x(N=n) \sim \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi} \sigma_n}$. A similar application of the Dominated Convergence Theorem also implies , since the characteristic function of $\frac{N-n}{\sigma_n}$ is $${\rm E}_x\left(e^{iu \frac{N-n}{\sigma_n}}\right)={\rm E}_x\left(e^{i \frac{u}{\sigma_n}N}\right) e^{-iu\frac{n}{\sigma_n}}= \phi_x\left(\frac{u}{\sigma_n}\right)e^{-iu\frac{n}{\sigma_n}}.$$
To carry out this plan, we separate the cases $t>2$, $\sqrt{2}<t<2$ and $t=2$.
Case 1: $t>2$. Recalling the expectation and variance in , Proposition \[P:expvar\] implies $$\begin{aligned}
\log \left(\phi_{x}\left(\frac{u}{\sigma_n}\right) e^{-i\frac{nu}{\sigma_n}}\right) &= \log\left({\mathcal{D}}_t(xe^{i\frac{u}{\sigma_n}})\right)-\log\left({\mathcal{D}}_t(x)\right) -i\frac{nu}{\sigma_n} \nonumber \\
&=\sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} \log\left(\frac{1+x^ke^{i\frac{ku}{\sigma_n}}}{1+x^k}\right)- i\frac{nu}{\sigma_n} \nonumber \\
&= i\frac{u}{\sigma_n}\left(\sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} \frac{kx^k}{1+x^k} - n \right) - \frac{u^2}{2\sigma_n^2}\left(\sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} \frac{k^2x^k}{(1+x^k)^2}\right) + \sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} f_{x^k}\left(\frac{ku}{\sigma_n}\right) \nonumber \\
&= i\frac{u}{\sigma_n}({\rm E}_{x}(N)-n) - \frac{u^2}{2} +\sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} f_{x^k}\left(\frac{ku}{\sigma_n}\right) \nonumber \\
&= uO\left(n^{-\frac{1}{4}}\right) - \frac{u^2}{2}+\sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} f_{x^k}\left(\frac{ku}{\sigma_n}\right), \label{Proberror}\end{aligned}$$ where $f_{x^k}$ is as in Lemma \[L:f\_xbound\]. Using Proposition \[P:expvar\] and Lemma \[L:f\_xbound\], we have $$\begin{aligned}
\left|\sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} f_{x^k}\left(\frac{ku}{\sigma_n}\right) \right| &\leq \frac{cu^3}{\sigma_n^3} \sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} k^3 \frac{x^k}{(1-x^k)^3} \\
&= \frac{cu^3n^2}{\sigma_n^3}\sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} \left(\frac{k}{\sqrt{n}}\right)^3 \frac{e^{-\frac{\beta k}{\sqrt{n}}}}{\left(1-e^{-\frac{\beta k}{\sqrt{n}}}\right)^3} \cdot \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}} \\
&= \frac{cu^3n^2}{\sigma_n^3}\left(\int_0^t \frac{v^3 e^{-\beta v}}{\left(1-e^{-\beta v}\right)^3} dv + O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}\right)\right) \\
&= u^3 O\left(n^{-\frac{1}{4}}\right),\end{aligned}$$ since the integral converges. This proves .
Next, we find a dominating function in the range $|u| \leq \frac{\sigma_n}{\sqrt{n}}v_0$. Here, we will set $v:= \frac{\sqrt{n}}{\sigma_n}u$, so $|v|\leq v_0$. Recognizing Riemann sums, the following holds for such $v$ uniformly.
$$\begin{aligned}
\log \phi_{x}\left(\frac{v}{\sqrt{n}}\right) &= \sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} \left(\log \left(1+e^{-\frac{\beta }{\sqrt{n}}k + i\frac{vk}{\sqrt{n}}}\right)-\log \left(1+e^{-\frac{\beta }{\sqrt{n}}k}\right) \right) \nonumber\\
&=\sqrt{n} \int_0^{t} \left(\log\left(1+e^{-\beta w+ivw}\right)-\log\left(1+e^{-\beta w}\right)\right) dw + o(\sqrt{n}) \nonumber\\
&=\frac{\sqrt{n}}{\beta -iv}\left(\frac{\pi^2}{12} + \text{Li}_2\left(-e^{-\beta t+ivt}\right)\right) - \frac{\sqrt{n}}{\beta }\left(\frac{\pi^2}{12} + \text{Li}_2\left(-e^{-\beta t}\right)\right) + o(\sqrt{n}). \label{Liint}\end{aligned}$$
The Taylor series for Li$_2(z)$ about $z=-e^{-\beta(t)t}$ is $$\text{Li}_2\left(-e^{-\beta t}\right) + \log\left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right)\left(ze^{\beta t}+1\right)- \frac{1}{2} \left(\frac{e^{-\beta t}}{1+e^{-\beta t}} - \log\left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right)\right) \left(ze^{\beta t}+1\right)^2$$ $$+ O\left((ze^{\beta t}+1)^3\right).$$ Substituting $z=-e^{-\beta t+ivt}$, we obtain the following: $$\begin{aligned}
& \text{Li}_2\left(-e^{-\beta t+ivt}\right) \nonumber \\
&= \text{Li}_2\left(-e^{-\beta t}\right)+\log\left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right)\left(1-e^{ivt}\right)\nonumber \\
&\qquad - \frac{1}{2} \left(\frac{e^{-\beta t}}{1+e^{-\beta t}} - \log\left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right)\right) \left(1-e^{ivt}\right)^2 + O(v^3) \nonumber \\
&=\text{Li}_2\left(-e^{-\beta t}\right)-i t\log\left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right)v \nonumber \\ & \qquad + \left( \frac{t^2\log\left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right)}{2} + \frac{t^2}{2} \cdot \frac{e^{-\beta t}}{1+e^{-\beta t}} -\frac{t^2\log\left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right)}{2} \right)v^2 + O(v^3) \nonumber \\
&=\text{Li}_2\left(-e^{-\beta t}\right) -it \log\left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right)v + \frac{1}{2} \cdot \frac{t^2}{1+e^{\beta t}} v^2 + O(v^3) \label{Litay2}.\end{aligned}$$
Also, note that $$\label{taybetais}
\frac{1}{\beta-iv}= \frac{1}{\beta}+ \frac{i}{\beta^2}v - \frac{1}{\beta^3}v^2 + O(v^3).$$ Thus, from and , we choose $v_0$ small enough so that the dominating term for the real part of is $$\begin{aligned}
&\sqrt{n}v^2\left(\frac{1}{\beta } \cdot \frac{1}{2} \cdot \frac{t^2}{1+e^{\beta t}} + \frac{t \log\left(1+e^{-\beta t}\right)}{\beta^2} - \frac{1}{\beta^3}\text{Li}_2\left(-e^{-\beta t}\right) - \frac{1}{\beta^3} \cdot \frac{\pi^2}{12} \right) \\
&=\sqrt{n}\frac{v^2}{\beta} \left(\frac{1}{2} \cdot \frac{t^2}{1+e^{\beta t}} - 1 \right),\end{aligned}$$ where we used the dilogarithm identity with the alternate definition of $\beta$ given in . By , this is $-A\sqrt{n}v^2$ for some $A>0$. Hence, for some $A>0$, $$\left|\phi_{x}\left(\frac{v}{\sqrt{n}}\right)\right| \ll e^{-A\sqrt{n}v^2} \qquad \text{for $|v| \leq v_0$.}$$
This implies $\left|\phi_{x}\left(\frac{u}{\sigma_n}\right)\right| \ll e^{-A'u^2}$ for some $A'$ in the required range. Thus, is proved.
For the remaining range, $\frac{\sigma_n}{\sqrt{n}}v_0 \leq |u| \leq \pi \sigma_n$, we will use the substitution $w:= \frac{u}{\sigma_n}$ and bound $\phi_x\left(w\right)$ for $\frac{v_0}{\sqrt{n}} \leq \left| w\right| \leq \pi$. Following the analysis of Roth and Szekeres ([@RS], p. 253), we write $$\left|\frac{1+x^ke^{iwk}}{1+x^k}\right|^2= \frac{1}{(1+x^k)^2}\left(1+2x^k\cos(wk) + x^{2k}\right) = 1-\frac{2x^k(1-\cos(wk))}{(1+x^k)^2}.$$ Note that the expression on the far left is positive almost everywhere; therefore, $0<\frac{2x^k(1-\cos(wk))}{(1+x^k)^2}<1$ almost everywhere. Thus, it is safe to expand the logarithm as follows. $$\begin{aligned}
&\log\left|\phi_x(w)\right| =\frac{1}{2}\sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} \log\left(1-\frac{2x^k(1-\cos(wk))}{(1+x^k)^2} \right)
\\
&\leq -\frac{1}{2}\sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} (1-\cos(wk))\frac{2x^k}{(1+x^k)^2} \\
&\ll -\sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} (1-\cos(wk)) \\
&\leq -\sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} \left\|\frac{wk}{2\pi} \right\|^2.\end{aligned}$$ Since $\frac{v_0}{\sqrt{n}} \leq |w| \leq \pi,$ the latter is $\ll - \sqrt{n}$ by Lemma \[L:rothszekeres\], taking $\epsilon \leq t v_0$, so that $ \frac{\epsilon}{t\sqrt{n}}\leq\frac{v_0}{\sqrt{n}} .$ This implies that the right integral in tends to 0, so Proposition \[P:Probasymp\] is proved for $t>2$.
Case 2: $\sqrt{2} < t < 2$. Below, we use the fact that $\frac{x^k}{(1+x^k)^2}= \frac{x^{-k}}{(1+x^{-k})^2}.$ Thus, $$\begin{aligned}
&\log \left(\phi_x\left(\frac{u}{\sigma_n}\right)e^{-i\frac{un}{\sigma_n}}\right) \\
&=i\frac{u}{\sigma_n}\left(\sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} \frac{kx^k}{1+x^k} -n \right) - \frac{u^2}{2\sigma_n^2}\sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} \frac{k^2x^k}{(1+x^k)^2} + i\frac{u}{\sigma_n}\frac{t_n\sqrt{n}(t_n\sqrt{n}+1)}{2} + \\ & \qquad +\sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} \left(\log\left(\frac{1+x^{-k}e^{-ik\frac{u}{\sigma_n}}}{1+x^{-k}}\right) - i\frac{u}{\sigma_n}\frac{kx^k}{1+x^k} + \frac{u^2}{2\sigma_n^2}\frac{k^2x^k}{(1+x^k)^2} \right) \\
&= o(1) - \frac{u^2}{2} + i\frac{u}{\sigma_n}\frac{t_n\sqrt{n}(t_n\sqrt{n}+1)}{2} + \sum_{k \leq t \sqrt{n}} f_{x^{-k}}\left(-k\frac{u}{\sigma_n}\right) \\ & \qquad -i \frac{u}{\sigma_n} \sum_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} k\underbrace{\left(\frac{x^k}{1+x^k} + \frac{x^{-k}}{1+x^{-k}}\right)}_{=1} \\
&= o(1) - \frac{u^2}{2} + \sum_{k \leq t \sqrt{n}} f_{x^{-k}}\left(-k\frac{u}{\sigma_n}\right) \\
&= -\frac{u^2}{2} + o(1),\end{aligned}$$ where Lemma \[L:f\_xbound\] was used as before to show that the sum is $o(1)$. This proves .
To find a dominating function in the range $|u| \leq \frac{\sigma_n}{\sqrt{n}}v_0$, we once again set $v:= \frac{\sqrt{n}}{\sigma_n}u$, and write $$\left|\phi_x\left(\frac{v}{\sqrt{n}}\right) \right|= \left|e^{i\frac{t_n(t_n\sqrt{n}+1)}{2}v} \prod_{k \leq t\sqrt{n}} \frac{1+x^{-k}e^{-ik\frac{v}{\sqrt{n}}}}{1+x^{-k}}\right|=\left|\phi_{x^{-1}} \left(\frac{-v}{\sqrt{n}}\right)\right|.$$ Thus, we may perform an analysis similar to Case 1 with $\beta \to \gamma$ and conclude that the dominating part of Re$\left( \log \phi_x\left(\frac{v}{\sqrt{n}}\right) \right)$ is $$\sqrt{n}(-v)^2\left(\frac{1}{\gamma } \cdot \frac{1}{2} \cdot \frac{t^2}{1+e^{\gamma t}} + \frac{t \log\left(1+e^{-\gamma t}\right)}{\gamma^2} - \frac{1}{\gamma^3}\text{Li}_2\left(-e^{-\gamma t}\right) - \frac{1}{\gamma^3} \cdot \frac{\pi^2}{12} \right).$$ We now apply the identity for the dilogarithm with to get $$\sqrt{n} \frac{v^2}{\gamma}\left(\frac{t^2}{2\left(1+e^{\gamma t}\right)} + 1 - \frac{t^2}{2}\right)
=\sqrt{n}\frac{v^2}{\gamma}\left(\frac{2\left(1+e^{-\gamma t}\right)-t^2}{2\left(1+e^{-\gamma t}\right)}\right)
= \sqrt{n} v^2 \left(\frac{-t^2}{\beta'(t) \cdot 2\left(1+e^{\beta t}\right)}\right)
,$$ which is negative by Proposition \[P:beta\]. Thus, as in Case 1, $\left|\phi_{x}\left(\frac{u}{\sigma_n}\right)\right| \ll e^{-A'u^2}$ for some $A'$ in the required range, so is proved.
As in Case 1, a similar application of Lemma \[L:rothszekeres\] to $\phi_{x^{-1}}(-w)$ shows that the right integral in tends to 0, so Proposition \[P:Probasymp\] is proved for $\sqrt{2}<t<2$.
Case 3: $t=2$. For fixed $u$ in the range $|u|\leq \frac{\sigma_n}{\sqrt{n}}v_0$, where $v_0$ will be specified below, we write $$\phi_1\left(\frac{u}{\sigma_n}\right)e^{-i\frac{un}{\sigma_n}}=\prod_{k \leq 2\sqrt{n}} \frac{1+e^{ik\frac{u}{\sigma_n}}}{2} \cdot e^{-i\frac{un}{\sigma_n}}= \prod_{k \leq 2 \sqrt{n}} \cos\left(k \frac{u}{2\sigma_n}\right) \cdot e^{i \frac{u}{\sigma_n} \left(n-\frac{t_n\sqrt{n}(t_n\sqrt{n}+1)}{2}\right)}$$ $$=\prod_{k \leq 2 \sqrt{n}} \cos\left(k \frac{u}{2\sigma_n}\right) + o(1),$$ since $$\frac{t_n\sqrt{n}(t_n\sqrt{n}+1)}{2}= \frac{t_n^2 n}{4}+O(\sqrt{n})= n + O(\sqrt{n}).$$ Note that, over the summation range, $k= O(\sqrt{n})$ uniformly, so $\frac{k}{\sigma_n}= O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt[4]{n}}\right)$ uniformly. Thus, the following holds for fixed $u$, where $v_0$ is chosen so that the logarithms below are defined: $$\begin{aligned}
\log\left(\phi_1\left(\frac{u}{\sigma_n}\right)e^{-i\frac{un}{\sigma_n}}\right) &= \sum_{k \leq 2\sqrt{n}} \log \left(\cos\left(k\frac{u}{2\sigma_n}\right)\right) + o(1) \\
&=\sum_{k \leq 2\sqrt{n}} \log \left(1-k^2\frac{u^2}{4\sigma_n^2}+ O\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)\right) + o(1) \\
&=\sum_{k \leq 2\sqrt{n}} \left(-k^2\frac{u^2}{4\sigma_n^2}+ O\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)\right) + o(1) \\
&=-\frac{u^2 \cdot t_n^3n^{\frac{3}{2}}}{4 \sigma_n^2 \cdot 3} + o(1) \\
&=-\frac{u^2}{2} +o(1),\end{aligned}$$ since $\sigma_n^2 \sim \frac{2}{3}n^{\frac{3}{2}}$ by Propositions \[P:expvar\] and \[P:beta\]. This proves .
To find a dominating function in the range $|u| \leq \frac{\sigma_n}{\sqrt{n}}v_0$, we write $\frac{v}{\sqrt{n}}:= \frac{u}{\sigma_n}$ once again, and we choose $v_0$ small so that the logarithms below are defined. Thus, $$\begin{aligned}
{\rm Re}\left(\log \phi_1\left(\frac{v}{\sqrt{n}}\right)\right) &= \sum_{k \leq 2\sqrt{n}} \log \cos\left(v\frac{k}{2\sqrt{n}}\right) \\
&= 2\sqrt{n}\int_0^1 \log \cos\left(vw\right)dw + O(\{2\sqrt{n}\}) + O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}\right) \\
&=\frac{2\sqrt{n}}{v}\int_0^v \log \cos (w) dw + O(1).\end{aligned}$$ It is not difficult to calculate the following Taylor series about $v=0$ (the knowledge that the function is even is helpful): $$\frac{1}{v}\int_0^v \log \cos (w) dw= -\frac{1}{6}v^2 + O(v^4).$$ Thus, choosing $v_0$ small enough, we have ${\rm Re}\left(\log \phi_1\left(\frac{v}{\sqrt{n}}\right)\right) \ll e^{-A\sqrt{n}v^2}$ for some $A$, which implies $\left|\phi_{1}\left(\frac{u}{\sigma_n}\right)\right| \ll e^{-A'u^2}$ for some $A'$ in the required range for $u$, so is proved.
Applying Lemma 2 as in Case 1, one can bound $\phi_{1}(w)$ for $w= \frac{u}{\sigma_n}$ in the required range, and show that the right integral in tends to 0. This proves Proposition \[P:Probasymp\] for $t=2$.
Bounding logarithmic series: proofs of Lemmas \[L:f\_xbound\] and \[L:rothszekeres\] {#S:lemmaproofs}
====================================================================================
The proof is very similar to Lemma 1 in [@R]. For $|s| \leq \frac{1-x}{2},$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
\log\left(\frac{1+xe^{is}}{1+x}\right) &= \sum_{j \geq 1} \frac{1}{j}\left((-x)^j-(-x)^je^{isj}\right) \nonumber \\
&=-\sum_{j \geq 1} \frac{(-x)^j}{j}\sum_{k\geq 1} \frac{(is)^kj^k}{k!} \nonumber \\
&= -\sum_{k \geq 1} \frac{(is)^k}{k!} \sum_{j \geq 1} (-x)^jj^{k-1}, \label{swapsum}\end{aligned}$$ where swapping the order of summation in is valid due to absolute convergence for $|s| \leq \frac{1-x}{2}.$ Indeed, $$\left|\sum_{k \geq 1} \frac{(is)^k}{k!} \sum_{j \geq 1} (-x)^jj^{k-1}\right|\leq \sum_{k \geq 1} \frac{s^k}{k} \sum_{j \geq 1} x^j \frac{n(n+1)\cdots (j+k-2)}{(k-1)!} \leq \sum_{k \geq 1} \frac{x}{k} \left(\frac{s}{1-x}\right)^k < \infty.$$
Note that the $k=1$ and $k=2$ terms in are, respectively, $$-is\sum_{j\geq 1} (-x)^j= is\frac{x}{1+x} \qquad \text{and} \qquad \frac{s^2}{2}\sum_{j \geq 1} (-x)^jj= -\frac{s^2}{2}\frac{x}{(1+x)^2}.$$ Thus, by , we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
|f_x(s)| &\leq \sum_{k \geq 3} \frac{|s|^k}{k!}\sum_{j \geq 1} j^{k-1}x^j \\
&\leq \sum_{k \geq 3} \frac{x}{k} \left(\frac{|s|}{1-x}\right)^k \\
&\leq \frac{x|s|^3}{3(1-x)^3} \cdot \frac{1}{1-\frac{|s|}{1-x}} \\
&\leq \frac{2x|s|^3}{3(1-x)^3}.\end{aligned}$$
For $|s| \geq \frac{1-x}{2}$, we have $$\left|-i \frac{x}{1+x}s + \frac{1}{2} \frac{x}{(1+x)^2} s^2 \right| \leq \frac{x|s|^3}{(1-x)|s|^2} + \frac{x|s|^3}{(1-x)^2|s|} \leq (4+2) \frac{x|s|^3}{(1-x)^3},$$ so it remains to prove that for $|s|\geq \frac{1-x}{2}$, $$\left|\log\left(\frac{1+xe^{is}}{1+x}\right)\right| \leq c' \frac{x|s|^3}{(1-x)^3},$$ for some $c' > 0.$ For $|s| \geq \frac{1}{4}$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\left|\log\left(\frac{1+xe^{is}}{1+x}\right)\right|
&\leq \sum_{m \geq 1} \frac{x^m}{m} \left|1-e^{ism}\right| \\
&\leq -2\log(1-x) \\
&\leq 2\frac{x}{1-x} \\
&\leq 2\cdot 4^3\frac{x|s|^3}{(1-x)^3}.\end{aligned}$$ Finally, for $\frac{1-x}{2} \leq |s| \leq \frac{1}{4}$ (which implies $x \geq \frac{1}{2}$ and $\frac{|s|}{1-x} \geq \frac{1}{2}$), we have $$\begin{aligned}
\left|\log\left(\frac{1+xe^{is}}{1+x}\right) \right|
&\leq \left|\log\left(1+\frac{x}{1+x}(e^{is}-1)\right) \right| \\
&\leq \left|\log\left(1+ie^{\frac{s}{2}}S\right)\right|,\end{aligned}$$ where $S= \frac{x}{1+x} \cdot 2\sin\left(\frac{s}{2}\right)$ satisfies $$|S| \leq \frac{x|s|}{1+x} \leq \frac{x|s|}{1-x} \leq 4\frac{x|s|^3}{(1-x)^3}.$$
The left-most inequality above implies $|S| \leq \frac{1}{4}$. Thus, $$\left|\log\left(1+ie^{\frac{s}{2}}S\right)\right| \leq \frac{|S|}{1-|S|} \leq \frac{4}{3}|S| \leq \frac{4}{3}\cdot 4\frac{x|s|^3}{(1-x)^3},$$ and we are done.
Let $f_n(\alpha):= \sum_{k\leq n} ||k\alpha||^2.$ We prove first that $$\label{E:inffn}
\inf_{\frac{1}{2n} \leq \alpha \leq \frac{1}{2}} f_n(\alpha) \gg n.$$
The extension of to the range $\left[\frac{\epsilon}{n}, \frac{1}{2}\right]$ for $\epsilon \in \left(0, \frac{1}{2}\right]$ follows from $$\inf_{\frac{\epsilon}{n} \leq \alpha \leq \frac{1}{2n}} f_n(\alpha) = \sum_{k \leq n} k^2 \frac{\epsilon^2}{n^2} \gg n.$$
Now, note that $f_n(\alpha)$ is piecewise a parabola of the form $$\sum_{k \leq n} k^2\left(\alpha- \frac{\ell_k}{k}\right)^2, \qquad \gcd(\ell_k,k)=1.$$ Thus, we see by taking the derivative of $f$ that its minimum in $\left[\frac{1}{2n}, \frac{1}{2}\right]$ occurs at a rational number (or possibly more than one). Therefore, it suffices to show that there is a constant $c$, independent of $n$, such that $f_n(\alpha) \geq cn$ for all rational $\alpha \in \left[\frac{1}{2n}, \frac{1}{2}\right]$. In what follows, we will be rather wasteful with our estimates, but for clarity we will produce explicit constants at each step.
Naturally, $$f_n\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)\geq \floor[\Big]{ \frac{n}{2}} \frac{1}{4} \geq \frac{n}{16}.$$ Now let $\alpha= \frac{a}{b}$ with $\gcd(a,b)=1$ and $3 \leq b \leq n$. For each $j \in [1,b-1]$, we have $$\#\{k \leq n: \ ka \equiv j \pmod{b}\} \geq \floor[\Big]{\frac{n}{b}}.$$ Thus, $$f_n(\alpha) = \sum_{k \leq n} \left\|k \frac{a}{b} \right\|^2 \geq 2 \cdot \sum_{j < \frac{b}{2}} \floor[\Big]{\frac{n}{b}} \frac{j^2}{b^2} \geq 2 \cdot \floor[\Big]{\frac{n}{b}} \frac{1}{b^2} \frac{b^3}{2 \cdot 6 \cdot 2^3} \geq \frac{1}{96} n.$$
Now assume $b > n$, $\gcd(a,b)=1$, and $\frac{1}{2n} \leq \frac{a}{b} \leq \frac{1}{2}.$ If $\frac{b}{2} \leq na < b$, then clearly $$f_n(\alpha) = \sum_{k \leq n} \left\|k\frac{a}{b}\right\|^2 \geq \frac{a^2}{b^2}\sum_{k \leq \frac{n}{2}} k^2 \geq \frac{1}{2^2n^2}\frac{n^3}{2\cdot 6 \cdot 2^3} =\frac{n}{384}.$$
Now assume $\frac{n}{\frac{b}{a}} \geq 1$ and note that $a$ generates the additive group $\pmod{b}$. Partition the set $\{ka\}_{k=1}^n$ into subsets between multiples of $b$ as $$\left\{a, 2a, \dots, \floor[\Big]{\frac{b}{a}}a\right\} \cup \left\{(\floor[\Big]{\frac{b}{a}} +1)a, \dots, (2\floor[\Big]{\frac{b}{a}} + \eta_2)a\right\} \cup \dots,$$ where the $\eta_j \in \{0,1\}$. There are at least $\floor[\Big]{\frac{n}{\floor{\frac{b}{a}}}} \geq 1$ such sets, and each contains a sequence of $\frac{\floor[\Big]{\frac{b}{a}}}{2} \geq 1$ elements that are at least $a, 2a, \dots, \frac{\floor[\Big]{\frac{b}{a}}}{2}a,$ respectively. Hence, we have $$f_n(\alpha) \geq \floor[\Big]{\frac{n}{\floor{\frac{b}{a}}}} \sum_{j \leq \frac{\floor[\Big]{\frac{b}{a}}}{2}} \frac{j^2a^2}{b^2} \geq \frac{n}{2\floor[\Big]{\frac{b}{a}}}\frac{a^2}{b^2} \frac{\floor[\Big]{\frac{b}{a}}^3}{2\cdot 6 \cdot 2^3} \geq \frac{n}{768},$$ since $\frac{b}{a} \geq 2$ implies $\frac{a}{b}\floor[\Big]{\frac{b}{a}} \geq \frac{1}{2}$. Thus, is proved and with it, Lemma \[L:rothszekeres\].
[99]{}
M. Abramowitz and I. Stegun, [*Handbook of Mathematical Functions with Formulas, Graphs, and Mathematical Tables,*]{} Dover, 1972.
G. Andrews, [*The Theory of Partitions,*]{} Cambridge Univ. Press, 1984.
P. Billingsley, [*Probability and Measure,*]{} John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1995.
W. Bridges, Limit shapes for unimodal sequences, preprint (2020); available at [arXiv:2001.06878](https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.06878)
P. Duchon, P. Flajolet, G. Louchard and G. Schaeffer, Boltzmann samplers for the random generation of combinatorial structures, [*Combin. Probab. Comput.*]{} [**13**]{} (2004), 577-625.
B. Fristedt, The structure of random large partitions of integers, [*Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.*]{} [**337**]{} (1993), 703-735.
P. Flajolet and R. Sedgewick, [*Analytic Combinatorics*]{}, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2009.
G.H. Hardy and S. Ramanujan, Asymptotic formul$\ae$ in combinatory analysis, [*Proc. London Math. Soc. (2)*]{} [**17**]{} (1918), 75-115.
H.L. Montgomery and R.C. Vaughn, [*Multiplicative Number Theory: I. Classical Theory,*]{} Cambridge Univ. Press, 2006.
D. Romik, Partitions of $n$ into $t\sqrt{n}$ parts, [*European J. Combin.*]{} [**26**]{} (2005), no. 1, 1-17.
K. Roth and G. Szekeres, Some asymptotic formul$\ae$ in the theory of partitions, [*Quart. J. Math. Oxford Ser. (2)*]{} [**5**]{} (1954), 241-259.
G. Szekeres, An asymptotic formula in the theory of partitions, [*Quart. J. Math. Oxford Ser. (2)*]{} [**2**]{} (1951), 85-108.
G. Szekeres, Some asymptotic fomul$\ae$ in the theory of partitions II, [*Quart. J. Math. Oxford Ser. (2)*]{} [**4**]{} (1953), 96-111.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The accurate prediction of singlet and triplet excitation energies is of significant fundamental interest and critical for many applications. An area of intense research, most calculations of singlet and triplet energies use time-dependent density functional theory (TDDFT) in conjunction with an approximate exchange-correlation functional. In this work, we examine and critically assess an alternative method for predicting low-lying neutral excitations with similar computational cost, the ab initio Bethe-Salpeter equation (BSE) approach, and compare results against high-accuracy wavefunction-based methods. We consider singlet and triplet excitations of 27 prototypical organic molecules, including members of Thiel’s set, the acene series, and several aromatic hydrocarbons exhibiting charge-transfer-like excitations. Analogous to its impact in TDDFT, we find that the Tamm-Dancoff approximation (TDA) overcomes triplet instabilities in the BSE approach, improving both triplet and singlet energetics relative to higher level theories. Finally, we find that BSE-TDA calculations built on effective DFT starting points, such as those utilizing optimally-tuned range-separated hybrid functionals, can yield accurate singlet and triplet excitation energies for gas-phase organic molecules.'
author:
- Tonatiuh Rangel
- 'Samia M. Hamed'
- Fabien Bruneval
- 'Jeffrey B. Neaton'
bibliography:
- 'paper.bib'
title: 'An assessment of low-lying excitation energies and triplet instabilities of organic molecules with an ab initio Bethe-Salpeter equation approach and the Tamm-Dancoff approximation'
---
Introduction
============
The quantitative prediction and understanding of low-lying excitations in organic molecules is of significant fundamental interest and technological relevance. For example, a better understanding of multiexciton phenomena in organic molecular systems – such as singlet fission (SF) [@anthony_larger_2008; @smith_recent_2013; @lee_singlet_2013], a process by which a singlet exciton decays into two low-energy triplet excitations, can lead to external quantum device efficiencies above 100% [@smith_recent_2013; @lee_singlet_2013] and is therefore desirable for next-generation solar cells and other optoelectronic applications. Such multiexciton energy conversion phenomena are dependent on a subtle balance between singlet and triplet excitation energies, and predictions of such energetics call for accurate ab initio methods.
A widely-used ab initio formalism for neutral excitations is time-dependent density-functional theory (TDDFT). For gas-phase acene molecules, the performance of TDDFT with a number of exchange-correlation functionals is well-documented: overall, TDDFT with standard functionals—e.g., local, semilocal, and global hybrid exchange-correlation functionals—fails to predict triplet excitations [@peach_influence_2011; @peach_overcoming_2012] by $0.4$–$1.8$ eV, as well as the ordering and absolute energies of the two lowest-lying singlets [@grimme_substantial_2003; @kuritz_charge-transfer-like_2011], one of which has charge-transfer-like character [@kuritz_charge-transfer-like_2011] (as detailed in Section \[sect:la-lb\]). These failures have been ascribed to i) the so-called “low orbital overlap problem” in global hybrid functionals, in which the overlap between spatially-separated molecular orbitals is usually overestimated; and to ii) triplet instabilities associated with TDDFT using standard approximate exchange-correlation functionals [@kuritz_charge-transfer-like_2011; @lopata_excited-state_2011; @sears_communication:_2011; @casida_progress_2012; @peach_overcoming_2012].
![ Top: Subset of 20 organic molecules containing triplet excitations from the Thiel’s set. Bottom: The general formula for an acene molecule, and the three other aromatic hydrocarbons stuided here: azulene, benzo\[$e$\]pyrene (BP) and dibenzo\[$a,c$\]anthracene (DBAn). H is white, C is light blue, N is dark blue and O is red. []{data-label="fig:molecules"}](molecule-pics.pdf "fig:"){width="1.0\linewidth"}\
Beyond TDDFT approaches with conventional functionals, range-separated hybrid functionals (RSH) have been shown to mitigate the low orbital overlap problem [@wong_optoelectronic_2010; @richard_time-dependent_2011; @kuritz_charge-transfer-like_2011; @peach_overcoming_2012]. In this class of functionals, the Coulomb potential is partitioned into short- and long-range contributions, with the important consequence that different fractions of exact exchange can be used in the short and long range [@leininger_combining_1997; @yanai_new_2004]. This partitioning is usually described as $$\frac{1}{r} = \frac{\alpha + \beta \textrm{erf}(\gamma r)}{r}
+ \frac{1-\left[\alpha + \beta \textrm{erf}(\gamma r)\right]}{r},$$ where the first term is treated explicitly, and the second is replaced with a semi-local functional, such as one of several generalized gradient approximations (GGAs). The $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ parameters are either fixed as in, e.g., CAM-B3LYP [@yanai_new_2004], or tuned to fulfill DFT theorems as in optimally-tuned range-separated hybrid (OTRSH) functionals [@kronik_excitation_2012] or Koopmans’ compliant functionals [@borghi_koopmans-compliant_2014]. Two examples of OTRSH functionals are that of Baer-Neuhauser-Lifshitz (BNL) [@baer_density_2005; @livshits_well-tempered_2007] and the Perdew-Burke-Ernzerhof (PBE)-based OTRSHs [@kronik_excitation_2012; @refaely-abramson_quasiparticle_2012; @refaely-abramson_gap_2013]. Importantly, CAM-B3LYP, OTRSH-BNL, and other RSH functionals have proven quite successful in predicting the low-lying excitations of aromatic hydrocarbons [@wong_optoelectronic_2010; @richard_time-dependent_2011; @kuritz_charge-transfer-like_2011; @lopata_excited-state_2011; @peach_overcoming_2012] and charge-transfer (CT) excitations [@stein_prediction_2009; @autschbach_charge-transfer_2009; @stein_reliable_2009].
An alternative approach to neutral excitations is ab initio many-body perturbation theory (MBPT), where neutral excitations are computed via two-particle Green’s functions through solution of an effective two-particle equation, the Bethe-Salpeter equation (BSE). In MBPT, solutions to the BSE build on one-particle energies and wavefunctions, usually obtained from a generalized Kohn-Sham DFT starting point within $GW$ approximation, where $G$ is the one-particle Green’s function and $W$ the screened Coulomb interaction. Referred to as the $GW$-BSE approach hereafter, this method has been extremely successful for solids [@onida_electronic_2002], as it goes beyond DFT by including electron-hole interactions, which can be significant for molecules and other systems. It has also been successfully applied to gas-phase molecules [@onida_reining_1995; @grossman_rohlfing_2001], and quantitative and extensive benchmark studies are beginning to appear [@boulanger_fast_2014; @bruneval_systematic_2015; @jacquemin_benchmarking_2015; @jacquemin_00_2015; @jacquemin_benchmark_2017]. Yet much remains unknown about the performance of ab initio $GW$-BSE calculations, particularly their ability to predict acene excitations, charge-transfer-like excitations of aromatic molecules, and more generally, the triplet excitations of organic compounds. The aim of the present work is to address these issues.
The Bethe-Salpeter equation is a formal solution to the two-particle Green’s function, giving access to excitonic wavefunctions and eigenvalues. The underlying theory and approach are explained in more detail in Refs. [@onida_electronic_2002; @rohlfing_electron-hole_1998; @strinati_application_2008]. In finite systems with real wavefunctions, BSE is exactly analogous to TDDFT. As in the Casida equations of linear-response TDDFT, solutions to the BSE can take the form of an eigenvalue problem, i.e., $$\begin{pmatrix}
\phantom{-}A & \phantom{-}B\\
-B & -A
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
X_s \\
Y_s
\end{pmatrix}
=
\Omega_s
\begin{pmatrix}
X_s \\
Y_s
\end{pmatrix},
\label{eqn:hamiltonian}$$ where $X_s$, $Y_s$ are the excitonic wavefunctions, $\Omega_s$ are the eigenvalues, and the $A$ and $B$ blocks form the resonant and coupling parts of the BSE respectively. [@rohlfing_electron-hole_1998]. In the Tamm-Dancoff approximation (TDA) [@_quantum_2003] the $B$ and $-B$ blocks are neglected, resulting in the decoupling of the $A$ and $-A$ blocks. While the applicability and implications of the TDA in TDDFT are well documented [@hirata_time-dependent_1999; @casida_charge-transfer_2000; @peach_influence_2011; @peach_overcoming_2012; @sears_communication:_2011; @casida_progress_2012], the quantitative impact of the TDA on $GW$-BSE calculations of small molecules remains underexplored.
Benchmarks against wavefunction-based theory are the norm to assess the accuracy of approximations within lower order theories or approximations to TDDFT. For example, Thiel’s set [@silva-junior_benchmarks_2010] contains reference-quality excitation energies which were obtained with multistate multiconfigurational second-order perturbation theory such as (MS-CASPT2) and various coupled-cluster theories, such as coupled cluster with singles, doubles, and perturbative triples (CCSD(T)) [@silva-junior_benchmarks_2010; @silva-junior_basis_2010]. Recent work [@bruneval_systematic_2015; @jacquemin_benchmarking_2015; @jacquemin_benchmark_2017] has explored the performance of $GW$-BSE for Thiel’s set, reporting that $GW$-BSE can indeed yield quantitative singlet energetics under several approximations. However, as in TDDFT, $GW$-BSE-calculated triplets were found to be substantially underestimated [@bruneval_systematic_2015; @jacquemin_benchmark_2017]. The limited performance of $GW$-BSE in this case merits further analysis.
Motivated by the success of $GW$-BSE in general, and its low computation cost relative to wavefunction methods, herein we assess the performance of different approximations to $GW$-BSE and determine successful approaches within this framework for the quantitative prediction of low-lying excitations of organic compounds. We evaluate $GW$-BSE against multireference and coupled cluster references for representative singlet and triplet excitations of 27 organic molecules, including hydrocarbons, heterocycles, aldehydes, ketones, and amides (see Figure \[fig:molecules\]). We focus on approximations to $GW$ that enter the BSE, including hybrid functional-starting points with one-shot schemes and the effect of partially self-consistent schemes, as described in Section \[sect:comput-details\]. We also provide a detailed assessment of the performance of the BSE and the TDA relative to that of other two-particle Green’s function approaches and computationally-less-expensive TDDFT methods.
Computational details {#sect:comput-details}
=====================
Our calculations start with a self-consistent time-independent DFT calculation, using an approximate exchange-correlation functional (see below). For the molecules considered here, we minimize the total energy with respect to the density using fixed atomic coordinates for all molecules obtained from Ref. [@silva-junior_benchmarks_2010] (see SI for more details). Starting from the output of our DFT calculations, and using the <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">MolGW</span> package [@bruneval_molgw_2016; @molgw_cite], we then compute one- and two-particle excitation energies with the $GW$ and $GW$-BSE approaches, respectively. As is standard, our $GW$-BSE calculations build on single-particle states, which are coupled in the two-particle BSE equation via the electron-hole interaction kernel. With $GW$ input, BSE is recast into an eigenvalue problem [@rohlfing_electron-hole_1998], the solution of which yields the energies and eigenstates of a set of neutral excitations. As detailed in prior work by us and others [@x._blase_first-principles_2011; @bruneval_benchmarking_2013; @gallandi_accurate_2016; @knight_accurate_2016; @rangel_evaluating_2016], $GW$ calculations are sensitive to the generalized Kohn-Sham starting point and to whether self-consistency is used. Here, we build on previous work and use three accurate $GW$ schemes: $G_0W_0$@BHLYP (one-shot GW on top of BHLYP [@foresman_exploring_1996], which has 50% exact-exchange); $G_0W_0$@OTRSH-PBE [@perdew_generalized_1996]; and eigenvalue self-consistent $GW$ (ev$GW$), in which the quasiparticle energies are updated (in both $G$ and the polarizability) one or more times prior to calculating the final self-energy corrections [@x._blase_first-principles_2011].
As mentioned, our $GW$-BSE calculations are performed with the <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">MolGW</span> package, in which the frequency dependence of the $GW$ non-local self-energy $\Sigma(\mathbf{r},\mathbf{r'},\omega)$ is treated analytically, and hence is exact for a given basis set, without the need for plasmon-pole approximations. We use conventional approximations to solve the BSE: irreducible vertices are set to 1, the polarizability and other matrix elements are constructed using $GW$ eigenvalues and DFT wavefunctions, the screened Coulomb interaction is evaluated in the random phase approximation (RPA), and a static electron-hole screening (COHSEX) is used; see Ref. [@onida_electronic_2002]. We adopt the aug-cc-pVTZ basis set [@dunning_jcp1989] which ensures convergence better than 0.1 eV for the excitation energies shown here (see SI for details). In order to reduce the computational load, and for the purpose of parallelization, we use the resolution-of-the-identity in the Coulomb metric [@vahtras_cpl1993; @weigend_pccp2002], as implemented in <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">MolGW</span> [@rangel_evaluating_2016; @bruneval_molgw_2016], with the well-established auxiliary basis sets of Weigend [@weigend_pccp2002] which are consistent with Dunning basis sets. The resolution-of-the-identity is expected to have a small affect on the $GW$ energies, on the order of 1 meV, as we have demonstrated in the case of benzene [@rangel_evaluating_2016].
For OTRSH-PBE, as a standard procedure for the acenes [@refaely-abramson_quasiparticle_2012; @refaely-abramson_gap_2013; @rangel_evaluating_2016], we set $\alpha = 0.0 - 0.2$, (see SI) which fixes the amount of short-range Fock exchange to $0-20$%. Additionally, we set $\alpha + \beta = 1$ to enforce long-range asymptotic exact exchange. Then, the range-separation parameter $\gamma$ is varied to achieve a minimization of the target function $$\begin{aligned}
J^2(\gamma) & = & \left[\mathrm{IP}^\gamma(N) + E^\gamma_{\homo}(N)\right]^2 \nonumber\\
& + & \left[\mathrm{IP}^\gamma(N+1) + E^\gamma_{\homo}(N+1)\right]^2,\end{aligned}$$ where the ionization potential of the neutral species with $N$ electrons, $\mathrm{IP}^{\gamma}(N)$, is determined via a $\Delta SCF$ approach from total energy differences as $\mathrm{IP}^{\gamma}(N)=\epsilon^{\gamma}_\textrm{tot}(N-1)-\epsilon^{\gamma}_\textrm{tot}(N)$. Here $\epsilon^{\gamma}_{\textrm{tot}}(N)$ and $\epsilon^{\gamma}_{\textrm{tot}}(N-1)$ are total energies of the neutral and cation species respectively. This procedure enforces the ionization potential theorem of DFT [@perdew_density-functional_1982; @salzner_koopmans_2009; @levy_exact_1984; @perdew_comment_1997; @almbladh_exact_1985], namely that the energy of the Kohn-Sham highest occupied molecular orbital (HOMO) is equal to the negative of the first ionization potential. For molecules with unbound $N+1$ anionic state, only the first of these two terms is minimized, as in our previous work [@rangel_evaluating_2016]. The optimal parameters obtained within this framework for the molecules studied are listed in the SI. OTRSH-BNL parameters are taken from Ref. [@kuritz_charge-transfer-like_2011].
Our TDDFT calculations are performed with QChem 4.2 [@qchem] with standard settings, excluding core electrons in the correlation computation and neglecting relativistic effects as usual. We use the cc-pVTZ basis set which, relative to aug-cc-pVTZ, converges the neutral-excitation energies satisfactorily: we consider TD-CAM-B3LYP, with and without the TDA, for the singlet $L_a$ and $L_b$ states for all acenes considered herein, and the lowest lying triplet state for benzene, naphthalene and anthracene. For all test cases, the difference between the augmented and unaugmented bases was between 0.001 and 0.087 eV, with an unsigned average difference of 0.028 eV.
Low-lying $\pi \rightarrow \pi^*$ excitations of aromatic hydrocarbons {#sect:la-lb}
======================================================================
In aromatic hydrocarbons, like the acenes, azulene, benzo$[e]$pyrene (BP) and dibenzo$[a,c]$- anthracene (DBAn) (see Figure \[fig:molecules\]), the two low-lying singlet excitations are labeled $^1L_a$ and $^1L_b$ [@platt_classification_1949]. These excitations are well-known to differ significantly in character, and these differences are widely discussed in the literature. The bright (or large oscillator strength) longitudinal ionic state involves principally a transition between the highest-occupied molecular orbital (HOMO) and the lowest unoccupied molecular orbital (LUMO), and is often described as having charge-transfer (CT)-like character; while the dark (near-zero oscillator strength) covalent excitation arises from a destructive interference [@guidez_origin_2013] of transitions that typically couple the HOMO to the LUMO$+1$ and the HOMO$-1$ to the LUMO [@hirao_complete_1997; @parac_tddft_2003; @kuritz_charge-transfer-like_2011].
The description of these excitations as ionic or covalent comes from valence bond theory, and refers to the distribution of charge in the spatial part of the component orbitals of the excited state. If in the resonance structures describing these orbitals, the density oscillates from negative to positive with respect to the carbon-atom centers, the excitation is termed “ionic”. If there is no such oscillation and the resonance structures correspond to Kekule structures, with alternating double and single bonds, the excitation is termed “covalent”.
The corresponding low-lying triplet excitations are labeled, following the same conventions as above, as and , respectively. Notice that labeling of unbound molecular orbitals (e.g. the LUMO and LUMO$+1$ of some acenes) is somewhat arbitrary, since their ordering may change depending on the choice of DFT exchange-correlation (XC) functional and basis set. In this work, we adopt a definition of the unbound LUMO of benzene and naphthalene as the first resonant state whose energy corresponds to the negative electron affinity energy measured in experiments, as detailed in Ref. [@hajgato_benchmark_2009]. As this state is not the most stable, the resonant state has a finite lifetime. In this work, we first computed the LUMO within PBE. PBE spuriously binds the LUMO, however the corresponding wavefunction will only serve as a basis function to identify the LUMO within the more accurate approximations. We then define the LUMO calculated with a hybrid functional as the unbound state having the largest overlap with the PBE LUMO. With this simple method we have been able to extract the LUMO states across the acene series in a consistent and reliable manner.
Predicting both and presents a challenge for TDDFT approaches. In fact, excitations, with their CT-like character [@kuritz_charge-transfer-like_2011], are usually poorly predicted by standard TDDFT [@parac_tddft_2003; @kuritz_charge-transfer-like_2011; @moore_charge-transfer_2015], due to the known shortcoming of many standard functionals to describe such excitations. We note that this shortcoming has the potential to be ameliorated by using RSHs with asymptotic exact exchange [@kuritz_charge-transfer-like_2011], although the CT nature of excitations and the ability of RSHs to overcome these shortcomings has been questioned. [@moore_charge-transfer_2015].
Results and discussion {#results}
======================
We begin with a benchmark of $GW$-BSE and TDDFT against CCSD(T) for the low-lying singlet excitations of the acenes. We end with an examination of the role of the TDA within both the TDDFT and $GW$-BSE frameworks.
Predicting the low-lying excitations of the acenes with TDDFT {#tddft}
-------------------------------------------------------------
\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --
 
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --
In Figure \[fig:mae-exct-tda\]a, we show the mean signed deviation ($\text{MSD}= 1/N_i \sum_i^{N_i} E_i - E_i^{\mathrm{ref}}$), relative to CCSD(T) [@lopata_excited-state_2011; @hajgato_benchmark_2009], of representative TDDFT-RSHs explored in this study. Our TD-OTRSH-BNL results are in excellent agreement with those reported in Refs. [@kuritz_charge-transfer-like_2011] and [@lopata_excited-state_2011]. In addition, we find that TD-OTRSH-PBE low-lying singlets are within $0.05$ eV of the corresponding TD-OTRSH-BNL excitations. In fact, as previously discussed [@lopata_excited-state_2011; @moore_charge-transfer_2015], the performance of TD-OTRSH based on BNL or PBE for and relative to CCSD(T) is very consistent: for both approaches, is within 0.1–0.2 eV of the reference, but presents larger discrepancies ($\sim 0.4$ eV), as does the $ - $ gap, which is within $0.6$ eV.
Predicting the low-lying excitations of the acenes with $GW$-BSE {#gw-bse}
----------------------------------------------------------------
Having reviewed the accuracy of TDDFT-RSH for the and excitations relative to CCSD(T), we now discuss the $GW$-BSE results, focusing on the sensitivity to the underlying $GW$ starting point. In Figure \[fig:mae-exct-tda\]b, we show the calculated MSD, as defined in the previous section, of representative $GW$-BSE approaches studied here. Consistent with previously-reported $GW$ results on the charged excitations of the acenes (see for instance Refs. [@bruneval_benchmarking_2013], [@gallandi_accurate_2016] and [@rangel_evaluating_2016]) hybrid starting points for $G_0W_0$ or self-consistent $GW$ approaches are required to predict accurate excitations within $GW$-BSE; relatively low MSDs are found within $G_0W_0$-BSE@BHLYP and ev$GW$-BSE, in agreement with recent works [@bruneval_systematic_2015; @jacquemin_benchmarking_2015; @jacquemin_00_2015]. As hypothesized in Ref. [@refaely-abramson_quasiparticle_2012], the OTRSH starting point is superior. In particular, we highlight that while the OTRSH-PBE starting point yields neutral excitation energies with accuracies similar to other starting-points for aromatic hydrocarbons, OTRSH-PBE leads to markedly improved triplet energetics for the molecules studied here, as discussed later. As shown in Figure \[fig:mae-exct-tda\]b, for the $GW$-BSE schemes considered here, the state is predicted within 0.1–0.2 eV, whereas is underestimated by at least 0.4 eV; additionally, the $ - $ gap is underestimated by $\sim 0.6$ eV independent of $GW$-BSE scheme. The rather poor performance of both $GW$-BSE and TDDFT approaches, in the context of neutral low-lying singlet and triplet excitations of acene molecules, can be remedied by the Tamm-Dancoff approximation, as discussed next.
The role of the Tamm-Dancoff Approximation within TDDFT and $GW$-BSE {#tda}
--------------------------------------------------------------------
[lccccccc]{}\
\
& & &\
& BSE & TDA & CCSD(T)$^*$ && BSE & TDA & CCSD(T)$^*$\
Benz. & 5.89 & 6.13 & 6.54$^b$ && 3.60 & 3.94 & $4.26 \pm 0.11^{b,c}$\
Naph. & 4.34 & 4.59 & $ 4.81 \pm 0.02^{a,b}$&& 2.65 & 2.93 & $3.20 \pm 0.11^{b,c}$\
Anth. & 3.38 & 3.63 & $3.68 \pm 0.02^{a,d}$&& 2.01 & 2.29 & $2.41 \pm 0.07^{c,d}$\
Tetra. & 2.42 & 2.72 & 2.94$^a$ && 1.08 & 1.36 & 1.76$^c$\
Penta. & 1.88 & 2.21 & 2.42$^a$ && 0.57 & 0.91 & 1.37$^c$\
Hexa. & 1.48 & 1.84 & 2.05$^a$ && $<0 ^\dagger$ & 0.58 & 1.00$^c$\
Azu. & 2.00 & 2.12 & 1.94$^d$ && 1.35 & 1.42 & 2.18$^d$\
BP & 3.65 & 3.82 & 4.09$^d$ && 1.95 & 2.41 & 2.82$^d$\
DBAn & 3.48 & 3.69 & 3.91$^d$ && 1.90 & 2.30 & 2.73$^d$\
\
MSD & -0.43 & -0.18 &&& -0.74 & -0.39&\
MAD & 0.44 & 0.22 &&& 0.74 & 0.39&\
\
\
& & &\
& BSE & TDA & CCSD(T)$^*$ && BSE & TDA & CCSD(T)$^*$\
Benz. & 5.10 & 5.15 & 5.08$^b$ && 4.39 & 4.42 & 4.86$^b$\
Naph. & 4.30 & 4.32 & $ 4.19 \pm 0.06^{a,b}$ && 3.76 & 3.79 & 4.09$^b$\
Anth. & 3.82 & 3.79 & $3.58 \pm 0.01^{a,d}$&& 3.42 & 3.43 & 3.52$^d$\
Tetra. & 3.33 & 3.37 & 3.25$^a$ && 3.11 & 3.18 &\
Penta. & 3.10 & 3.13 & 3.02$^a$ && 2.79 & 2.83 &\
Hexa. & 2.91 & 2.98 & 2.86$^a$ && $^\dagger$ & 2.66\
Azu. & 3.34 & 3.49 & 3.64$^d$ && 2.09 & 2.19 & 2.20$^d$\
BP & 3.57 & 3.60 & 3.50$^d$ && 2.96 & 3.11 & 3.34$^d$\
DBAn & 3.58 & 3.61 & 3.57$^d$ && 3.34 & 3.43 & 3.35$^d$\
\
MSD & 0.04 & 0.08 &&& -0.23 & -0.17&\
MAD & 0.11 & 0.12 &&& 0.23 & 0.20\
\
\
$^*$ CCSD(T) data from the literature: $^a$ Ref. , $^b$ Ref. , $^c$ Ref. , and $^d$ Ref. .\
$^\dagger$ the BSE Hamiltonian contains negative eigenvalues (read text).
The fact that the TDA can improve the description of low-lying neutral excitations of the acenes has been discussed thoroughly in the TDDFT community [@sears_communication:_2011; @wang_improving_2008; @hirata_time-dependent_1999; @peach_overcoming_2012; @peach_influence_2011], and here we find that similar arguments apply to $GW$-BSE. In Figure \[fig:mae-exct-tda\], we also show the MSD of the calculated low-lying excited states using TDDFT and $GW$-BSE within the TDA with respect to the CCSD(T) reference. The calculated and energies of acene molecules within representative $GW$-BSE and TDDFT schemes are shown in Figure \[fig:la-lb-vs-ccsdt\].
[*Link between TDDFT and triplet instability.*]{} Within Hartree-Fock [@seeger_selfconsistent_1977] and within DFT [@bauernschmitt_stability_1996], the stability of the spin-restricted solution against that of the more flexible spin-unrestricted solution requires the positive-definiteness of two matrices (one for singlet final states and one for triplet final states) that are precisely the sum of the blocks $A$ and $B$ \[See Eq. (\[eqn:hamiltonian\])\] used in time-dependent Hartree-Fock (TDHF) or in TDDFT. In other words, if either one of the $A+B$ matrices has a negative eigenvalue, then the ground-state singlet solution is unstable against a spin-unrestricted triplet solution. This is the so-called triplet instability. Consequently, an unstable or near-unstable spin-restricted ground state implies negative or very small eigenvalues of $A+B$, which in turn produce non-physical or too-small neutral excitations in TDHF or in TDDFT [@casida_charge-transfer_2000; @sears_communication:_2011]. This is why prior work often resorts to the TDA to circumvent the spin-restricted instability situation [@casida_charge-transfer_2000; @wang_improving_2008; @peach_influence_2011; @sears_communication:_2011; @peach_overcoming_2012; @casida_progress_2012]. The TDA is thus a practical way to prevent the electronic system from sampling the triplet ground state, which is spuriously too low in energy.
[*Link between the BSE and triplet instability.*]{} In the $GW$-BSE framework, the connection between triplet instability and the BSE matrix (Eq. \[eqn:hamiltonian\]) is precisely analogous. However, the connection cannot be demonstrated as rigorously as for TDDFT. The BSE, evaluated in the standard fashion [@onida_electronic_2002], is indeed a combination of (1) eigenvalues obtained from the dynamical $GW$ self-energy and (2) a kernel, which is an approximate functional derivative of the static $GW$ self-energy, namely the static screened exchange approximation (SEX) [@hedin_new_1965]. Additionally, the functional derivative $\delta W / \delta G$ is always neglected in the BSE kernel [@onida_electronic_2002]. Thus, following the same logic for $GW$-BSE as for TDDFT above, the BSE blocks $A+B$ would then lead to stability problems (if present) in the static screened exchange spin-restricted solution. If one admits that the $GW$ quasiparticle energies are not far from the static screened exchange energies, the connection between triplet instability and BSE can be understood, but again, not proven. In situations where the triplet instability occurs or nearly occurs in static screened exchange, the TDA to the BSE may be a good route to obtain meaningful neutral excitation energies. However, this calls for a direct numerical comparison, which we carry out below.
[*Performance of the TDA within TDDFT.*]{} As demonstrated in prior work literature [@wang_improving_2008; @peach_overcoming_2012], the TDA improves the description of the singlet and the first triplet , states because these share a similar origin; both are covalent in the valence bond sense, and involve mainly HOMO to LUMO transitions, whereas $L_b$ energies are virtually unmodified with the TDA. Hence, within the RSH time-dependent approaches used here, the large discrepancy (0.4 eV) between the calculated state and CCSD(T) is not improved by the TDA (see Figure \[fig:mae-exct-tda\]). On the other hand, we find that the TDA leads to an improvement in the excitation energies in the asymptotic limit of longer acene molecules (see panels a and c of Figure \[fig:la-lb-vs-ccsdt\]). For example, for pentacene TD-OTRSH-PBE predicts $= 2.18$ eV with TDDFT and $2.48$ eV with the TDA, in outstanding agreement with the CCSD(T) reference value of $2.42$ eV. In brief, and in agreement with the literature [@lopata_excited-state_2011; @moore_charge-transfer_2015], TDDFT-TDA with RSH functionals yields highly accurate CT-like energetics, but tends to overestimate transition energies.
[*Performance of the TDA within $GW$-BSE.*]{} Having reviewed the ability of the TDA within TDDFT to predict the low-lying excitations of the acenes, we now discuss the accuracy of the TDA within $GW$-BSE for these transitions. Here we expand our discussion to a larger set of aromatic hydrocarbons, including azulene, BP and DBAn (see Figure \[fig:molecules\]) which have well-characterized $L_a$ and $L_b$ states [@moore_charge-transfer_2015]. In Table \[table:hydrocarbons\], we show the calculated singlet and triplet excitations with $G_0W_0$-BSE@BHLYP (with and without the TDA) and mean deviations with respect to CCSD(T), as previously defined.
Similar to TDDFT, in $GW$-BSE we find that, independent of $GW$ self-energy scheme, the and states are improved within the TDA (by at least $0.2$ eV, see Figure \[fig:mae-exct-tda\] and Table \[table:hydrocarbons\]). While triplet energies remain underestimated by $\sim 0.3-0.4$ eV, singlet energies are accurately predicted with $GW$-BSE-TDA, with remaining discrepancies lower than $0.2$ eV. The TDA also corrects the – energy ordering; as shown in Figure \[fig:la-lb-vs-ccsdt\] these two states cross at naphthalene when following increasing/decreasing ring number $n$ within the full-BSE (panel b), while the crossing is at anthracene within the TDA (panel d), in agreement to CCSD(T). In summary, $GW$-BSE within the TDA can predict – with excellent quantitative accuracy, an MSD better than 0.2 eV – both ionic CT-like and covalent singlet excitations (such as and , respectively) of the acenes and other aromatic-hydrocarbons.
![ First-triplet excitation energies of organic molecules in Thiel’s set (see Figure \[fig:molecules\]) calculated with $GW$-BSE are benchmarked against reference data [@silva-junior_benchmarks_2010]. The MSD (read text) corresponding to molecules in Series 1 is shown in blue bars, Series 2 in orange bars, Series 3 in black bars and the total in pink bars. We consider several $GW$-BSE schemes with the full-BSE and the TDA. []{data-label="fig:mae-t1"}](mae-t1-tda.pdf)
[*Thiel’s set.*]{} We further analyze the accuracy of $GW$-BSE and the TDA for a larger set of triplet excitations. We show in Figure \[fig:mae-t1\] the MSDs (previously defined) of the calculated first-triplet energies of 20 organic molecules of Thiel’s set (all energies are tabulated in the SI). Again, we consider several representative $GW$-BSE approaches; using the BHLYP and OTRSH-PBE starting points for $G_0W_0$ and ev$GW$. Additionally, we show the MSDs for the molecule categories described in Figure \[fig:molecules\].
With this larger set of excitations, it becomes clear from our calculations that $G_0W_0$@BHLYP and ev$GW$@PBE0, known to perform reasonably well for singlet excitations [@jacquemin_benchmarking_2015; @bruneval_systematic_2015], can present severe errors for triplets, with MSDs of $\sim -0.6$ to $-0.8$ eV, as noticed first in Ref. [@bruneval_systematic_2015] for the BHLYP starting point. The OTRSH starting point for $G_0W_0$-BSE has a relatively lower MSD of $\sim -0.4$ to $-0.6$ eV, presumably due to the RSH optimal starting point for the underlying $GW$ electronic structure [@gallandi_accurate_2016; @rangel_evaluating_2016], which will be discussed in detail in a separate publication [@samia]. For all $GW$-BSE approaches studied here, the TDA improves the first-triplet energy, a fact that we discuss in greater depth below. Further, we note that in agreement with recent work [@jacquemin_benchmark_2017], $GW$-BSE-TDA approaches predict inaccurate triplet energies (with MSD of $-0.4-0.5$ eV) when using a global-hybrid starting point. Importantly, within the OTRSH starting-point, $GW$-BSE-TDA can result in relatively accurate first-triplet energies with a MSD of $-0.19$ eV.
![Ratio of the first triplet energy ($T$) calculated within $GW$-BSE diagonalizing the full BSE Hamiltonian and using the TDA. Several representative $GW$-BSE schemes are shown: $G_0W_0$-BSE@BHLYP in dashed-blue lines and crosses, $G_0W_0$-BSE@OTRSH-PBE in dotted-orange lines and circles and ev$GW$-BSE@PBE0 in black lines and crosses. $GW$-BSE predicts a negative triplet energy (shown at zero) for hexacene for all $GW$ schemes used in this work.[]{data-label="fig:ratio-triplet"}](tt-tda.pdf "fig:")\
In order to better understand the superior performance of the TDA within $GW$-BSE for low-lying triplet energies, we show in Figure \[fig:ratio-triplet\] the ratio of the triplet energy calculated within the full $GW$-BSE and within the TDA ($T/T^{\mbox{\scriptsize TDA}}$). When the ratio approaches zero or becomes negative (TDDFT predicts a negative or zero triplet energy), the triplet and its corresponding ground state become unstable, as explained before; hence this ratio acts as a measure of instability [@sears_communication:_2011]. In this work, we find that the full-BSE and the TDA predict similar triplet energies for benzene and naphthalene (ratio close to 0.9), but the triplet ratio drops to less than zero at hexacene independent of the $GW$ approximation; note that for the PBE starting point to $GW$-BSE, the ratio becomes negative at pentacene (not shown). This implies that $GW$-BSE, in disagreement with CCSD(T) [@hajgato_benchmark_2009], predicts triplet ground states for acenes larger than pentacene. In analogy to TDDFT, this may be a result of instabilities in the corresponding $GW$-BSE triplet and ground states; we leave the evaluation of stability conditions in the $GW$-BSE states to future work.
As mentioned above, triplet instabilities are well-known and documented in Hartree Fock and TDDFT theories [@sears_communication:_2011; @peach_overcoming_2012; @peach_influence_2011; @hirata_time-dependent_1999; @casida_progress_2012], and $GW$-BSE is similarly affected, as shown here and in Ref. [@zimmermann_influence_1970]. In TDDFT—as in configuration interaction singles (CIS) theory, which mixes only single Slater determinants and is the minimal post-Hartree-Fock method capable of predicting physical excited states—triplet instabilities are overcome with the TDA [@casida_progress_2012]. Not surprisingly, in $GW$-BSE the TDA also overcomes triplet instabilities, as we document here, in a manner analogous to TDDFT for molecules.
Finally, we briefly comment on the performance of the BSE among other [*two-particle Green’s function methods*]{}. In this context, the algebraic diagrammatic construction \[ADC(2)\] [@trofimov_efficient_1995] and the second-order polarization propagator (SOPPA) [@nielsen_transition_1980] methods are efficient Green’s function methods which give access to the neutral excitations of molecules. The accuracy of representative variants of ADC(2) has been studied for the low-lying singlet excitations of the acenes, from naphthalene to hexacene, in Ref. [@knippenberg_low-lying_2010]. Comparing these results to the CCSD(T) reference used in this work, we find an MSD for the ADC(2) variants of $-0.46$ and $0.36$ eV (or lower) for and respectively, relatively higher than that of the best $GW$-BSE method used in this work ($GW$-BSE-TDA@OTRSH with an MSD of $-0.13$ and $0.17$ eV for the same excitations) [^1] . In Refs. [@packer_new_1996; @sauer_performance_2015], the lowest singlet excitations of small acenes have been calculated with SOPPA-based methods, among which the original SOPPA and SOPPA(CCSD) perform best. The MSD with respect to CCSD(T) is 0.3–0.8 eV for and and 0.4–0.5 eV for the first triplet energies of benzene and naphthalene [^2] . Moreover, for the triplet excitations in the Thiel’s set, SOPPA and SOPPA(CCSD) yield MSDs with respect to the BTE of $-0.45$ and $-0.54$ eV, respectively [@sauer_performance_2015], which again is relatively high compared to $G_0W_0$-BSE-TDA@OTRSH in this work (with an MSD of only $-0.2$ eV). The superior performance of $GW$-BSE-TDA for these sets of excitations therefore situate the BSE as an efficient and accurate alternative to many traditional approximate methods in quantum chemistry.
Conclusions
===========
In summary, we have benchmarked $GW$-BSE with CCSD(T) for neutral excitations of aromatic hydrocarbons and heterocycles, including the challenging $L_a$ and $L_b$ excitations heavily documented in prior work with TDDFT. We first explored the accuracy of approximations to $GW$-BSE and found that $G_0W_0$-BSE@OTRSH can yield accurate triplet and singlet excitations, sometimes outperforming other highly-accurate approaches such as ev$GW$-BSE and $G_0W_0$-BSE@BHLYP. In particular, for aromatic hydrocarbons, the above mentioned $GW$-BSE methods can predict accurate energetics but generally present significant errors for the states. This problem is remedied by using the TDA, which leads, as it does with TDDFT, to a better overall performance, overcoming triplet instabilities, improving triplet energetics, and capturing quantitatively both the charge-transfer-like $L_a$ and covalent $L_b$ singlet excitations of aromatic cyclic compounds.
Supplemental Material
=====================
In the Supplemental Material we tabulate the calculated neutral excitations of the acenes and other organic molecules of the Thiel’s set.
This work was supported by the Center for Computational Study of Excited State Phenomena in Energy Materials at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, which is funded by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Basic Energy Sciences, Materials Sciences and Engineering Division under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231, as part of the Computational Materials Sciences Program. This work is also supported by the Molecular Foundry through the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Basic Energy Sciences under the same contract number. We acknowledge the use of computational resources at the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC). F. Bruneval acknowledges the Enhanced Eurotalent program and the France Berkeley Fund for supporting his sabbatical leave in UC Berkeley.
[^1]: The calculated singlet energies of the acenes with strict ADC(2) \[ADC(s)-s\] in Ref. [@knippenberg_low-lying_2010] are: 4.57, 4.00, 3.61, 3.36 and 3.18 eV for , from naphthalene to hexacene respectively, and 5.09, 3.87, 3.04, 2.46 and 2.05 eV for . The extended variant \[ADC(2)-x\] yields poorer results for these excitations [@knippenberg_low-lying_2010]. Similar values for the singlet excitatios of naphthalene are found in Ref. [@helmich_pair_2014] with a smaller TZVP basis. We use these results to calculate the MSD of ADC(2) with respect to the CCSD(T) references (shown in the SI).
[^2]: We have compiled the calculated energies with SOPPA-based methods from Ref. [@sauer_performance_2015] with the aug-cc-TZVP basis, which are also found in Ref. [@packer_new_1996] with a smaller basis set. The energies of benzene and naphthalene calculated with SOPPA are 5.91 and 4.19, respectively, and 5.77 and 3.97 with SOPPA(CCSD). The corresponding energies are 4.63 and 3.78 eV with SOPPA and 4.43 and 3.49, with SOPPA(CCSD). The first triplet energies within SOPPA and the cc-pVTZ basis are 3.73 and 2.68 eV for benzene and naphthalene, respectively; the corresponding values within SOPPA(CCSD) are 3.56 and 2.44 eV
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
The analyticity properties of the S-matrix in the physical region are determined by the correspondence principle, which asserts that the predictions of classical physics are generated by taking the classical limit of the predictions of quantum theory. The analyticity properties deducible in this way from classical properties include the locations of the singularity surfaces, the rules for analytic continuation around these singularity surfaces, and the analytic character (e.g., pole, logarithmic, etc.) of these singularities. These important properties of the S-matrix are thus derived without using stringent locality assumptions, or the Schroedinger equation for temporal evolution, except for freely moving particles. Sum-over-all-paths methods that emphasize paths of stationary action tend to produce the quantum analogs of the contributions from classical paths. These quantum analogs are derived directly from the associated classical properties by reverse engineering the correspondence-principle connection.
(This article is an invited contribution to a special issue of Publications of RIMS commemorating the fortieth anniversary of the founding of the Reseach Institute for Mathematical Science.)
---
LBNL-53835\
.5in
[**Correspondence and Analyticity.**]{} [^1]
.50in Henry P. Stapp\
[*Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory\
University of California\
Berkeley, California 94720*]{}
.5in
[**1. Introduction.**]{}
The S matrix was introduced by Wheeler\[1\]. It specifies the amplitude for the scattering of any set of originally noninteracting initial particles to any set of eventually noninteracting final particles. The full physical content of relativistic quantum theory resides in the S matrix: any two formulations that give the same S matrix are considered to be physically equivalent.
The S matrix is a function of the momentum-energy four-vectors of the initial and final particles. The law of conservation of momentum-energy entails that the term of the S matrix that describes the scattering of any specified set of initial particles to any specified set of final particles must have a momentum-energy conservation-law delta function that constrains the sum of the momentum-energy vectors of the final particles to be equal to the sum of the momentum-energy vectors of the initial particles. The remaining factor, which is defined only at points that satisfy this conservation-law condition, is called a scattering function. It is finite at almost all points in its domain of definition. This is important because computations starting from the Schroedinger equation tend to give scattering functions that are everywhere infinite. Thus Heisenberg\[2\] and others \[3\] have proposed an approach to relativistic quantum theory that avoids the infinities that arise from the Schroedinger equation by discarding that equation altogether, and computing the S matrix directly from certain of its general properties. In this approach one never specifies the (Schroedinger-equation- induced) temporal evolution that takes initial states continuously to final states, but which, according to the basic philosophy, lacks physical significance. The S-matrix method works very well for simple cases. It may work in general, but new computational techniques would be needed to achieve this.
A key property of the scattering functions is that each of them is analytic (holomorphic) at almost every point of its original (real) domain of definition. This property was originally deduced from an examination of Feynman’s formulas for these functions, which are derived essentially from the (relativistic) Schroedinger equation. Landau\[4\] and Nakanishi\[5\] independently deduced the very restrictive necessary conditions for the occurrence of singularities of these functions. Coleman and Norton\[6\] then noted that these Landau-Nakanishi conditions are precisely the conditions for the existence of a [*classical*]{} physical process that has the same topological structure — i.e., has the same arrangement of line segments connected at vertices — as the Feynman graph with which it is associated.
A Feynman graph is topological structure of line segments joined at vertices. It was used by Feynman to specify a corresponding mathematical contribution to the S matrix. The associated Landau-Nakanishi diagram is a diagram in four-dimensional space-time that has the same topological structure, but moreover satisfies all of the conditions of a corresponding process in classical physics. Thus a Landua-Nakanishi diagram can be regarded as a representation of a process in classical-physics that consists of a network of point particles that interact only at point vertices, and that propagate between these vertices as freely moving particles.
The rules of (relativistic) classical particle physics assign a momentum-energy four-vector to each line of the diagram, and impose the conservation-law condition that the energy-momentum flowing into the diagram along the initial incoming lines must be able to flow along the lines of the graph, and then out along the final outgoing lines [*with energy-momentum conserved at each vertex.*]{} This conservation-law condition is imposed also by the Feynman rules. But the Landau-Nakanishi (i.e., classical-physics) diagram is required to satisfy also the “classical physics” requirement that each line of the spacetime diagram be a [*straight-line segment that is parallel to the momentum-energy carried that line.*]{} \[In classical relativistic particle physics each freely-moving particle moves in space-time in the direction of its momentum-energy four-vector ($p=mv,v^2=1$), but this property is not imposed in quantum theory: it would conflict with the uncertainty principle, and, likewise, with the Fourier-transformation connection between space-time displacements and momentum-energy that constitutes the foundation of quantum theory.\]
The Landau-Nakanishi diagram is, then, the picture of a possible classical process, involving point particles interacting at points, and conforming to the conditions of relativistic classical-particle physics. These conditions were shown by Landau and Nakanishi to specify the [*location (in the space of the momentum-energy four vectors of the initial and final particles) of a singularity—failure of analyticity—of the contribution to the S matrix corresponding to the associated Feynman graph.*]{}
The purpose of this article is to highlight the fact that although this important connection between the physical-region singularities of the quantum scattering functions and associated classical scattering processes was originally derived from very strong quantum assumptions involving the concepts of point interactions and continuous Schroedinger evolution in time, the result is actually a consequence of much less. It is a consequence of the “correspondence principle” connection between relativistic quantum physics and relativistic classical-particle physics. This principle asserts that the predictions of classical physics emerge from quantum theory in the “classical limit” in which all effects due to the nonzero value of Planck’s constant become negligible.
The correspondence principle entails, however, much more than just the analyticity of the S matrix at all points that do not correspond to a classical-physics process. It entails also that, in a real neighborhood of almost every real singular point, the scattering function is the limit of a function analytic in the interior of a certain cone-like domain that extends some finite distance into the complex domain from its tip in the real neighborhood. This means that [*each physical scattering function is a limit of single analytic function.*]{} That feature of the S matrix is one of the key general properties upon which the S-matrix approach is based. Its derivation from the correspondence principle was given by Chandler and Stapp\[7\] and by Iagolnitzer and Stapp\[8\]. The first of these two papers sets out the general framework, but is formulated within a distribution-analytic framework in which the wave functions are, apart from mass-shell-constraint delta functions, infinitely differentiable functions of compact support. Consequently, it achieves analyticity only modulo infinitely differentiable background terms. The second of these papers uses essentially Gaussian wave functions to obtain full analyticity.
It is worth noting that Sato \[9\] independently constructed a mathematical machinery called the sheaf of microfunctions, which can be used to describe the same cone-like domain when applied to the S matrix.
The correspondence principle entails even more. It specifies also the [*nature*]{} of these singularities: whether they are, for example, pole, or logarithmic singularities. This means that the quantum effects closely associated with these classical-physics processes are determined already by the correspondence principle, without appeal the notion of true point interactions or of the Schroedinger equation. That is, the correspondence principle, which is a condition on the classical limit of quantum theory, can be “reverse engineered” to deduce those features of the quantum S matrix that produce the classical result in the classical limit. And these feature include the analytic character of the the S Matrix scattering functions in their original (real) domains of definition.
[**2. An Asymptotic Fall-Off Property.**]{}
The papers with Chandler and Iagolnitzer just cited deal exclusively with particles of non-zero rest mass. The momentum-space wave function of particle $i$ then has, due to the mass-shell condition, the form $$\Psi_i (p_i) = \psi_i (p_i) 2\pi \delta (p_i^2 -m_i^2), \eqno (2.1)$$ where $p_i^2$ is the Lorentz inner product of $p_i$ with itself, with metric $(1,-1,-1,-1)$, and $m_i$ is the (nonzero) rest-mass of particle $i$. Quantum theory is characterized, fundamentally, by the Fourier-transform link between momentum-energy and space-time. Thus the spacetime form of this momentum-energy wave function is given by the Fourier transform: $$\widetilde\Psi_i (x_i) = \int (2\pi)^{-4} d^4 p_i \exp (-ip_ix_i)\Psi_i (p_i).
\eqno (2.2)$$
The spacetime wave function has important asymptotic fall-off properties. In Appendix A of reference \[13\] it is shown that if $\psi_i(p_i)$ has compact support and is continuous, together with its first and second derivatives, and if $u$ is any positive time-like four-vector satisfying $v^2 =1$, then $$\lim_{\tau \rightarrow \infty} f(m_i,\tau)\widetilde\Psi_i(v\tau)
=\psi_i(m_iv), \eqno (2.3)$$ where $$f(m_i,\tau)=2m_i (2\pi i\tau/m_i)^{2/3} \exp (im_i\tau). \eqno (2.4)$$
In the formula (2.2) the expression $p_ix_i$ in the exponent is originally divided by Planck’s constant over $2\pi$. But that factor has been removed by choosing units of space and time so that Planck’s constant (divided by $2\pi$) and the velocity of light are both unity. But then letting $\tau$ go to infinity is effectively equivalent to letting Planck’s constant go to zero: the expansion of the spacetime scale is mathematically equivalent to going to the classical limit. Formula (2.3) shows that in this limit the probability distribution in spacetime for a freely moving particle is specified by the momentum-space distribution function $\psi_i(p_i)$ in accordance with the relativistic classical physics formula $p_i=m_iv$.
The fall-off property described above was derived from quantum theory. Later I shall derive it from classical physics.
The correspondence principle asserts that the classical-physics results hold not only for these free-particle states but also for processes corresponding to networks of locally interacting particles that propagate freely over the asymptotically large distances between their interactions: the classical physics probabilities emerges from the quantum probabilities in the asymptotic $\tau \rightarrow \infty$ limit. This correspondence-principle requirement determines not only the locations and natures of the singulaties of the quantum momentum-space scattering functions, but normally entails also that, in a real neighborhood of a singular point $P$, the scattering function is a limit of a function analytic in the intersection of a complex neighborhood of $P$ with the interior of a cone that extends from the real domain in a set of directions that is specified by the structures of the classical scattering diagrams associated with that singular point $P$. This connection between [*directions of analyticity*]{} at singularities and classical spacetime diagrams is made via a $4n$-dimensional displacement vector $U$ introduced in reference \[7\].\
[**3. The $4n$-dimensional displacement vector $U$.**]{}
Consider a spacetime diagram $D$ that describes a possible network of classical particles with a total of $n$ initial and final particles. This diagram $D$ determines (via the directions of the initial and final lines) a set $P=(p_1, ... ,p_n)$ of initial and final momentum-energy vectors.
It is convenient to introduce in addition to the [*physical*]{} momentum-energy vectors $p_i$, which have positive energy components, also the [*mathematical*]{} momentum-energy vectors $k_i$, where $k_i=p_i$ for initial particles, and $k_i= -p_i$ for final particles. Then the law of conservation of energy momentum reads $\sum k_i = 0$.
The $4n$-dimensional displacement vector $U$ is defined as follows. From any arbitrarily chosen origin $O$ in spacetime draw, for each initial and final particle $i$, a vector $u_i$ from $O$ to some point on the straight-line that contains the initial or final line $i$. Define $$U = (u_1, ... , u_n). \eqno (3.1)$$
For a fixed spacetime diagram D this 4n-dimensional displacement vector $U$ is not uniquely fixed: one can add to $U$ any vector of the form $$U_0=(a+b_1k_1, a+b_2k_2, ... , a+b_nk_n), \eqno (3.2)$$ where a is a real spacetime vector, and for each $i$ the parameter $b_i$ is a real number. Changing $a$ just shifts the location of $D$ relative to the origin $O$, and changing $b_i$ just slides the tip of $u_i$ along the straight line $i$.
Notice that the combination of the four conservation-law delta functions and the $n$ mass-shell delta functions restricts the relevant set of points in the $4n$-dimensional space of points $K= (k_1, ... ,k_n)$ to a surface of co-dimension $4+n$, and that the $4+n$ dimensional set of vectors $U_0$ spans the set of normals to that co-dimension $4+n$ surface: the contravarient vectors formed by taking linear combinations of the gradients to the arguments of the $4+n$ delta functions constitute the set of vectors $U_0$. This is the simplest example of the important fact that the set of vectors $U$ associated with a singular point $K$ generally span the space defined by the set of normal vectors to the surface of singular points passing though $K$. This normality of the vectors $U$ associated with diagrams of classical physics to the surfaces of singularities of the S matrix provides the link between relativistic classical physics and domains of analyticty of scattering functions in relativistic quantum physics.
[**4. Another Asymptotic Fall-Off Property.**]{}
If the wave function $\psi_i(p_i)$ in Eq. (2.1) is infinitely differentiable and of compact support, and if $V$ is the associated velocity (double) cone consisting of all lines through the origin ($p_i=0$) that intersect the compact support (in the mass shell $p_i^2=m_i^2$) of $\psi_i(p_i)$ then, for all $u$ in any compact set that does not intersect $V$, the function $\widetilde\Psi (u\tau)$ uniformly approaches zero faster than any inverse power of the scale parameter $\tau$: for any integer $N$ $$\lim_{\tau\rightarrow\infty}\tau^N \widetilde\Psi_i(u\tau)=0. \eqno (4.1)$$ This is a standard result (cf. ref\[8\], Eqn. (28)), and it allows one to prove the weaker analyticity properties that hold modulo infinitely differential back-ground terms. (See ref. \[7\]). But to derive full analyticity from the correspondence principle a stronger fall-off property is needed.
This stronger asymptotic fall-off property is obtained by introducing into the wave functions $\psi_i(p_i)$ an exponential factor that shrinks in width as $\tau$ tends to infinity. Specifically, one introduces free-particle momentum-space wave functions of the form $$\psi_{\tau,\gamma,\bar p}(p) = \chi(p) \exp (-(p-\bar p)^2 \gamma\tau).
\eqno (4.2)$$ and also requires the infinitely differential function $\chi(p)$ (of compact support) to be analytic at $p=\bar p$, where $p^2 = \bar p^2 = m^2.$ Then the following fall-off property holds: for all $4$-vectors $u$ in any compact set that does not intersect the line through the origin containing $\bar p$, and for all $\gamma \geq 0$ smaller than some fixed $\gamma_0$, there is a pair of finite numbers $(C,\alpha)$ such that for all $\tau$ $$|\widetilde\Psi_{\tau,\gamma,\bar p}(u\tau)|<
C\exp -\alpha\gamma\tau. \eqno (4.3)$$
Classical and quantum proofs of this fall-off property will be described below. But let us first show how this property of the free-particle coordinate-space wave functions is used to deduce, from the correspondence principle, domains of analyticity for the momentum-space scattering function.
[**5. Kinematics and Probabilities.**]{}
The connection to the correspondence principle is obtained by using initial and final wave functions $\Psi_i(p_i,u_i)$ of the form $$\Psi_i(\tau,\gamma,\bar p_i;p_i,u_i)=
\Psi_i(\tau,\gamma,\bar p_i;p_i)\exp iu_ip_i \eqno (5.1)$$ where, for any $i$, in accordance with (2.1) and (4.2), $$\Psi(\tau,\gamma,\bar p;p)=\psi_{\tau,\gamma,\bar p}(p)2\pi\delta (p^2-m^2)$$ The wave function (5.1) represents the particle state obtained by translating the state represented by $\Psi_i$ by the spacetime displacement $u_i$. The parameters $\gamma$ are taken to be the same for all $i$. It is convenient to use henceforth real $\chi_i(p_i)$, each of which is equal to one (unity) in some finite neighborhood of $\bar p_i$.
The correspondence-principle results are obtained by examining the $\tau \rightarrow \infty$ behaviour of the transition amplitude $$A(\tau)=S[\{\Psi_i(\tau,\gamma,\bar p_i; p_i, u_i\tau)\}] \eqno (5.2)$$ where the right-hand side is $$\left[\prod_i \int (2\pi)^{-4} d^4k_i
\Psi_i(\tau,\gamma,\bar k_i;k_i)\right]S(K)\exp iKU\tau.$$
The absolute value squared of the complex number $A(\tau)$, times $f(\tau)$, is the transition probability associated with these states of the initial and final particles, and $f(\tau)$ is the inverse of the square of the product of the norms of the wave functions $\psi_i$ of (4.2). This factor grows like $(\tau)^{3n}$, but this growth can be absorbed into a bound of the form $C exp -\alpha\gamma\tau$ by a slight adjustment of $C$ and $\alpha$.
[**6. The Correspondence-Principle Condition.**]{}
For any fixed $\bar K$ (with $\sum \bar k_i =0$ and, for each $i$, $\bar{k}_i^2 = m_i^2)$ there is a set $C(\bar K)$ of vectors $U$ such that each pair of $4n$-dimensional vectors $(\bar K, U)$ satisfies the Landau-Nakanishi conditions. This set $C(\bar K)$ includes the set $C_0(\bar K)$ consisting of all of the vectors $U_0$ of the form (3.2): each of these vectors $U_0$ specifies a classical-physics diagram D in which all of the initial and final particles pass through a single common point. Each of these vectors $U_0$ has a null (Lorentz) inner product with every tangent vector to — i.e., with every infinitesimal displacement in — the surface at $\bar K$ of singularities generated by the mass-shell and overall conservation-law delta functions.
Suppose $C(\bar K) = C_0(\bar K)$. That would mean that, on the one hand, there are for the set $\{\bar k_i\}$ of initial and final (mathematical) momentum-energy vectors specified by $\bar K$ no classical-physics diagrams except the trivial ones in which all the initial and final particles pass through a common point, and, on the other hand, according to the Feynman rules, no singularity of the quantum scattering function. But from the S-matrix point of view the Feynmam rules are suspect, because they come essentially from the physically meaningless continuous time evolution, and also lead to infinities. However, the general correspondence principle condition that the predictions of classical physics should emerge in the limit where Planck’s constant goes to zero, or, equivalently, where $\tau$ goes to infinity, would seem to be an exceedingly plausible and secure condition. The analyticty of the scattering function at this point $\bar K$ is, in fact, a consequence of that correspondence condition.
For any point $\bar K$ such that $C(\bar K) = C_0(\bar K)$ consider any $U$ that does not belong $C(\bar K)$. If $U$ does not belong to $C(\bar K)=C_0(\bar K)$ then for at least one of the $n$ particles $i$ the component vector $U_i$ is not parallel to $\bar k_i$. But then the amplitude $A(\tau)$ will pick up an exponential fall-off factor of the kind shown in (4.3). These vectors $U$ cover a unit sphere in the $3n-4$-dimensional subspace that is normal to the $n+4$-dimentional subspace $C(\bar K)$. Thus there will be a [*least value*]{} of $\alpha$ for the $U$’s on this (compact) unit sphere.
This uniform exponential fall-off over this unit sphere arises, in the classical computation, from the exponential fall off of the overlap of the probability functions of the initial and final particles: i.e., from the exponentially decreasing probability, as $\tau$ increases, for [*all*]{} of the initial and final particles to be in any single finite region of space-time that grows like the square root of $\tau$. In classical physics such an exponential decrease in this probability, coupled with the fact that the only classical scattering process that can carry the initial momentum-energies to the final momentum-energies is one where all the initial and final particle trajectories pass through some such growing space-time region entails a similar fall off of the transition probabilities: the probability for this kind of classical process to occur cannot grow faster than the product of the probabilities that the particle can all be in any such growing region. Thus the correspondence principle requires that transition amplitude $A(\tau)$ have the same sort of fall off as the one arising from the overlap of the wave functions. It will now be shown that this condition entails the analyticity of the scattering function at this point $\bar K$ where $C(\bar K) = C_0(\bar K)$.
[**7. Derivation of analyticity at trivial points.**]{}
By a “trivial point” I mean a point $\bar K$ such that $C(\bar K) = C_0(\bar K)$: the only classical processes with external momenta specified by $\bar K$ are the trivial single-vertex diagrams.
The set of Landau-Nakanishi surfaces that enter any bounded region of $K$ space has been shown to be finite \[Ref. 10\]. And each such surface is confined to a co-dimension-one analytic manifold. Consequently, each trivial point $\bar K$ lies in an open neighborhood of such points.
Introduce a set of analytic coordinates $q$ in the $3n-4$-dimensional manifold in $K$-space restricted by the mass-shell and conservation-law conditions near $\bar K$. Let the $q$ be a subset of the space components of the set of vectors $(k_i-\bar k_i)$, and let the $v$ associated with any $q(K)$ in the neighborhood of $q(\bar K)=0$ be the corresponding $3n-4$ components of $U\tau$ mod $C_0(K)$, so that $KU\tau$ in (5.2) becomes $(-qv -\bar kv)$, where the metric $(1,1,1)$ is now used, and $v$ represents displacements away from the displacements that generate the trivial single-vertex processes. Then the $A(\tau)$ in (5.2), times the (unimportant) phase factor $\exp(i\bar kv)$. can be written as $$T(v,r)=\int dq F(q)\exp(-r\mu(q)) \exp(-iqv), \eqno (7.1)$$ where $$\mu(q) = \sum_i (k_i(q)-k_i(0))^2, \eqno (7.2)$$ $r= \gamma \tau$, and $F(q)$ is the scattering function times a factor that is real, infinitely differentiable of compact support, and analytic at $q=0$, which is the $q$-space image of $\bar K$. A fall-off property of the form (4.3) is required to hold for all $\tau$ and all $0\leq\gamma \leq \gamma_0$, with $r=\gamma \tau$, and all $v=\hat{v}\tau$ with $|\hat{v}|=1$ . What needs to be proved is that this fall-off condition, together with the analogous rapid (faster than any power of $\tau$) fall off at $\gamma = 0$, entails the analyticity of $F(q)$ at $q=0$.
This rapid fall off of the bounded $T(v,0)=T(\hat{v}\tau,0)$ for all unit vectors $\hat{v}$ means that $F(q)$ is the well-defined and infinitely differentiable Fourier transform: $$F(q)=(2\pi)^l\int dv\exp(iqv) T(v,0), \eqno (7.3)$$ where $l=3n-4$. To show that $F(q)$ is analytic at $q=0$ re-write this equation in the form $$(2\pi)^l F(q)=\int dv\exp(iqv)\times$$ $$\left[T(v,\gamma_0|v|)exp(\gamma_0|v|\mu(q))
-\int_0^{\gamma_0|v|} dr \frac{\partial}{\partial r}
[T(v,r)\exp(r\mu(q))]\right]. \eqno (7.4)$$
Consider first the first term in the big brackets. The correspondence principle requires the factor $T(v,\gamma_0|v|)$ to be bounded by $C\exp(-\alpha\gamma_0|v|)$. The function $\mu(q)$ is zero at $q=0$, and hence the associated exponential growth is dominated by the fall-off factor for $q$ in a sufficiently small neighborhood of $q=0$, Indeed, this bound keeps the integral well defined and analytic for all $q$ in a small complex neighbor of $q=0$. Thus the contribution $F_1(q)$ to $F(q)$ coming from the first term in the big brackets is analytic at $q=0$.
To prove that this property holds also for the other contribution, $F_2(q)$, substitute (7.1) into the second term in the big brackets. The $\partial/\partial r$ can be moved under the integral over $dq$ because $F(q)$ is infinitely differentiable of compact support. This gives for the integrand $$\exp(iqv)\frac{\partial}{\partial r}[T(v,r)\exp(r\mu(q))]=$$ $$\int dq' F(q')\exp(i(q-q')v)\exp(r(\mu(q)-\mu(q')))[\mu(q)-\mu(q')]
\eqno (7.5)$$ Hefer’s theorem \[8\] allows one to write $$\mu(q)-\mu(q')=\rho(q,q')\cdot(q-q'), \eqno (7.6)$$ where $\rho$ is a vector whose the components $\rho_j$ (j=1,... ,3n-4) are analytic in a product of domains around $q=0$, and $q'=0$. Then (7.5) becomes $$\exp(iqv)\frac{\partial}{\partial r}[T(v,r)\exp(r\mu(q))]=
Div_v [\exp(iqv)\exp(r\mu(q))H(q,v,r)], \eqno (7.7)$$ where $H(q,v,r)$ is the vector $$H(q,v,r)= -i\int dq' F(q')\exp(-iq'v)exp(-r\mu(q'))\rho(q,q').
\eqno (7.8)$$ We may thus write $$(2\pi)^l F_2(q)=-\lim_{R\rightarrow \infty}
\left[\int_{|v|<R} dv \int_0^{\gamma_0|v|} dr
Div_v [\exp(iqv)\exp(r\mu(q)) H(q,v,r)]\right].
\eqno (7.9)$$
For fixed $R$ we can change the order of integration and perform first an integration over $v$ for $r/\gamma_0 < |v| < R$. Then Gauss’ theorem gives the volume integral of the divergence as the difference of two surface integrals, one at $|v|=r/\gamma_0$, the other at $|v|=R$. The estimates given in Appendix IV of ref. \[9\] show that the contribution at $R$ vanishes as $R\rightarrow \infty$. The contribution at $|v|= r/\gamma_0$ integrated on $r$ from $0$ to $\infty$ generates an integration over all $v$ with $r$ replaced by $|v|\gamma_0$, and a Jacobian factor $J(q)$ that is analytic at $q=0$. Thus we obtain $$(2\pi)^l F_2(q) = \gamma_0\int dv \exp(iqv)
\exp(\gamma_0 |v| \mu(q)) \widehat v\cdot H(q,v, \gamma_0 |v|),
\eqno (7.10)$$ where $\widehat v = v/|v|$. This function $F_2(q)$ is analytic at $q=0$ for the same reasons that $F_1(q)$ was. This completes the proof, apart from the straightforward calculations given in Appendix IV of reference \[9\].
Note that that (7.1), with $r=\gamma_0 \tau$, and (7.4) together with (7,10), gives a generalization of the Fourier transformation theorem that incorporates Gaussian factors. It gives, from the mathematical point of view, a localized version of the familiar connection between analyticity and exponential fall off of the Fourier transform. From the physics point of view it gives a connection between the analyticity of the scattering functions of relativistic quantum theory and the results of classical physics that emerge from quantum theory in the classical limit where Planck’s constant goes to zero.
The analyticity of the scattering functions except on the Landau-Nakanishi surfaces has thus been derived, by “reverse engineering” the correspondence principle: quantum properties have been deduced from classical properties, the correspondence principle, and the basic connection between classical and quantum physics, namely the Fourier-transform connection between the momentum-energy and the space-time displacements of freely moving particles.
[**8. Derivation of Cone of Analyticity at Most Singular Points.**]{}
A more complex category of points $\bar K$ consists of points $\bar K$ such that all of the spacetime diagrams corresponding to this $\bar K$ are the same apart from shifts in location or scale, but which differ from the simple single-vertex case except in the limit where the diagram is shrunk to a point. For any such point $\bar K$ the set $C(\bar K)$ consists of $C_0(\bar K)$ plus a single ray, $U(\bar K)$: the displacements along $U(\bar K)$ generate the displacements of the external lines of the diagram away from positions where they all intersect at a single point. \[The argument can be extended to cover all points $\bar K$ such that all of the Landau-Nakanishi surfaces that contain $\bar K$ coincide with a single co-dimension-one Landau-Nakanishi surface, and hence all specify the same unique ray $U(\bar K)$.\]
It is important that $U(\bar K)$ is a ray, not a full line: a displacement in the opposite direction does not give the locations of the external lines of a classically allowed process. (The intermediate particles would have to move backward in time, and carry the incoming positive energy backward in time.) Thus a compact set of displacements $U$ not in $C(\bar K)$, but confined to a space essentially normal to the set $C_0(\bar K)$, cannot now cover an entire sphere: there must be a hole in this compact set through which the single ray $U(\bar K)$ can pass.
To deal with this case one can introduce the same set of local coordinates $(q,v)$ as before, with $\hat{v}=v/|v|$, and let $\hat{v}(\bar K)$ be the point on the unit sphere $|v|=1$ that is the image in $|v|=1$ of $U(\bar K)$. Let $A(\bar K)$ be a compact set in $v$ space that lies in the unit sphere, and covers this sphere $|v|=1$ except for points in a small open spherical ball about the point $\hat{v}(\bar K)$. Let the points in this ball that lie also on the sphere $|v|=1$ be called $H(\bar K)$ (for Hole), so that each point on $|v|=1$ lies either in $A(\bar K)$ or in $H(\bar K)$, but not in both.
Choose the functions $\chi(p_i)$ in (4.2) so that their supports are small enough so that the point $\hat{v}(K)$ corresponding to each point $K$ in the support of the product of the $\chi(p_i)$s lies in a closed subset of the open set $H(\bar K)$. Then for all points $\hat{v}=v/|v|$ in $A(\bar K)$ the function $T(v,\gamma |v|)$ will, by virtue of the correspondence principle, fall off faster than any power of $|v|$ for $\gamma = 0$, and like (4.3) for $0 < \gamma \leq \gamma_0$. The problem is then to show that the function $F(q)$ in (7.1) is the boundary value, in some real neighborhood of $q=0$, of a function analytic in the intersection of a complex neighborhood of $q=0$ with an open cone $Q$ in $Im$ $q$.
To prove this, separate the $v$-space domain of integration in (7.3) into two disjoint parts, $V(H(\bar K))$ and $V(A(\bar K))$, where the latter consists of all rays from $v=0$ that pass through the closed set $A(\bar K)$ of points in the sphere $|v|=1$, and $V(H(\bar K))$ is the rest of $v$ space.
This separation of the space of integration of the (bounded-by-virtue-of- unitarity) function $T(v,0)$ into two parts separates $F(q)$ into two terms: $$F(q) = F_H(q) + F_A(q). \eqno (8.1)$$ The imaginary part of $q$ in $F_H(q)$ is restricted to the open cone $Q$ in which $Im$ $qv > 0$ for all $v$ in a closed cone $V$ that contains the closure of $V(H(\bar K))$ in its interior, apart from the origin $v=0$. For these $q$ the exponential factor $\exp iqv$ in (7.3) get from $Im$ $q$ a factor $\exp -\alpha |Im$ $ q||v|$, where $\alpha > const > 0$. This means, because $T(v,0)$ is bounded, that the integral is absolutely converent, and hence that $F_H(q)$ is analytic near $q=0$ for $Im$ $q$ in $Q$.
Most of the real points $q$ very near to $q=0$ are “trivial” points, of the kind considered in the preceding section. At those trivial points $q'$, the function $F(q') = F_H(q') + F_A(q')$ is analytic. These two terms are taken at these points $q'$ to be just the contributions to $F(q)$ specified in (7.4) and (7.10) restricted to the regions $V(H(\bar K))$ and $V(A(\bar K))$ respectively. Both of these contributions are analytic in the intersection of some neighborhood of $q$ with the cone $Q$. Thus one can stay in the domain of analyticity by moving $Im$ $q$ slightly into the cone $Q$ in order pass to the other side of the surface of singularities that passes through $q=0$.
A more elaborate presentation of this argument, and of its generalizations to more complex cases, can be found in references \[7\] and \[8\], and also in Iagolnitzer’s book \[11\].
[**9. Correspondence-Principle Asymptotic Fall Off.**]{}
I have described some of the analytic consequences of the fall-off properties (2.3), (4.1), and (4.3). I turn now to a fuller discussion of the roots of these fall-off properties in the correspondence to classical properties.
The statistical predictions of quantum mechanics correspond, at least in a formal way, to the predictions of classical [*statistical*]{} mechanics. In the latter theory one describes a system of $n$ particles at any time $t$ in terms of a function $\rho (x,p,t)$, which specifies how the probability is distributed over the points $(x,p)$ of “phase space,” where $x$ specifies the $3n$ coordinate variables and $p$ specifies the $3n$ momentum-space variables. Free-particle evolution keeps $p$ fixed and shifts the location $x_i$ of a particle of (rest) mass $m_i$ during a time interval $t$ to the location $x_i + tp_i/m_i$. For large $t$ the second term dominates, and the coordinate-space probability function goes over to the momentum-space probability function, properly scaled to account for the diverging directions of the different momentum vectors. This classical kinematics entails that for free particles the classical distribution $\rho (x,p,t)$ at large times $t$ becomes a product over $i$ of functions $$\rho (u_it, p_i,t)= |\rho (u_im_i) \rho(p_i)/f(m_i,t)^2|, \eqno (9.1)$$ where $$\rho(p_i)=\int d^3x_i \rho(x_i,p_i, t'), \eqno (9.2)$$ is independent of $t'$, and $f(m_i,t)$ is the function defined in (2.4). Here I am, for simplicity, assuming that the momenta are small enough so that the non-relativistic formulas (where $t=\tau$ and $p_0=m$) are adequate. (The fully covariant formulation gives the same results.) The factor $(m_i/t)^3$ coming from $f(m_i,t)^{-2}$ compensates for the linear spreading out of the probability distribution in coordinate space, and the $1/(2m_i)^2$ comes from the normalization in (2.1). This equality of the classically-derived and quantum-mechanically derived limits constitutes, in this case, [*part of*]{} the correspondence-principle relationship between the asymptotic properties in classical and quantum theory: both theories give the same asymptotic form for the probability distribution in $(x,p)$, for the case $\gamma =0$.
There is no conflict here with the uncertainty principle limitation on the idea of a distribution in both $x$ and $p$ simultaneously: the huge spreading out of the coordinate-space distribution eliminates any such conflict.
But what is the rate of approach to this limit?
The probability distribution in coordinate space at $t=0$ for the function in (4.2), at $\gamma=0$, would be given by the (absolute value squared of the) Fourier transform of $\chi(p)$. This transform of the infinitely differentiable compactly supported $\chi(p)$ falls off faster than any power of $|x|$. This leads to the quantum mechanical prediction (4.1). Classically, this original $x$-space distribution is the constant (non-expanding) background to the $t$-dependent diverging trajectories. If this non-expanding background falls off faster than any power of $x$ then its contribution at points $x=u\tau$ will fall off faster than any power of $\tau$. Hence the approach to the large-$t$ limit computed classically, by using the straight-line trajectories in space-time, also exhibits the faster than any power fall off specified in (4.1): the classical and quantum predictions agree about both the limit and the rate of approach to this limit.
But what is the rate of fall off for the case $\gamma >0$?
To show that the fall off in this case conforms to (4.3) it is sufficient to go to the frame where $\bar p$ is pure spacelike and the space part of $u$ is nonzero. Then $$|\widetilde{\Psi}_{\tau,\gamma,\bar p}(u\tau)|=
|\int d^3q/(2\pi)^{-3}\chi(q)\exp(-\tau[q^2\gamma+i(qu-u_0(q_0-\bar p_0))])|,
\eqno (9.3)$$ where I again use the metric (1,1,1) for the $3$-vector products $qu$ and $q^2$, and $q_0-\bar p_0 =(q^2+m^2)^{1/2} -m$.
To get the quantum prediction, consider a distortion of the $q$-space contour that is parameterized by a scalar $\alpha$. For $q^2 > \alpha$ there is no distortion. For $Re$ $q^2 < \alpha$ the component of $Im$ $q$ that is directed along $u$ is shifted (keeping real the other two components of the $3$-vector $q$) so that
$$Re[q^2\gamma+i(qu-u_0(q_0-\bar p_0))]=\alpha\gamma. \eqno (9.4)$$ Distort the contour from $\alpha =0$ to a value such that all real $q$ in $q^2 \leq \alpha$ lie inside the open set where $\chi$ is one, and such that $|Im$ $q|$ remains less than $m$.
Then for all real points $q$ with $ q^2>\alpha$ one has an exponential fall-off factor $\exp -\alpha\gamma\tau$. For real $q$ such that $q^2 < \alpha$ the condition (9.4) gives a factor $\exp -\alpha\gamma\tau$. One can obtain a bound like this for every four vector $u$ on the unit (Euclidean) sphere, minus small open holes around the rays along the positive and negative time axis (along which $\bar p$ has been taken to lie). These holes can be defined by conditions on the three-vector part $\vec{u}$ of $u$: $|\vec{u}|< \epsilon$. The only singularity that could block this continuation is the singularity of $q_0$ at $q^2+m^2=0$, and this is prevented by our condition $|Im$ $q|<m$.
A more detailed presentation is given in Appendix III of Ref. 9.
The classical analog is obtained by taking the classical coordinate-space probability function, imagined now to specify the distribution of the classical particles, to be the one obtained from the Fourier transform. For large $\tau$ the contributions from $\chi - 1$ fall off exponentially. Ignoring that contribution, at very large $\tau$, one has a coordinate-space function that is essentially a Gaussian, which has a width that grows like the square root of $\tau$. Hence in the scaled-down coordinate $u=x/\tau$ the width of the Gaussian shrinks like $(\tau)^{-1/2}$, just as it does in momentum space. Thus the probability function in $(u,p)$-space (or in $(\vec{u},\vec{p})$-space) for fixed $(u,p)$, falls off exponentially in $\tau$, as long as one keeps $|\vec{u}|$ finitely away from zero.
The fall-off properties (4.1) and (4.3) pertain to the individual freely moving particles. But we need analogous fall-off properties for process involving multiple scatterings of such freely moving particles by quasi-local interactions.
In quantum theory one has an initial $\Psi_{in}$ and a final $\Psi_{fin}$. If a certain preparation procedure $In$ prepares a system to be in the initial state $\Psi_{in}$, and if a certain measurement procedure $Fin$ will definitely produce a “Yes” outcome if the final state is $\Psi_{fin}$, and will definitely produce a “No” outcome if the final state is orthogonal to $\Psi_{fin}$, then $$Probability = |\Psi_{in}^* S \Psi_{fin}|^2 \eqno (9.5)$$ is the predicted probability that a preparation of type $In$ followed by a measurement of type $Fin$ will yield an outcome “Yes”.
If the intersection of the supports of the wave functions (4.2) contain no points $K$ such that $C(K)$ is bigger than $C_0(K)$ then the only relevant classical scattering diagrams are the trivial one that have only one vertex. If the interactions not carried by physical particles have finite range (with perhaps exponential tails) then the transition probability will (as mentioned previously) be bounded, in classical physics, by the probability that all of the particles can be in some region that grows like the square root of $\tau$. And the condition that $C(K)= C_0(K)$ for all points in the support of the wave functions means that for any such growing region in spacetime the probability that all the particles will be in this region will have an exponential in $\tau$ fall off coming from some nonzero displacement in either a momentum variable $q$ or a translation variable $u$. And the range of these displacements is compact: they cover the compact surface in $v$ space times the product of the compact domains in $q$-space. Thus for these “trivial” points one gets, in the classical-physics analog, a fall off of type (4.3), as already noted.
But how does one get the analogous result for multiple-scattering processes, which involve intermediate particles?
The answer is that if all interaction regions can be taken to grow no faster than the square root of $\tau$, then in the scaled-down (by a factor $\tau$) coordinate system the diagram must have point vertices. And momentum-energy is strictly conserved in classical mechanics. So the scaled-down diagrams depict classical processes with point vertices. If no such diagram can match the external conditions imposed by the $(U,K)$ then there will always by an exponential fall-off factor coming from some external particle, which is what the arguments require.
[**10. Nature of the Singularity.**]{}
The correspondence principle entails analyticity except on the surfaces specified by the Landau-Nakanishi equations, and it assures analyticity in the associated cones of analyticity at the Landau-Nakanishi points. But what about the nature of these singularities?
Consider a $3$-particle to $3$-particle process in which two particles collide to create one final particle plus one intermediate particle that eventually collides with the third initial particle to produce the other two final particles. Classical physics demands that in the positive-time asymptotic regime the transition probability function must fall off as $\tau^{-3}$, due to the geometric spreading. This is just the fall off obtained in section 2, and it corresponds to a pole singularity, $$f(p)= i(p^2 - m^2+i\epsilon)^{-1}, \eqno (10.1)$$ which is the energy-increases-with-time part of the mass-shell delta function $2\pi\delta(p^2-m^2)$ of classical physics. Thus not only the location of this singulatity, and the $i\epsilon$ rule for continuing around it, but also the pole character of this singularity is determined essentially by the fall-off properties entailed by the correspondence principle.
The geometric conditions that lead to the $\tau^{-3/2}$ fall off in the single-intermediate-particle case can be generalized to the case of any number of intermediate particles. One obtains the condition $$2d=3N_l -4(N_v -1)-1, \eqno (10.2a)$$ or $$d= \frac{1}{2}(3N_l -4N_v +3), \eqno (10.2b),$$ where $N_v$ is the number of vertices, $N_l$ is the number of internal lines, and $d$ is the “degree” of the singularity, with $d = -1$ being $\delta (E)$ or $E^{-1}$, and $d=0$ being $\log E$, etc. Thus for the two-vertex, one internal line case one gets $d=-1$ (a pole singularity) and for the triangle diagram with three vertices and three internal lines one gets $d=0$ (a logarithmic singularity.) For $N_v=2$ and $N_l=2$ (two-particle threshold) one gets $d=1/2$, $(\sqrt E)$.
To understand (10.2) from the classical point of view consider the application of (9.1), applied to the entire classical diagram $D$, consisting of $N_l$ internal lines, $N_e$ external lines, and $N_v$ vertices. The factors $|\rho(u_im_i)/f(m_i,t)^2|$, with $tp_i/m_i =\tau u_i$, give the $3N_l$ in (10.2a). Each internal lines contributes a factor $\tau^{-3}$ to the fall-off of the probability, and hence a fall-off factor $\tau^{-3/2}$ in the amplitude, and this translates via the Fourier connection to an increase by $3N_l/2$ of the degree $d$ of the singularity.
But the classical formula (9.1) has also a momentum factor $\rho(p)$. The $p_i$ in (9.1) must include an external momentum-energy four-vector at each external line, and the function $\rho(p)$, with $p$ being the collection of internal and external four vectors, will have a conservation-law delta function at each of the $N_v$ vertices. This is a classical condition. The scattering function has the one overall conservation-law delta function factored off, leaving $4(N_v-1)$ delta functions.
The term of zeroth order in $N_l$ and $N_v$ is not determined by this argument, but is fixed by the known pole case to be the extra term $-1$ in (10.2a). The important point is that to the extent that (10.2) determines the degree $d$ of the singularity, this degree is fixed by the fall-off and conservation-law features exhibited by the associated classical process: the classical process exhibits the features that enter into Eqn. (10.2).
These remarks tie Eqn. (10.2) to classical physics, but do not give a derivation of (10.2). This equation is derived in Kawai and Stapp \[12\], for all of the cases mentioned above, and, more generally, for each physical-region singularity that corresponds to a unique Landau-Nakanishi diagram in which no two vertices coincide, at most two lines connect any pair vertices, and no vertex is trivial in the sense that all of the lines connected to it are parallel. \[Actually, far more is derived in ref. 12, namely an explicit form of the S-matrix near certain points where several surfaces intersect, and these forms play an important role in understanding the global analytic structure of the S matrix.\] The proof is based on the analyticity properties derived from the correspondences principle, on the general theory of holonomic microfunctions described in Sato, Kawai, and Kashiwara \[13\], and on the techniques and results developed in Coster and Stapp \[14, 15\] for combining the analytity properties that follow from the correspondence principles with the important unitarity property of the S matrix.
The other key element in S-matrix theory is “crossing”: the postulate that a certain analytic continuation that changes $k_i$ to $-k_i$ will take one to the scattering function of a “crossed” process where initial (resp. final) particle $i$ is replaced by final (resp. initial) anti-particle $i$. Hence much of the structure of quantum theory is seen to be entailed already by the correspondence principle, plus natural extensions of the analyticity properties entailed by the correspondence principle.
[**11. Photons and Infra-red Divergences.**]{}
Massless particles, such as photons, pose new technical problems, which are entwined with an important infra-red problem. A number of studies \[16, 17, 18\] of the effects of the interaction of an electron (or positron) with low-energy photons appeared to show that the pole-character of the electron is disrupted by this interaction: the pole exponent $-1$ is modified by a term of order $1/137$. However, any such change at the level of the S matrix itself would entail a significant deviation from the $1/r^3$ fall off, which is empirically confirmed to very high accuracy.
Part of the problem in those works is that what was studied was the electron [*propagator*]{}, which corresponds, physically, to suddenly creating a charged electron at some point $x$ and suddenly destroying it at some other point $x'$. But charge is conserved: it cannot be suddenly created or destroyed. So one should examine, instead, closed loops of charge, where two particles of opposite charge emerge from an initial place, and eventually come together at some later place. But even when this is done there still remains an infra-red divergence problem, associated with the emission of “infinite” numbers of soft (i.e., low-energy) photons at each place where some deflection or deviation of the spacetime trajectory of the charged particle from straight-line motion occurs. This infra-red problem is solved by again appealing to the correspondence principle.
The point is this. If one considers the space-time diagram associated with the Feynman graph as a classical multiple-scattering process—of charged particles—then one can compute the classical electromagnetic field radiated by those moving charges. It has long been known that for every classical radiation field there is a corresponding quantum state, called a coherent state. It involves infinite numbers of photons. To resolve the infra-red divergence problem completely one should use for the final quantum state of the radiant elecromagnetic field, not the vacuum state plus added photons, but rather the quantum coherent state corresponding to the classical electromagnetic field radiated from the classical process specified by the Landau-Nakanishi diagram, plus added photons. So again, as before, the quantum process is largely determined by the underlying classical process: the classical process determines the bulk of the radiated quantum electromagnetic field, and once this part is properly incorporated the fall-off properties associated with motions of the charged particles come into proper accord with the predictions of classical physics, which then fixes, via analyticty, the parts of the quantum scattering function closely associated with this classical process. One can then, again, reverse engineer the correspondence principle to get the quantum counterpart of the classical process. The program was initiated by Stapp\[19\], and various resulting analyticity properties were derived in a series of papers by Kawai and Stapp\[20, 21\]
In the works described above the particle trajectories were always taken to be straight-line segments. However, Eqn. (2.16) of ref. 19 shows the effect of the “Coulomb” contribution. It conforms to the classical rule. The correspondence principle approach discussed here suggests allowing the classical-particle trajectory to deviate from straight lines in a way that gives stationary action. That will cause these classical trajectories to curve as they do classically under the influence of a Coulomb potential. These curved trajectories will radiate soft photons that will need to be added to the final coherent state.
This suggested application of the correspondence principle begins to look more like a traditional spacetime description than an S-matrix calculation. However, it is built not upon the presumption of local interactions but rather upon analyticity properties derived by a reverse engineering of the correspondence-principle classical limit.\
[**References.**]{}
1\. J. A. Wheeler, On the mathematical description of light nuclei by the method of resonating group structure. [*Phys. Rev.*]{}, [**52**]{} (1937), 1107-1122.\
2. W. Heisenberg, Die “beobachtbaren grossen” in der theorie der elementarteilen I and II. [*Z. Physik*]{}, [**120**]{} (1943), 513-538 and 673-702.\
3. W. Heisenberg, ref. 2; G.F. Chew, [*S-Matrix Theory of Strong Interactions*]{}. W.A. Benjamin, New York, (1961); G.F.Chew, [*The Analytic S-Matrix*]{}, W.A. Benjamin, New York, (1966).\
4. L. D. Landau, On analytic properties of vertex parts. [*Nucl. Phys.*]{}, [**13**]{} (1959), 181-192.\
5. N. Nakanishi, Ordinary and anomalous threshholds in perturbation theory. [*Prog. Theor. Phys.*]{}, [**22**]{} (1959), 128-144.\
6. S. Coleman and R. Norton, Singularities in the physical region. [*Nuovo Cimento*]{}, [**38**]{} (1965), 438-442.\
7. C. Chandler and H. Stapp, Macroscopic causlity conditions and properties of scattering functions. [*J. Math. Phys.*]{}, [**10**]{} (1969), 826-859.\
8. D. Iagolnitzer and H. Stapp, Macroscopic causality and physical region analyticity in S-matrix theory. [*Commun. Math. Phys.*]{}, [**14**]{} (1969), 15-55.\
9. M Sato, Hyperfunctions and partial differential equations. [*Proc. Internat. Conf. on Functional Analysis and Related Topics, 1969*]{}, pp. 91-94, Univ. Tokyo Press. Tokyo, 1970.\
10. H. Stapp, Finiteness of the number of positive-alpha Landau singularity surfaces in bounded portions of the physical region. [*J. Math. Phys.*]{}, [**8**]{}. (1967), 1606-1610.\
11. D. Iagonitzer, [*The S Matrix*]{}. North-Holland, New York (1976).\
12. T. Kawai and H. Stapp, Discontinuity formula and Sato’s Conjecture, [*Publ. RIMS*]{} [**12**]{} Suppl. (1977), 155-232.\
13. M. Sato, T. Kawai and M. Kashiwara, Microfunctions and pseudo- differential equations. [*Lecture Notes in Math.*]{} No. 287, pp. 265-529, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, Springer, 1973.\
14. J. Coster and H. Stapp, Physical region discontinuity equations. [*J. Math. Phys.*]{}, [**11**]{} (1970), 2743-2763.\
15. J. Coster and H. Stapp, Physical region discontinuity equations for multi-particle scattering amplitudes I. [*J. Math. Phys.*]{}, [**10**]{} (1969), 371-396.\
16. T. Kibble, Coherent soft-photon states and infrared divergences IV. [*Phys. Rev.*]{}, [**175**]{} (1968), 1624-1640.\
17. D.Zwanziger, Reduction formulas for charged particles and coherent states in quantum electrodynamics. [*Phys. Rev.*]{}, [**D7**]{} (1973), 1062-1098.\
18. J.K. Storrow, Photons in S-matrix theory. [*Nuovo Cimento*]{}, [**54A**]{} (1968), 15-41, and [**57A**]{} (1968), 763-776.\
19. H.P. Stapp, Exact solution of the infrared problem. [*Phys. Rev.*]{}, [**D28**]{} (1983), 1386-1418.\
20. T. Kawai and H. Stapp, Quantum electrodynamics at large distances. [*Phys. Rev.*]{}, [**D52**]{} (1995), 2484-2532.\
21. T. Kawai and H. Stapp, On infra-red singularities associated with QC photons. [*Microlocal Analysis and Complex Fourier Analysis*]{}, World Scientific Publishing, Singapore, 2002, pp. 115-134.
[^1]: This work is supported in part by the Director, Office of Science, Office of High Energy and Nuclear Physics, Division of High Energy Physics, of the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC03-76SF00098
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We study the action of the $SL(2;R)$ group on the noncommutative DBI Lagrangian. The symmetry conditions of this theory under the above group will be obtained. These conditions determine the extra $U(1)$ gauge field. By introducing some consistent relations we observe that the noncommutative (or ordinary) DBI Lagrangian and its $SL(2;R)$ dual theory are dual of each other. Therefore, we find some $SL(2;R)$ invariant equations. In this case the noncommutativity parameter, its $T$-dual and its $SL(2;R)$ dual versions are expressed in terms of each other. Furthermore, we show that on the effective variables, $T$-duality and $SL(2;R)$ duality do not commute. We also study the effects of the $SL(2;R)$ group on the noncommutative Chern-Simons action.'
---
-15 mm
.5cm [Davoud Kamani]{} .1cm [*Institute for Studies in Theoretical Physics and Mathematics (IPM)\
P.O.Box: 19395-5531, Tehran, Iran*]{}\
[*e-mail: [email protected]*]{}\
.5cm [*PACS*]{}: 11.25.-w\
[*Keywords*]{}: String theory; Noncommutativity; $SL(2;R)$ duality.
Introduction
============
$SL(2;R)$ duality generalizes strong-weak coupling duality. There is an $SL(2;R)$ symmetry manifest in the low energy action, which is broken down to $SL(2;Z)$ in string theory. Also there is considerable evidence in favor of this duality being an exact symmetry of the full string theory [@1; @2; @3]. In fact, the $SL(2;R)$ group and its subgroup $SL(2;Z)$ act as symmetry groups of many theories [@4; @5; @6]. Among these theories, the noncommutative theories and the Dirac-Born-Infeld (DBI) theory are more important, for example see the Refs. [@6; @7].
Consider the $SL(2;R)$ symmetry of the type IIB superstring theory [@1; @2; @3]. In the type IIB theory the R-R zero-form $\chi$ and the dilaton $\phi$ of the NS-NS sector define a complex variable $\lambda = \chi + ie^{-\phi}$. Under the $SL(2;R)$ duality this variable and also the NS-NS and R-R two-forms $B_{\mu\nu}$ and $C_{\mu\nu}$ transform as in the following & &= ,\
& &(
[c]{} B\_\
C\_
) (
[c]{} [B]{}\_\
[C]{}\_
) = (\^T)\^[-1]{} (
[c]{} B\_\
C\_
) , = (
[cc]{} a & b\
c & d
) SL(2;R). In addition, the Einstein metric $g^{(E)}_{\mu\nu} =e^{-\phi/2}g_{\mu\nu}$ remains invariant. Therefore, the string coupling constant $g_s = e^\phi$ and the string metric $g_{\mu\nu}$ transform as follows g\_s \_s = \^2 g\_s ,g\_ \_=g\_ ,|c+ d|.
For slowly varying fields, the effective Lagrangian of the open string theory is the DBI Lagrangian. For a review of this theory see Ref. [@7] and references therein. The equivalence of the noncommutative and ordinary DBI theories has been proven [@8]. We shall concentrate on both of these theories.
In section 2, we shall present an $SL(2;R)$ invariant argument for the ordinary and noncommutative DBI Lagrangians. Therefore, for special $C_{\mu\nu}$ a $Dp$-brane with ordinary worldvolume, but modified tension will be obtained. In addition, we obtain the auxiliary $U(1)$ gauge field strength ${\bar F}_{\mu\nu}$ [@9] in terms of the other variables. This field with the $U(1)$ field strength $F_{\mu\nu}$ form an $SL(2;R)$ doublet.
In section 3, by introducing a consistent relation between $B_{\mu\nu}$ and ${\tilde B}_{\mu\nu}$, a useful rule will be obtained. That is, the DBI theory and its $SL(2;R)$ dual theory are duals of each other. In other words, twice dualizing of the DBI theory leaves it invariant. This reflection also holds for the noncommutative DBI theory.
In section 4, we shall obtain some relations between the effective open string variables and their duals. Thus, $SL(2;R)$ transformations on the noncommutative DBI Lagrangian can be captured in the tension of the brane. On the other hand, we have the original noncommutative DBI theory with the modified tension. This form of the dual theory leads to another solution for the auxiliary gauge field.
In section 5, the noncommutativity parameter is related to its $T$-dual and its $SL(2;R)$ dual versions. We shall see that on the effective variables, $T$-duality and $SL(2;R)$ duality do not commute. In addition, the invariance of the quantity $\frac{G_s}{g_s}$, under the $T$-duality and $SL(2;R)$ duality will be shown.
In section 6, we study the Chern-Simons (CS) action. For its commutative theory, for example, see Ref.[@10] and for its noncommutative version, e.g. see Ref.[@11; @12]. The effects of the $SL(2;R)$ group on the noncommutative CS action will be studied. We observe that under twice dualization this action remains invariant.
Noncommutative DBI Lagrangian and its $SL(2;R)$ duality
=======================================================
Now we study the action of the $SL(2;R)$ group on the noncommutative DBI Lagrangian. We consider an arbitrary $Dp$-brane. Consider the noncommutative DBI Lagrangian [@8] \_[(0)]{} = , where the index zero shows the cases with zero extra modulus, i.e. $\Phi=0$. From the definitions of the open string variables $G_{(0)\mu\nu}$, $G^{(0)}_s$ and the noncommutativity parameter $\theta^{\mu\nu}_0$, in terms of the closed string variables $g_{\mu\nu} , B_{\mu\nu}$ and $g_s$ (whit $\mu,\nu =0,1,...,p$), & &G\_[(0)]{}=g\_-(2’)\^2 (Bg\^[-1]{}B)\_,\
& &\^\_0=-(2’)\^2 B \^,\
& &G\^[(0)]{}\_s = g\_s \^[1/2]{}, one can find their $SL(2;R)$ transformations. We also require transformation of ${\widehat F}_{\mu\nu}$.
According to the following relation [@8] = (1 + F)\^[-1]{}F, transformation of the noncommutative field strength ${\widehat F}_{\mu\nu}$ can be obtained from the transformations of $\theta^{\mu\nu}$ and the ordinary field strength $F_{\mu\nu}$.
It has been discussed by Townsend [@9] that for $D$-string there are two $U(1)$ gauge fields $F_{\mu\nu}$ and ${\bar F_{\mu\nu}}$, which form an $SL(2;R)$ doublet, related to the doublet $\left( \begin{array}{c} B_{\mu\nu} \\ C_{\mu\nu}
\end{array} \right)$. Also see the Ref.[@13]. We assume that the field strength ${\bar F}_{\mu\nu}$ can be applied to any $Dp$-brane. Therefore, $F_{\mu\nu}$ and ${\bar F_{\mu\nu}}$ can be interpreted as DBI fields, but not both simultaneously. Thus, the ordinary gauge field strengths $F_{\mu\nu}$ and ${\bar F}_{\mu\nu}$ transform in the same way as the fields $B_{\mu\nu}$ and $C_{\mu\nu}$, & & F\_ \_ = dF\_ -c[|F]{}\_,\
& & [|F]{}\_ \_ = -bF\_+a[|F]{}\_. Imposing the $SL(2;R)$ invariance on the ordinary (noncommutative) DBI theory, gives ${\bar F}_{\mu\nu}$ in terms of $F_{\mu\nu}$ ($F_{\mu\nu}$ and $\theta^{\mu\nu}$).
Commutative result
------------------
Consider the case $C_{\mu\nu}=\frac{d}{c}B_{\mu\nu}$. This means that the field ${\tilde B}_{\mu\nu}$ is zero. In other words, the transformed theory is not noncommutative. Therefore, the $SL(2;R)$ transformation of the Lagrangian (3) reduces to = . For ${\bar F}=\frac{d-\eta}{c}F-\frac{\eta}{c}B$, the Lagrangian (7) is proportional to the DBI Lagrangian, i.e., = \^\_[DBI]{}. This equation can be interpreted as follows. The Lagrangian ${\tilde {\cal{L}}}$ describes the same $Dp$-brane which is described by ${\cal{L}}_{DBI}$, but with the modified tension \_p=. For the $D3$-brane, theory is symmetric, i.e. ${\tilde {\cal{L}}}=
{\cal{L}}_{DBI}$, as expected. For the strong coupling of strings $g_s \rightarrow \infty$, the modified tension ${\bar T}_p$ goes to zero. For the weak coupling constant $g_s \rightarrow 0$, this tension for $D$-particle goes to zero, for $D$-string is finite and for $Dp$-brane with $p \geq 2$ approaches to infinity. We also can write \_p = , = .
Noncommutative result with $\Phi =0$
------------------------------------
Now we find the conditions for the invariance of the noncommutative theory with zero modulus $\Phi$. Consider the following relations between the scalars and 2-forms & &e\^[2]{} = ,\
& &C\_ = B\_, which are equivalent to $\eta =1$ and ${\tilde B}_{\mu\nu}=B_{\mu\nu}$, respectively. These assumptions lead to the relations ${\tilde G}^{(0)}_s = G^{(0)}_s$, ${\tilde G}_{(0)\mu\nu}=G_{(0)\mu\nu}$ and ${\tilde \theta}^{\mu\nu}_0 = \theta^{\mu\nu}_0$. In addition, the field strength should be selfdual or anti-selfdual, i.e., ${\widetilde {\widehat F}}= \pm {\widehat F}$. Therefore, the noncommutative theory (3) becomes $SL(2;R)$ invariant. Since for any matrix $M$ there is $\det M = \det M^T$, the anti-selfdual case for the Lagrangian (3) also is available. In other words, we have $\det (G_{(0)}-2\pi \alpha' {\widehat F})=
\det (G_{(0)}-2\pi \alpha' {\widehat F})^T=
\det (G_{(0)}+2\pi \alpha' {\widehat F})$.
According to the equation (5), the condition on the field strength ${\widehat F}$ gives ${\tilde F}$ and consequently ${\bar F}$ in terms of $F$ and $\theta_0$, = F \[F\^[-1]{}+(11)\_0\]\^[-1]{}. This is a way to determine the auxiliary field strength ${\bar F}_{\mu\nu}$. For the selfdual case (i.e. the upper signs) the field strength ${\bar F}$ is proportional to $F$. For the anti-selfdual case (i.e. the lower signs) we have +=. This means that, ${-\theta_0^{-1}}$ is harmonic mean between $F$ and ${\tilde F}$. The equation (13) for the commutative case gives an anti-selfdual $F$, i.e. ${\tilde F}=-F$.
Noncommutative result including $\Phi$
--------------------------------------
The noncommutative DBI Lagrangian with arbitrary noncommutativity parameter has the dual form = , where the effective parameters ${\tilde G}$, ${\tilde \Phi}$ and ${\tilde G}_s$ have been given by the equations = - +, \_s = .
For the equations (11) and selfdual $\theta$, the dual Lagrangian (14) is equal to the noncommutative Lagrangian ${\widehat {\cal{L}}}$ (i.e., equation (14) without tildes) if ${\widehat F}$ is selfdual or =-[F]{}-2. To show invariance under this condition, again use the identity $\det M = \det M^T$.
According to the equation (17) and dual form of the equation (5), the field strength ${\bar F}$ is |F = F+ (1+)\^[-1]{}, where the matrix $\omega$ is = (1+F)\^[-1]{}F(1+2)+2. As expected, the equation (18) for $\Phi=0$ reduces to the equation (12) with plus signs.
Duality of the dual theories
============================
Define the matrix ${\tilde \Lambda}$ as (
[cc]{} [a]{} & [b]{}\
[c]{} & [d]{}
) = (
[cc]{} d & -b\
-c & a
) = \^[-1]{}. Therefore, we can write = , (
[c]{} B\_\
C\_
) = (\^T)\^[-1]{} (
[c]{} [B]{}\_\
[C]{}\_
). Also let the parameter ${\tilde \eta}$ be | [c]{}+[d]{}| = . This gives g\_s = \^2[g]{}\_s,g\_ = [g]{}\_. That is, in some equations if we change the dual quantities with the initial quantities the resulted equations also hold. With this rule, the equations (21) and (23) directly can be obtained from the equations (1) and (2).
For generalization of the above rule let the 2-form $C_{\mu\nu}$ be proportional to $B_{\mu\nu}$ as in the following C\_=B\_. This leads to the relation \_=B\_, or equivalently ${\tilde C}_{\mu\nu}= \frac{1-a\eta}{d-\eta}C_{\mu\nu}$. These equations also hold under the exchange of the dual quantities with the initial quantities. In other words, we have $({\tilde d}-{\tilde \eta}){\tilde B}_{\mu\nu}
={\tilde c}{\tilde C}_{\mu\nu}$, $B_{\mu\nu}={\tilde \eta} {\tilde B}_{\mu\nu}$ and $C_{\mu\nu}= \frac{1-{\tilde a}{\tilde \eta}}{{\tilde d}-{\tilde \eta}}
{\tilde C}_{\mu\nu}$.
According to the equations (2), (4) and (25), for the zero modulus $\Phi$, the transformations of $G_{(0)}$, $\theta_0$ and $G^{(0)}_s$ are as in the following & &[G]{}\_[(0)]{}=G\_[(0)]{},\
& &\^\_0=,\
& &[G]{}\^[(0)]{}\_s=\^2 G\^[(0)]{}\_s. On the other hand, these equations also obey from the above rule.
Since ${\tilde \Lambda}\in SL(2;R)$, we conclude that the initial theory also is $SL(2;R)$ transformed of the dual theory. Therefore, the mentioned rule can be written as SL(2;R)[dualtheory]{},\
SL(2;R)[dualtheory]{} . In other words, twice dualization leaves the theory (and related equations) invariant. Note that “[*initial theory*]{}” refers to the type IIB theory or DBI theory. In the next sections, we shall see that the rule (27) will be repeated. For example, it also holds for the noncommutative DBI theory, ordinary and noncommutative Chern-Simons actions. The statement (27) for the ordinary DBI theory is obvious, i.e., \_[DBI]{} = \_[DBI]{}.
Relations between the effective variables
=========================================
The noncommutative DBI Lagrangian and the $SL(2;R)$ duality of it can be described more generally, such that the noncommutativity parameters $\theta$ and ${\tilde \theta}$ become arbitrary [@8]. Therefore, the extra moduli $\Phi$ and ${\tilde \Phi}$ are not zero (for example, the dual theory was given by the equation (14)). The equations (26) guide us to introduce the following relations between the effective metrics and the extra moduli & &[G]{}\_=G\_,\
& &\_=\_. According to the equations (15) and (29) we obtain \^=. This implies that, if the effective theory is noncommutative (ordinary) the dual theory of it also is noncommutative (ordinary). Note that if we introduce the equation (30) then we obtain the equations (29). The equations (16) and (30) give the following relation between the effective string couplings ${\tilde G}_s$ and $G_s$, \_s=\^2 G\_s.
The equations (29)-(31) have the following properties. (a) They are consistent with the rule (27). In other words, they can be written in the forms $G_{\mu\nu}={\tilde \eta} {\tilde G}_{\mu\nu}$, $\Phi_{\mu\nu}={\tilde \eta} {\tilde \Phi}_{\mu\nu}$, $\theta^{\mu\nu}=\frac{{\tilde \theta}^{\mu\nu}}{{\tilde \eta}}\;$ and $G_s={\tilde \eta}^2 {\tilde G}_s$. (b) For the commutative case, i.e., $\theta=0$ we have ${\tilde \theta}=0$. Thus, the equations (29) change to ${\tilde g_{\mu\nu}}=\eta g_{\mu\nu}$ and ${\tilde B_{\mu\nu}}=\eta B_{\mu\nu}$. (c) For the variables & &=B\^[-1]{},G=-(2’)\^2Bg\^[-1]{}B, =-B,\
& &=[B]{}\^[-1]{},=-(2’)\^2 [B]{}[g]{}\^[-1]{}[B]{},=-[B]{}, the equations (29) and (30) reduce to identities. Note that these variables also satisfy the equation (15) and this equation without tildes. (d) For $\theta =\theta_0$ the equation (30) gives ${\tilde \theta} ={\tilde \theta}_0$, therefore, $\Phi={\tilde \Phi}=0$. In this case as expected, there are $G=G_{(0)}$, ${\tilde G}=
{\tilde G}_{(0)}$, $G_s=G_s^{(0)}$ and ${\tilde G}_s
={\tilde G}_s^{(0)}$. On the other hand, the equations (29)-(31) reduce to the results (26).
The equations (25), (29), (30) and the second equation of (2) lead to the relations & &[Q\_[(1)]{}]{}\^[Q]{}\_[(2)]{}= Q\_[(1)]{}\^Q\_[(2)]{},\
& &[Q]{}\^\_[(1)]{}Q\_[(2)]{}= Q\^\_[(1)]{}[Q]{}\_[(2)]{}, where $Q_1, Q_2 \in \{G,\Phi, \theta,g,B\}$. That is, the quantities $Q_{(1)}^{\mu\nu}Q_{(2)\rho\sigma}$ and ${\tilde Q}^{\mu\nu}_{(1)}
Q_{(2)\rho\sigma}$ are $SL(2;R)$ invariant. On the other hand, since we have ${\tilde {\tilde Q}}_{(i)}=Q_{(i)}$ for $i = 1,2$, the equations (33) are consistent with the rule (27).
According to the equations (29) and (31), for the following values of the dual field ${\widetilde {\widehat F}}$, = , the dual Lagrangian (14) takes the form = \^. After substituding (34) in (14), for the lower signs one should perform transpose on the matrices in (14). Again use the identity $\det M =\det M^T$. This Lagrangian describes the same noncommutative $Dp$-brane, which also is given by ${\widehat {\cal {L}}}$, but with the modified tension, i.e., ${\bar {\widehat T}}_p=\eta^{\frac{p-3}{2}}{\widehat T}_p $. For the $D3$-brane the theory is invariant. For the commutative case, the equation (35) reduces to the equation (8), as expected.
The equation (34) with lower signs, is generalization of the equation (17). The field strength ${\bar F}$, extracted from the equation (34), is = F+ (1+ )\^[-1]{}, where the matrix $\Omega$ is = (1+F)\^[-1]{} F\[1 + (1 1)\] +(1 1).
Since the equation (34) can be written as ${\widehat F} = {\tilde \eta} [\pm {\widetilde{\widehat F}}-
(1\mp 1){\tilde \Phi}]$, this with the equations (29)-(31) imply that, in the rule (27) the “[*initial theory*]{}” also can be the noncommutative DBI theory. This also can be seen from the equation (35), i.e. ${\widehat {\cal {L}}}=
{\tilde \eta}^{\frac{p-3}{2}}{\widetilde {\widehat {\cal {L}}}}$, or equivalently = .
Commutator of the $SL(2;R)$ duality and $T$-duality on the effective variables
==============================================================================
Previously we have observed that the effective metric $G_{(0)\mu\nu}$ and the noncommutativity parameter $\theta^{\mu\nu}_0$ under the $T$-duality transform to $G'_{(0)\mu\nu}$ and ${\theta'}^{\mu\nu}_0$ as in the following [@14] & &G’\_[(0)]{}=g\_,\
& &[’\_0]{}\^=(2’)\^2 (B\^[-1]{})\^. The actions of $SL(2;R)$ duality on these equations give & &\_ =g\_,\
& &\^ = (2’)\^2 (B\^[-1]{})\^. Application of $T$-duality on the first and second equations of (26) and then comparison of the results with the equations (40), lead to the relations & &\[ -([G]{}\_0)’\]\_= (-’)G’\_[(0)]{} ,\
& &\[ -(\_0)’\]\^= -\^, where $\eta'$ is $T$-duality of $\eta$. These equations imply that, on the open string metric and noncommutativity parameter, unless $\eta=\eta'$, $T$-duality and $SL(2;R)$ duality do not commute with each other. We shall show that for the nonzero modulus $\Phi$, these equations also hold.
In the presence of the extra modulus $\Phi$, we have the following relation [@14] G’+2’ ’= (g+2’ B)\^[-1]{} (G-2’ ) (g-2’ B)\^[-1]{}. Therefore, there is the following relation between the noncommutativity parameter $\theta^{\mu\nu}$ and its $T$-duality ${\theta'}^{\mu\nu}$, \^=-\[(g-2’B) (g+2’B) \]\^. According to this equation and equation (30) we obtain \^=-\^. That is, the $T$-duality and $SL(2;R)$ duality versions of the noncommutativity parameter are related to each other.
Action of the $SL(2;R)$ duality on $G'$, $\Phi'$ and $\theta'$ of the equations (42) and (43) and also action of $T$-duality on ${\widetilde G}$, ${\widetilde \Phi}$ and ${\widetilde \theta}$ of the equations (29) and (30), and then comparison of the results, give & &\[-([Q]{})’\]\_=(-’) Q’\_,\
& &\[-()’\]\^ =(-) [’]{}\^, where $Q\in \{G,\Phi \}$. Let us denote the dualities of $Q$ as $Q' \equiv TQ $ and ${\tilde Q} \equiv SQ$. Thus, the equations (45) take the forms & &(\[S,T\] Q)\_=(-’) (TQ)\_,\
& &(\[S,T\])\^=(-) (T)\^. Similarly, for the effective string coupling $G_s$ there is G\_s=(\^[(3-p)/2]{}-’\^2) (TG\_s). Therefore, on the variables $G$, $\Phi$, $\theta$ and $G_s$ $T$-duality and $SL(2;R)$ duality do not commute. In other words, the commutator of these dualities, is proportional to the effects of $T$-duality.
The $T$-duality of the effective string coupling is $G'_s=\frac{G_s}{
\sqrt{ \det (g+2\pi \alpha'B)}}$. This implies $\frac{G_s}{g_s}$ is a $T$-duality invariant quantity [@14]. From this and the equation (31) we conclude that ==. That is, the ratio $\frac{G_s}{g_s}$ also is invariant under the $SL(2;R)$ duality. Therefore, on the quantity $\frac{G_s}{g_s}$, $T$-duality and $SL(2;R)$ duality commute.
$SL(2;R)$ duality of the noncommutative Chern-Simons action
===========================================================
The DBI action describes the couplings of a $Dp$-brane to the massless Neveu-Schwarz fields $g_{\mu\nu}$, $B_{\mu\nu}$ and $\phi$. The interactions with the massless Ramond-Ramond (R-R) fields are incorporated in the Chern- Simons action [@10] S\_[CS]{}= \_n C\^[(n)]{} e\^[2’(B+F)]{}, where $C^{(n)}$ denotes the $n$-form R-R potential. The exponential should be expanded so that the total forms have the rank of the worldvolume of brane. In fact, this action is for a single BPS $Dp$-brane.
The noncommutative Chern-Simons action for constant fields can be written as in the following [@11] \_[CS]{}= \_n C\^[(n)]{} 2’\[B+[F]{}(1-)\^[-1]{}\] , also see Ref.[@12]. This action holds for general modulus $\Phi$. It describes the R-R couplings to a noncommutative $Dp$-brane.
Now we study the effects of the $SL(2;R)$ group on this action. We can apply ${\widetilde {\widehat F}}$ from (34). For simplicity, choose the upper signs for ${\widetilde {\widehat F}}$. In addition, the equations (25) and (30) can be used for ${\tilde B}$ and ${\tilde \theta}$. Adding all these together, we obtain \_[CS]{}= \_n [C]{}\^[(n)]{} 2’. Therefore, we should determine the dual fields $\{{\tilde C}^{(n)}\}$. Since our attention is on the type IIB theory, ${\tilde C}^{(n)}$ is an even form. The dual fields ${\tilde C}^{(0)} \equiv {\tilde \chi}$ and ${\tilde C}^{(2)}\equiv {\tilde C}$ have been given by the transformations (1). The field $C^{(4)}$ corresponds to the $D3$-brane. It was shown in [@3; @4] that the invariance of the equations of motion, extracted from the total action $S_{DBI}+S_{CS}$, under the $SL(2;R)$ group, gives the transformations (1) and C\^[(4)]{} \^[(4)]{}=C\^[(4)]{}. For the forms ${\tilde C}^{(6)}$, ${\tilde C}^{(8)}$ and ${\tilde C}^{(10)}$ one may use the Hodge duals of the forms ${\tilde C}^{(4)}$, ${\tilde C}^{(2)}$ and ${\tilde C}^{(0)}$, which are available. However, we have the following results at least for $n \leq 4$.
The noncommutative Chern-Simons action (50) respects the rule (27), if twice dualization of the R-R fields are invariant \^[(n)]{}=C\^[(n)]{}. From the transformations (1) and (52) explicitly one can see this equation for $C^{(0)}$, $C^{(2)}$ and $C^{(4)}$. On the other hand, using (53) (at least for $n\leq 4$) and then applying $SL(2;R)$ transformations on the dual action (51), we obtain \_[CS]{}=[S]{}\_[CS]{}.
From the equations (1), (2), (6) and (20) we have ${\tilde {\tilde B}}_{\mu\nu}= B_{\mu\nu}$, ${\tilde {\tilde g}}_s= g_s$ and ${\tilde {\tilde F}}_{\mu\nu}= F_{\mu\nu}$. By considering the equation (53), we observe that the ordinary Chern-Simons action (49) also obey the rule (27), \_[CS]{}=S\_[CS]{}. For vanishing noncommutativity parameter, the equation (54) reduces to (55), as expected.
Conclusions
===========
We studied the action of the $SL(2;R)$ group on the noncommutative DBI theory with zero and nonzero extra modulus $\Phi$. The invariance of the theory determines the corresponding noncommutative field strength ${\widehat F}_{\mu\nu}$. As a consequence, the auxiliary field strength ${\bar F}_{\mu\nu}$ has been obtained. For a special value of the R-R 2-form, the $SL(2;R)$ group on the noncommutative DBI Lagrangian produces a theory which describes an ordinary brane with the modified tension. For the $D3$-brane the resulted ordinary theory is DBI theory, as expected.
We observed that the extracted equations of the ordinary DBI and noncommutative DBI theories under the exchange of the variables with their dual variables are invariant. In other words, twice dualizing of these theories and the corresponding variables and equations, does not change them. This implies that these theories and their $SL(2;R)$ transformations, are dual of each other.
By introducing some relations (which are consistent with the rule (27)) between the effective variables and their duals, we obtained some other equations that are $SL(2;R)$ invariant. Therefore, another solution for the auxiliary gauge field was found. In this case, $SL(2;R)$ duality of the noncommutative DBI theory is proportional to the noncommutative DBI theory. For the $D3$-brane the theory is selfdual.
We showed that the noncommutativity parameter, its $T$-dual and its $SL(2;R)$ dual have relations with each other. We found that on the open string metric, noncommutativity parameter, the extra modulus $\Phi$ and the effective string coupling, $T$-duality and $SL(2;R)$ duality do not commute. We also observed that the ratio of the effective string coupling to the string coupling under the above dualities is invariant.
Finally, we studied the effects of the $SL(2;R)$ group on the noncommutative Chern-Simons action. Under two successive dualizations, similar the DBI theory, this action remains invariant. This also occurs for the ordinary Chern-Simons action.
[99]{}
S.J. Rey, Phys. Rev. [**D43**]{}(1991)526; A. Font, L. Ibanez, D. Lust and F. Quevedo, Phys. Lett. [**B249**]{}(1990)35; M.J. Duff and R.R. Khuri, Nucl. Phys. [**B411**]{}(1994)473; A. Sen, Nucl. Phys. [**B404**]{}(1993)109; Phys. Lett. [**B303**]{}(1993)22; Mod. Phys. Lett. [**A8**]{}(1993)2023; J.H. Schwarz and A. Sen, Phys. Lett. [**B312**]{}(1993)105; M.J. Duff and J. Rahmfeld, Phys. Lett. [**B345**]{}(1995)441. C. Hull and P.K. Townsend, Nucl. Phys. [**B438**]{}(1995)109; A. Sen, Int. J. Mod. Phys. [**A9**]{}(1994)3707, hep-th/9402002. A.A. Tseytlin, Nucl. Phys. [**B469**]{}(1996)51, hep-th/9602064. M.B. Green and M. Gutperle, Phys. Lett. [**B377**]{}(1996)28, hep-th/9602077. E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. [**B460**]{}(1996)335, hep-th/9510135; M. Dc Roo, Nucl. Phys. [**B255**]{}(1985)515; J.H. Schwarz, Phys. Lett. [**B360**]{}(1995)13, hep-th/9508143; G.W. Gibbons and D.A. Rasheed, Phys. Lett. [**B365**]{}(1996)46, hep-th/9509141; M. Cederwall and P.K. Townsend, JHEP [**9709**]{}(1997)003, hep-th/9709002; A. Sen, Phys. Lett. [**B329**]{}(1994)217, hep-th/9402032. S.J. Rey and R. von Unge, Phys. Lett. [**B499**]{}(2001)215, hep-th/0007089; R. Gopakumar, J. Maldacena, S. Minwalla and A. Strominger, JHEP [**0006**]{}(2000)036, hep-th/0005048; J.X. Lu, S. Roy and H. Singh, JHEP [**0009**]{}(2000)020, hep-th/0006193; Nucl. Phys. [**B595**]{}(2001)298, hep-th/0007168; D.S. Berman, Phys. Lett. [**B409**]{}(1997)153, hep-th/9706208; C. Hofman and E. Verlinde, JHEP [**9812**]{}(1998)010, hep-th/9810116; C.S. Chan, A. Hashimoto and H. Verlinde, JHEP [**0109**]{}(2001)034, hep-th/0107215; R.G. Cai and N. Ohta, Prog. Theor. Phys. [**104**]{}(2000)1073, hep-th/0007106. M. Born and L. Infeld, Proc. R. Soc. [**A144**]{}(1934)425; R.G. Leigh, Mod. Phys. Lett. [**A4**]{}(1989)2767; A.A. Tseytlin, Nucl. Phys. [**B276**]{}(1986)391; Nucl. Phys. [**B501**]{} (1997)41, hep-th/9701125; E.S. Fradkin and A.A. Tseytlin, Phys. Lett. [**B163**]{}(1985)123; C.G. Callan, C. Lovelace, C.R. Nappi and S.A. Yost, Nucl. Phys. [**B288**]{}(1987)525-550; A. Abouelsaood, C.G. Callan, C.R. Nappi and S.A. Yost, Nucl. Phys. [**B280**]{}(1987)599. N. Seiberg and E. Witten, JHEP [**9909**]{}(1999)032, hep-th/9908142. P.K. Townsend, Phys. Lett. [**B409**]{}(1997)131, hep-th/9705160. M.R. Douglas, hep-th/9512077; M. Li, Nucl. Phys. [**B460**]{}(1996)351, hep-th/9510161; M.B. Green, J.A. Harvey and G. Moore, Class. Quant. Grav. [**14**]{}(1997) 47, hep-th/9605033. S. Mukhi and N.V. Suryanarayana, JHEP [**0011**]{}(2000)006, hep-th/0009101; hep-th/0107087. H. Liu and J. Michelson, Phys. Lett. [**B518**]{}(2001)143, hep-th/0104139. P.K. Townsend, Phys. Lett. [**B277**]{}(1992)285; E. Bergshoeff, L.A.J. London and P.K. Townsend, Class. Quant. Grav. [**9**]{} (1992)2545, hep-th/9206026. D. Kamani, Mod. Phys. Lett. [**A17**]{}(2002)237, hep-th/0107184.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We generalize the concept of parity-time symmetric structures with the goal to create meta-atoms exhibiting extraordinary abilities to overcome the presumed limitations in the scattering of overall lossless particles, such as non-zero forward scattering and the equality of scattering and extinction powers for all lossless particles. Although the forward scattering amplitude and the extinction cross section of our proposed meta-atoms vanish, they scatter incident energy into other directions, with controllable directionality. These meta-atoms possess extreme electromagnetic properties not achievable for passive scatterers. As an example, we study meta-atoms consisting of two or three small dipole scatterers. We consider possible microwave realizations in the form of short dipole antennas loaded by lumped elements. The proposed meta-atom empowers extraordinary response of a shadow-free scatterer and theoretically enables most unusual material properties when used as a building block of an artificial medium.'
author:
- 'M. Safari$^{1}$, M. Albooyeh$^{2,\ast}$, C. R. Simovski$^{3}$, and S. A. Tretyakov$^{3}$'
title: 'Shadow-free multimers as extreme-performance meta-atoms'
---
Introduction
============
The metamaterial paradigm is based on engineering electrically (optically) small particles called *meta-atoms* and exploiting them as optimized ingredients of composites with engineered electromagnetic properties (see e.g. [@Kildishev; @Yuflat; @TretyakovMSs; @Glybovski; @MoGeneral]). The ultimate goal of the metamaterial technology development would be to find means for realizations of *any arbitrary* material properties, which would require creation of meta-atoms with any arbitrary electromagnetic response. Basically, within the idealistic scenario we would like to be able to engineer and control the polarizabilities, the scattering cross sections and absorption cross sections of meta-atoms with full freedom. For an arbitrary particle that is sufficiently small in order to be described by a pair of the electric and magnetic dipole moments $\_p$ and $\_m$, the most general linear relations between these moments and the local fields $\_E$ and $\_H$ read \_p=\_[ee]{} \_E+\_[em]{}\_H,\_m=\_[mm]{} \_H+\_[me]{}\_E .Here, $\alpha_{\rm ee}$, $\alpha_{\rm mm}$, $\alpha_{\rm em}$, and $\alpha_{\rm me}$ are, respectively, electric, magnetic, magnetoelectric, and electromagnetic polarizabilities of the meta-atom, which are scalar values for an isotropic meta-atom and dyadics (tensors) in an anisotropic case [@biama; @MoGeneral; @YazdiAnalysis]. Notice that the last two polarizabilities i.e., $\alpha_{\rm em}$ and $\alpha_{\rm me}$ describe the bianisotropic response of the meta-atom which is a measure of coupling between the electric (magnetic) response of the meta-atom and the magnetic (electric) excitation field. The ultimate goal would be the full design control over the values of the four dyadic polarizabilities of the meta-atom.
However, the design freedom is limited by fundamental physics. For example, the conservation of energy imposes non-zero radiation losses for all passive particles (scatterers). Moreover, it dictates that four noted polarizabilities of a meta-atom cannot be tuned independently from each other [@condition]. By applying the energy conservation for the simplest case of a lossless electric dipole polarizable meta-atom (when $\alpha_{\rm em}=\alpha_{\rm me}=\alpha_{\rm mm}=0$) in an incident electromagnetic wave one obtains [@Sipe; @condition; @modeboo; @conditiongeneral] =[Re]{}([1\_[ee]{}]{})+j[k\^36\_0]{}, ł[cond2]{}where $k$ and $\epsilon_0$ are the ambient wavenumber and permittivity, respectively (e.g. [@modeboo]). Condition means that the imaginary part of the inverse polarizability of a lossless dipolar particle is fixed and there is no freedom to engineer it.
Next, for a lossless isotropic scatterer both the coupling coefficients $\alpha_{\rm em}$ and $\alpha_{\rm me}$ vanish if $\alpha_{\rm ee}\alpha_{\rm mm}=0$ [@Mo1]. Thus, it appears that in order to create magnetic polarization in an applied electric field, one must obviously polarize the meta-atom electrically and vice versa. Indeed, hypothetical meta-atoms modeled by \_p=\_[em]{}\_H, \_m=\_[me]{}\_E ł[pure]{}are forbidden if are lossless. The existence of such meta-atoms is not compatible with the classical limitations based on the energy conservation principle. However, such meta-atoms called *purely bianisotropic particles* would be extremely interesting and practically useful [@Mo1].
Furthermore, energy conservation considerations lead to the optical theorem which defines a connection between the forward scattering amplitude and the total extinction cross section that is valid for all passive particles. In particular, if the particle is passive and absorptive, its forward scattering cross section and the extinction cross section are not zero even for meta-atoms with exotic properties (see e.g. [@Alaeemagnetoelectric; @Alaeephase; @Darvishzadeh1; @Yazdibianisotropic]). In other words, if a particle receives some power from the incident waves, it must create some shadow. This limitation does not allow us to realize an “invisible” meta-atom interacting with the incident fields and extracting power from them while casting no shadow.
Recently, a new concept of parity-time (PT) symmetric structures gained a lot of attention in the literature (e.g. see [@Bender; @Vino_review]). PT-symmetric structures possess properties which are invariant with respect to the inversion of both spatial coordinates and time. For example, dielectric objects are said to be PT-symmetric if the following symmetry relation for the complex permittivity holds: (\_r)=\^\*(-\_r), ł[eps\_comp]{}where $*$ denotes complex conjugation and $\_r$ is the position vector. For example, if we fill one half of a sphere with a dielectric with the permittivity $\epsilon=\epsilon'-j\epsilon''$ and the other half with the material modelled by $\epsilon=\epsilon'+j\epsilon''$, this sphere will be a PT-symmetric structure. PT-symmetric objects appear to be overall lossless, and they seem to be able to overcome the presumed limitations of non-zero forward scattering and the equality of scattering and extinction powers for passive and lossless scatterers.
Basically, one can create a structure where the lossy half receives some power from the incident fields while the active half re-radiates the same amount of power into the forward direction, so that there is no shadow behind. This property was demonstrated, both theoretically and experimentally, for acoustic waves using two speakers [@Alu]. Does it mean that we are able to realize an “invisible medium” formed by PT-symmetric meta-atoms? If yes, what would be a suitable topology for meta-atoms composing such media? Perhaps, the simplest overall lossless electromagnetic structure that would apparently be shadow-free is depicted in Fig. \[fig:fig2\].
Assuming that the polarizabilities of the constituents of this dimer of electric dipoles are such that the two induced dipoles are equal in the amplitude and oscillate with opposite phases, we see that the forward scattering amplitude is exactly zero while the object scatters some power in other directions. Realization of this regime is not possible for any passive scatterer, and this structure is not PT-symmetric either. Although the forward scattering amplitude and the extinction cross section are zero, the loss is not compensated by gain since the scattering cross section is not zero. Clearly, the scattering pattern depicted in Fig. \[fig:fig2\](b) must be accompanied by scattering losses. Thus, without a detailed analysis it remains unclear if a PT symmetric structure in free space can be shadow-free.
Next, the limitation on the values of bianisotropic parameters, which forbids realization of particles obeying also comes from the basic properties of *usual* lossless particles. Since the example in Fig. \[fig:fig2\] shows that the limitation on forward scattering can be overcome, can we find meta-atoms which would be overall lossless but still violate the restrictive conditions [@condition] realizing constitutive relations ? It would be interesting to see how to realize in practice a shadow-free lossless scatterer and a purely bianisotropic lossless scatterer. These are the questions we address in this work.
Parity-time symmetry and loss compensation for finite-size objects in unbounded space
=====================================================================================
Since we are interested in engineered properties of small particles in open space, we start with a general discussion of the means to overcome the presumed limitations of zero forward scattering and the equality of extinction and scattering by passive and lossless scatterers using PT-symmetric objects. The known theoretical and experimental work on PT-symmetric structures which produce no shadow deal with scatterers in a waveguide environment [@Alu]. Recently, similar scenario for small scatterers in free space has been considered [@Alu_APS] with the conclusion that PT-symmetric dimers enable unusual scattering phenomena, including zero extinction and large scattering. Here we discuss the concept of PT-symmetry of objects in open space in general, and show that they cannot be PT-symmetric in the strict sense, leading to definition of [*shadow-free*]{} and [*loss-compensated*]{} scatterers.
![Conceptual illustration of the PT-symmetry concept in a closed waveguide (a-c) and for a compact scatterer in free space (d-f).[]{data-label="fig:PT_open"}](PT-concept1ab.pdf){width="49.00000%"}
The top three panels of Fig. \[fig:PT\_open\] illustrate the conventional scenario of a PT-symmetric object in a closed waveguide environment. We denote the characteristic impedance of the waveguide by $\eta_0$. A PT-symmetric obstacle (for instance, a double dielectric layer whose permittivity obeys relation ) is illuminated by a wave created by an ideal voltage source. For simplicity we assume that there are no reflections from the scatterer towards the source. Panel (b) shows this structure after the operation of time reversal. The power propagation direction is reversed, the active source becomes power sink and the source is replaced by a matched load. Next, we apply the spatial coordinate inversion \[see panel (c)\]. This operation brings the system to its initial state \[i.e., panel (a)\] and obviously demonstrates that the system is symmetric under the two successive operations of time reversal and space inversion (i.e., it is a PT-symmetric system).
Let us now consider the same scenario for a compact object (again, as the same example, a dielectric object whose permittivity obeys relation ). This case is illustrated in panels (d-f). The fundamental difference with the previous case is that polarizable objects scatter power into various directions, which physically means that there is dissipation loss at infinity (where the scattered power is eventually dissipated), measured by the radiation resistance of the scatterer \[denoted by $R_{\rm rad}$ in Fig. \[fig:PT\_open\]\]. In the illustration in panel (d) we assume that the scattering is symmetric with respect to left and right half-spaces (it does not have to be symmetric, in general), and conceptually indicate this dissipation loss at infinity as two absorbing hemispheres with the respective distributed surface resistance. The remaining two panels illustrate the results of time inversion followed by space inversion. Obviously, PT symmetry cannot be ensured because the symmetry relation must hold globally, that is, the environment at infinity must have also symmetrically distributed and balanced gain and loss properties.
On the other hand, the numerical example of Fig.\[fig:fig2\] shows that pairs of properly engineered active and lossy scatterers in open space can show properties which are very similar to those of PT-symmetric objects in waveguides, in particular, zero forward scattering amplitude while the total scattering cross section is not zero. We call these interesting objects shadow-free dimers, and in the next section we consider their properties in some detail.
The impossibility to achieve true PT-symmetric scattering response using complex conjugate permittivities was noted in the conference abstract [@Alu_APS]. In that work, the authors added gain to both elements of the dimer to offset the radiation loss, however, we note that even with this added gain, the structure does not become PT-symmetric. Scattering by cylinders obeying was studied in [@Miri], where it was assumed that these scatterers were PT-symmetric.
Shadow-free dimers {#sec:pt_dim}
==================
Balance of loss and gain and zero forward scattering
----------------------------------------------------
As a simple conceptual example of a small meta-atom with both lossy and active components we consider a pair of two closely positioned electrically polarizable scatterers, similarly to the scenario studied in [@Alu_APS]. Each of the scatterers is approximated as a Hertzian dipole: an electric dipole antenna with the electrically negligible length $l$ and a uniform current along the antenna. We assume that the two antennas are parallel and the distance between them $d$ is very small compared to the wavelength $\lambda$ (but still much larger than the negligibly small length of each antenna $l$, i.e., $l\ll d\ll\lambda$. A uniform current distribution in a short conducting wire can be approximately realized using capacitive caps at the two ends of the wire. Alternatively, we can work with ordinary short wire antennas, replacing in all the following formulas the Hertzian dipole length $l$ by the length of one antenna arm $l/2$ as its effective length [@Schelk].
In order to be able to control the currents induced in the antennas by the incident fields, we load both antennas by some lumped impedances $Z_{\rm 1L}$ and $Z_{\rm 2L}$. In particular, we will be interested in the situations when this pair forms a loss-compensated structure. Thus, we allow the real parts of the load impedances be positive or negative, so that the absorption and scattering can be balanced with gain.
This system can be analyzed using the antenna theory and the corresponding equivalent circuit. Let us assume that the dimer is excited by an external electromagnetic plane wave, propagating in the direction normal to the dimer plane. In this case the amplitudes of the external electric fields at the positions of the two antennas are equal (we denote the complex amplitude of the incident electric fields as $E_{\rm inc}$). The currents $I_{1,2}$ induced on the two dipoles obey linear relations I\_1(Z\_[inp]{}+Z\_[1L]{})+I\_2 Z\_[m]{}=E\_[inc]{}l,ł[I1]{}I\_2(Z\_[inp]{}+Z\_[2L]{})+I\_1 Z\_[m]{}=E\_[inc]{}l.ł[I2]{}The source voltages are the products of the incident electric fields at the positions of the two dipole antennas and the effective length of the antennas. The impedances are the sums of the input impedances of the dipole antennas $Z_{\rm inp}$ and the corresponding load impedances $Z_{\rm 1,2L}$. Moreover, the mutual impedance between the two dipoles is denoted by $Z_{\rm m}$. Knowing all the parameters, we can easily solve for the induced currents $I_{1,2}$ and find the induced electric and magnetic dipole moments in the dimer (induced dipole moments are proportional to the currents flowing in the two wire antennas).
Let us study the most interesting scenario when the loads are selected so that $I_2=-I_1$, realizing the regime illustrated in Fig. \[fig:fig2\]. In this situation, the total induced electric moment is zero, but the induced magnetic moment is not zero. Apparently, this dimer would also realize a purely bianisotropic particle, as it obeys relations . The presumed limitation of non-zero forward scattering is violated, at least in the dipole approximation, because the induced magnetic moment is directed along the incidence direction and does not radiate in the forward direction.
From and we can find the two currents I\_1=[Z\_[inp]{}+Z\_[2L]{}-Z\_[m]{}(Z\_[inp]{}+Z\_[1L]{})(Z\_[inp]{}+Z\_[2L]{})-Z\_[m]{}\^2]{}E\_[inc]{}l,ł[I1g]{}I\_2=[Z\_[inp]{}+Z\_[1L]{}-Z\_[m]{}(Z\_[inp]{}+Z\_[1L]{})(Z\_[inp]{}+Z\_[2L]{})-Z\_[m]{}\^2]{}E\_[inc]{}l,ł[I2g]{}and it is easy to derive the condition on the impedances under which $I_2=-I_1$: 2Z\_[inp]{}+Z\_[1L]{}+Z\_[2L]{}-2Z\_[m]{}=0.ł[condi]{}If this condition is satisfied, the induced currents are equal to $$\begin{aligned}
I_1&=&-I_2=\frac{2l}{Z_{1 \rm L}-Z_{2 \rm L}} E_{\rm inc} \nonumber \\
&=& \frac{l}{Z_{1 \rm L}-(Z_{ \rm m}-Z_{ \rm inp})} E_{\rm inc}.
\l{I12}\end{aligned}$$ As noted above, the induced electric dipole of the pair is zero, while the induced magnetic dipole equals $\_m={1\over2}\int \_r\times\_J\, d^3 r =\left({1\over2}I_1 l d\right)\_n$ where $\_n$ is the unit vector normal to the plane of the dipole pair [@alaee1].
Since all the involved impedances are complex numbers, is in fact a set of two conditions for the respective real and imaginary parts. The condition for the imaginary parts (reactances) is always possible to satisfy for any dipole antennas and any distance between them by properly choosing the reactances of the loads. This is possible because reactances of passive circuits can be either positive (inductance) or negative (capacitance), and there is no fundamental limitation on how small or large these reactances can be. However, in order to satisfy the condition on the real parts of the impedances, we have to allow for negative values of the load resistance in at least one of the dipoles. This is obvious from the fact that the real part of $Z_{\rm inp}$ is always positive (it is the radiation resistance of the corresponding dipole), and ${\rm Re}(Z_{\rm m})< {\rm Re}(Z_{\rm inp})$, as long as $d>0$. This is an expected conclusion, because otherwise we would be able to obtain zero extinction cross section, and hence, acquire the unattainable regime of zero forward scattering for a passive scatterer.
An exciting conclusion at this point is that we can overcome this limitation in an *overall lossless* dimer, because the equality of the total resistance to zero means that all losses are exactly compensated by gain.
To estimate the required dimensions and load impedances, we can analytically calculate the input impedance and the mutual impedance. Again we stress that we only need to estimate the corresponding real parts (resistances). The input impedance of a short dipole is well known, and it reads Z\_[inp]{}=+R\_[loss]{}+ R\_[rad]{}, where $C$ is the input capacitance of one of the antennas, $R_{\rm loss}$ is the dissipation loss resistance due to the final conductivity of the antenna wires, and $R_{\rm rad}$ is the radiation resistance of the dipole, which reads [@King_linear; @KH] R\_[rad]{} = \_0 , ł[Rrad]{}where $\eta_0= \sqrt{\frac{\mu_0}{\epsilon_0}}$ the free-space wave impedance and $l$ is the effective length of the dipole i.e., for the case of Hertzian dipole the effective and physical lengths are equal while for the case of short dipole the effective length is half of that of the total physical length. This expression for $R_{\rm rad}$ is valid for electrically short dipoles, when $l\ll \lambda$. The mutual impedance is, by definition, the ratio of the voltage induced in one of the two antennas if the current in the other one is fixed: Z\_[m]{}=[E|\_[r=d]{}lI\_1]{} ,where $E|_{r=d}$ is the electric field (the component along the dipole axis) created by the first antenna maintaining current $I_1$ at the position of the second antenna (at distance $d$).
To calculate this value, we make use of the standard expression of the electric field of a Hertzian dipole in the direction $\theta=\pi/2$ E\_=[I\_1 l4d]{} jk\_0e\^[-jkd]{},ł[Etheta]{}and calculate its real part at distance $d$: (E\_)=[I\_1 l4d]{} k\_0. ł[reE]{}While the reactive field (which determines the imaginary part of the mutual impedance) is very high in the near field, the real part of the field at small distances gives a finite and small value . Multiplying by $l$ and dividing by $I_1$ we find $${\rm Re}(Z_{\rm m})= \eta_0 {(kl)^2\over 4\pi } \left[ {\cos(kd)\over (kd)^2}+{1\over kd}\left(1-{1\over (kd)^2}\right)\sin (kd)\right]$$ \_0 [(kl)\^26]{}.ł[Zmu]{}The approximate relation is obtained by expanding in the Taylor series with respect to $kd$ (valid for $kd\ll 1$). We see that in the limit of $d\rightarrow 0$ it tends to the radiation resistance of a single dipole, that is, to ${\rm Re}(Z_{\rm inp})=\eta_0(kl)^2/(6\pi)$, and for small finite values of $kd$ it is always smaller than that. Formula agrees with the results of Ref.[@Polivka], derived using a different approach.
Now we are ready to calculate the required dipole load resistances which correspond to the regime of zero total induced electric dipole and zero forward scattering amplitude ($I_2=-I_1$). Defining $Z_{1,2 \rm L} =R_{1,2\rm L}+j X_{1,2\rm L}$, the result reads: \_0[(k\^2ld)\^215]{}+ R\_[1L]{}+R\_[2L]{}+2R\_[loss]{} =0 .ł[crit]{} Clearly, the total negative resistance of the two loads must compensate the total dissipation and radiation loss in the system. Note again that the compensation of total loss does not correspond to a PT-symmetric system in the conventional definition: the two load resistance in the two dipoles are not negative to each other. This is explained by the fact that even in the absence of dissipation in the antenna wires, both dipoles always exhibit radiation loss, which also needs to be compensated by an active load. This is an example of *shadow-free scatterers* defined above.
In this regime, incident plane waves excite two equal dipole moments with the opposite directions, i.e., $\_p_1=-\_p_2=\_p=-j{I_1 l\over\omega}\_z$ ($\_z$ is the unit vector in $z$-direction). As is seen in Fig. \[fig:fig2\](b), the radiation pattern has a null in both forward and backward directions. Apparently, the particle has zero radar cross section as well as zero forward cross section. However, it obviously scatters in directions other than the axial ones (here $\phi=0$ and $180^{\circ}$ according to Fig. \[fig:fig2\]). The scattered power density can be analytically solved (see Appendix \[AppA\]) as P\_[scatt]{}=[\_02]{}( kd [\^[2]{}]{} )\^2.ł[eqend]{} We see that the scattered power density is zero only in the directions along the incidence axis ($\phi=0~{\rm and}~\pi$) and when $\theta=0$ or $\pi$.
From Eq. we can find the total scattered power of the scatterer, which reads $$P_{\rm scatt}^{\rm tot}= \frac{\eta_0}{2}{1\over{15\pi}}(k^2ld)^2I_1^2.$$ Normalizing to the amplitude of the incident Poynting vector $P_{\rm inc}={1\over 2\eta_0}|E_{\rm inc}|^2$, we find the total scattering cross section \_[sc]{}= [k\^6]{}[\^2]{}d\^2 in term of the electric polarizability $\alpha_{\rm ee}$ of one of the dipoles, or equivalently \_[sc]{}=d\^2[(kl)\^4 ]{}[\_0\^2|Z\_[1L]{}-Z\_[2L]{}|\^2]{} ł[sc\_eq1]{}in term of the load impedances on the dipoles \[see Eq. \]. It is interesting to compare the scattered power to the total scattered power from a single dipole with the same length $l$ and the same current $I_1$. The total scattering power for such dipole reads (see e.g. [@Balanis]) $$P^{\rm tot}_{\rm dipole}=\frac{\eta_0}{2}\frac{1}{6\pi}(kl)^2I^{2}.\l{dipole_power}$$ The ratio of the total scattered powers of the two closely spaced dipoles with opposite currents and from one dipole equals $$P_{\rm scatt}^{\rm norm}=\frac{P_{\rm scatt}^{\rm tot}}{P^{\rm tot}_{\rm dipole}}=\frac{2}{5}k^2d^2.$$
Next, the absorption cross section is found by normalizing the total power dissipated in the resistive parts of the loads and lost in the conducting dipole arms i.e, $P_{\rm abs}={1\over 2}(R_{\rm 1L}|I_1|^2+R_{\rm 2L}|I_2|^2+R_{\rm loss}|I_1|^2+R_{\rm loss}|I_2|^2)$ to the incident power density. Since at least one of the loads is active (negative resistance), this power can be zero or negative. Substituting the current amplitudes from , we get \_[abs]{}=\_0(2l)\^2[R\_[1L]{}+R\_[2L]{}+2R\_[loss]{}]{}. Finally, the extinction cross section $\sigma_{\rm ext}=\sigma_{\rm sc}+\sigma_{\rm abs}$ reads \_[ext]{}=\_0[4l\^2 |Z\_[1L]{}-Z\_[2L]{}|\^2]{}([[\_0k\^4l\^2]{}]{}d\^2+R\_[1L]{}+R\_[2L]{}+2R\_[loss]{}).ł[extdim]{}Comparing the value in the brackets of Eq. with Eq. , one clearly observes that the extinction cross section equals zero for our proposed shadow-free meta-atom. It means that although the optical theorem is not violated (i.e., $\sigma_{\rm ext}^{\rm Total}=\sigma_{\rm sc}^{\rm Forward}=0$), the total scattering cross section is not zero and the meta-atom scatters in the lateral directions rather than the forward one (see e.g. Figs. \[fig:fig2\] and \[fig:fig3\]).
Let us next study the resonant dependence of the scattering cross sections on the load parameters. Equation tells that, counter-intuitively, the currents in the two out-of-phase dipoles tend to infinity when the two loads become *identical*: i.e., when $Z_{1 \rm L}-Z_{2 \rm L}\rightarrow 0$. Recall that the two dipole antennas are identical, but the loads are chosen so that the currents induced in the two dipoles by *the same* incident field are *opposite* in phase. Actually, from equations and we see that if $Z_{1 \rm L}-Z_{2 \rm L}\rightarrow 0$ and the condition for out-of-phase currents are satisfied together, the numerators of and tend to zero. However, the denominators also tend to zero, faster than the numerators. This can be seen by assuming that $Z_{1L}=Z+a$ and $Z_{2L}=Z-a$, where $Z=Z_{\rm m}-Z_{\rm inp}$ (so that for any complex value of parameter $a$ we satisfy Eq. , ensuring that the current mode is antisymmetric). A simple calculation shows that for $a\rightarrow 0$ I\_[1,2]{} \~ ł[1a]{} which results from the ratio $a/a^2$. The argument of the complex parameter $a$ determines the phase of the induced currents in relation to the phase of the incident field. Thus, we see that in the vicinity of this resonant point the current amplitudes can take arbitrary high values and the particle cross sections have no upper bound.
This shadow-free particle can be classified as a reciprocal bianisotropic particle with the omega type of magnetoelectric coupling [@biama]. More specifically, the property of having zero co-polarizabilities is similar to the property of omega nihility composite materials [@Younes], although here we study single meta-atoms while in [@Younes], effectively homogeneous materials are considered. It is interesting to compare these results to the conclusions of paper , where passive or active particles have been studied. In that paper it is shown that zero forward and back scattering from a single omega particle is possible only if the particle is active. Here we see that it is possible also for overall lossless particles, provided that the loss is balanced with gain. On the other hand, it is important to stress that the gain compensates the *total* loss, including scattering loss (radiation damping). Thus, as discussed above, the loads are not exactly symmetric: the load resistances of the two dipoles are not exactly negative with respect to each other, as is usually required in the definition of PT-symmetric systems . We expect that the symmetry of loads will be exact in the case of a periodical subwavelength arrays of such dimers, where the scattering loss is compensated by particle interactions [@line; @modeboo], or in waveguide set-ups, where scattering is prevented by waveguide walls (as in the acoustical experiments described in [@Alu]).
Numerical example: Finite-size strongly coupled shadow-free dimers {#sec:pt_dim2}
------------------------------------------------------------------
Next we study a particular system of two electrically small but finite-length loaded dipole antennas and drop the assumption that the distance between the two antennas is large compared with the dipole length (Fig. \[fig:fig3\]).
{width="85.00000%"}
In this case we can bring the two antennas very close to each other, so that the pair can be treated as a single composite meta-atom, whose transverse size is of the same order as the height. First we use the approximate formulas derived in the previous section to find a suitable pair of loading resistances for a given pair of short wire dipoles of length $l$ at distance $d$. Note that for a short dipole antenna the effective length is equal to the half-length of the antenna, and in our definition, we can directly use equation where $l$ is the half-length. To estimate the needed reactive loads, we use the known approximate formula for the input reactance capacitance of a short wire dipole [@Balanis; @Hansen] X\_[inp]{}=-[\_0]{}[(l/r\_0)-1]{}ł[Xinp]{}($r_0$ is the wire radius and $l$ is the effective length of the antenna). The mutual reactance can be approximately found in the model of Hertzian dipole interactions, as in the previous section. Namely, we calculate the imaginary part of at a small distance $d$ and find the mutual reactance in the same way as we found the mutual resistance. The result reads $$\operatorname{Im}({{Z}_{\rm m}})={{\eta }_{0}}\frac{{{(kl)}^{2}}}{4\pi }\left[ \left(\frac{1}{kd}-\frac{1}{{{(kd)}^{3}}}\right)\cos (kd)-\frac{1}{{{(kd)}^{2}}}\sin (kd) \right]$$ . ł[Xmu]{}
In order to realize the zero forward scattering regime we need to satisfy condition . It is a complex-valued equation, therefore, we need to solve it for both real and imaginary parts. We can freely choose the length and radius of each dipole, staying within the assumptions of a small scatterer. To stay within the short-dipole approximation, we choose $l=\lambda/20$ and $r_0=l/50$ for both dipoles. Then, by using , , , and , we find the input and mutual impedances $Z_{\rm inp}=(1.9740-j1075.5)\Omega$ and $Z_{\rm m}=(0.816-j1.141)\Omega$, respectively. To verify the results, we have also calculated these impedances using full-wave simulations (COMSOL) which leads to $Z_{\rm inp}=(1.7107-j1000.2
)\Omega$ and $Z_{\rm m}=(0.7182-j2.093
)\Omega$, showing good agreements with the analytical formulas.
Next, we need to find the required load impedances $Z_{\rm 1L}$ and $Z_{\rm 2L}$. We may freely choose one of the impedances and calculate the other one. It may seem to be enough to set one load impedance to zero and find the other one, however, it is not a wise selection because to bring the dipole to resonance (without a reactive load) we ought to go beyond the short-dipole regime. Thus, to find the required values for load impedances we calculate the induced currents and scattering patterns numerically and fine-tune the loads to realize the regime with zero forward scattering. The results for the required impedances are summarized in Table \[tab1\] before and after numerical tuning.
Impedance initially chosen values after fine-tuning
---------------------- ------------------------- -------------------
$Z_{\rm 1L}(\Omega)$ $-2.816+j1074.4$ $-2.4850+j997.07$
$Z_{\rm 2L}(\Omega)$ $0.5+j1074.4$ $0.5012+j997.07$
: The required impedances for negligible forward scattering in the case of a finite-size strongly coupled loss-compensated dimer. The distance between the dipoles is chosen to be three times of the dipole length.[]{data-label="tab1"}
The radiation pattern and the local electric field distribution for the chosen load impedance of Table \[tab1\] are shown in Fig. \[fig:fig3\]. Note that in the exact numerical solution the regime of zero forward scattering does not imply that the total electric dipole moment of the pair is zero, because higher-order modes also contribute to scattering in all directions. From Fig. \[fig:fig3\](b), one clearly observes the nulls in both forward and backward directions: the pair of a lossy (${\Re}(Z_{\rm 2L})>0$) and an active dipole (${\Re}(Z_{\rm 1L})<0$) obviously allows us to realize a shadow-free meta-atom. Figure \[fig:fig3\](c) presents the local electric field distribution in the vicinity of the two dipoles. As it is clear from this figure, the electric-field vectors around the two dipoles are equal but have opposite directions which leads to a non-zero curl of the electric fields that essentially demonstrates the presence of an equivalent magnetic dipole moment. That is, with the proper design, we have suppressed the electric dipole moment of the meta-atom while have kept its magnetic dipole. This leads to the extraordinary scattering in the lateral direction from an overall lossless meta-atom.
![Total scattering cross section obtained from Eq. , showing the resonant response of a shadow-free dimer when $Z_{1 \rm L}-Z_{2 \rm L}\rightarrow 0$. The values for the impedances are $Z_{\rm 1L}-a=$ $Z_{\rm 2L}+a=$ $-0.9975+j997.075\Omega$, and $a$ is considered to be a real-valued variable.[]{data-label="reson"}](FigRes1D_scat.pdf){width="35.00000%"}
Next, we illustrate the resonant enhancement of scattering close to the point where $Z_{1 \rm L}-Z_{2 \rm L}\rightarrow 0$. We introduce deviations $Z_{1L}=Z+a$ and $Z_{2L}=Z-a$, where $Z=Z_{\rm m}-Z_{\rm inp}$ from the optimized values of the load impedances and plot the dependence of the total scattering cross section on the absolute value of $a$. The results are shown in Fig. \[reson\]. Numerical simulations do not show unbounded growth of the scattering amplitude: coming very close to the resonant point, the numerical solution becomes not accurate.
Shadow-free dimer in the incidence plane
========================================
Next, let us study the same dimer as in Sec. \[sec:pt\_dim\] but excited by a plane wave travelling in the dimer plane, orthogonal to the dipole axes. We are interested in the regime where the forward scattering is absent, while the currents in the dipoles are different from zero. Now the external fields exciting the two dipole are different in phase, and the equations for the induced currents take the form I\_1(Z\_[inp]{}+Z\_[1L]{})+I\_2 Z\_[m]{}=E\_[inc]{}l,ł[I1p]{}I\_2(Z\_[inp]{}+Z\_[2L]{})+I\_1 Z\_[m]{}=E\_[inc]{}e\^[-jkd]{}l.ł[I2p]{} Here we assume that the incident plane wave propagates along the line from dipole 1 to dipole 2. The condition for zero forward scattering reads in this case I\_2=-I\_1 e\^[-jkd]{},I\_1=-I\_2e\^[jkd]{}=E\_[inc]{},ł[I12\_plane]{}which corresponds to the following relation between the impedances 2Z\_[inp]{}+Z\_[1 L]{}+Z\_[2 L]{}-2Z\_[m]{} =0 .ł[condi2]{}Next, by using Eq. , we find the condition for the required load resistances: \_0[730]{}(k\^2ld)\^2+ R\_[1L]{}+R\_[2L]{}+2R\_[loss]{} =0 .ł[crit1]{} To analyze this structure, we consider the same example as in the previous case, only assuming that the wave vector $\_k$ is in the plane of the two dipoles and the polarization of the incident electric field matches the orientation of the two antennas. The results for the required load impedances are summarized in Table \[tab2\].
{width="85.00000%"}
Impedance analytically found values after fine-tuning
---------------------- --------------------------- -------------------
$Z_{\rm 1L}(\Omega)$ $-4.952+j1075.9$ $-4.339+j998.69$
$Z_{\rm 2L}(\Omega)$ $0.5+j1075.9$ $0.5+j998.69$
: The required impedances for negligible forward scattering when the loss-compensated dimer and the incidence direction are in the same plane.[]{data-label="tab2"}
The far-field radiation pattern and the electric field distribution in the vicinity of the considered scatterer are shown in Fig. \[fig:fig4\](b) and (c). As it is clear, we again observe the regime of zero forward scattering while the scattering cross section is not zero. It can be shown that the scattered power of the proposed system of coupled dipoles when $I_2=-I_1{\rm e}^{jkd}$ reads (see Appendix \[AppB\]) =\^2. ł[eqendU]{} This is exactly what is observed from the full-wave simulations in Fig. \[fig:fig4\](b) i.e., a null of the scattered power in forward direction $\phi=90^\circ~{\rm and}~\theta=90^{\circ}$ (a shadow-free meta-atom) and a maximum in the backward direction $\phi=-90^\circ~{\rm and}~\theta=90^{\circ}$. Moreover, when $\theta=0$ or $\theta=180^\circ$ the radiation pattern experiences two nulls which again are clearly observable from the full-wave simulations in Fig. \[fig:fig4\](b) which are due to the presence of a quadrupole in the coupled system of dipoles. This system is analogous to the one studied in [@Alu] in the acoustical case, but the difference is that in [@Alu] the passive and active parts were in a closed waveguide, while in our case we consider an isolated dimer scatterer in free space.
From Eq. , the total scattered power of the proposed structure in this case reads $$P_{\rm scatt}^{\rm tot}= \frac{\eta_0}{2}{7\over{30\pi}}(k^2dl)^2I_1^2$$ and the normalized total scattered power with respect to the total power of a dipole \[see \] reads $$P_{\rm scatt}^{\rm norm}=\frac{P_{\rm scatt}^{\rm tot}}{P^{\rm tot}_{\rm dipole}}=\frac{7}{5}k^2d^2.$$
The total scattering and extinction cross sections read \_[sc]{}=[7]{}(k\^2ld)\^2[\_0I\_1E\_[inc]{}\^2]{}and \_[ext]{}=\_0[I\_1E\_[inc]{}\^2]{},ł[extdim2]{}respectively, and $I_1$ is defined in . Similar to the previous scenario in Sec. \[sec:pt\_dim2\], the extinction cross section is zero in this case \[compare Eqs. and \]. This means that the scattering losses is fully compensated by the introduction of the resistive (active and passive) load impedances. Although the present dimer still possesses a shadow-free characteristic, it mainly backscatters unlike the previous scenario which was scattering laterally (with respect to the incidence direction).
Shadow-free trimers: subwavelength superdirective scatterers
============================================================
In Section \[sec:pt\_dim\] we have symmetrically redirected the incident power into the lateral directions (with respect to the incident wave direction) by using shadow-free dimers \[see Figs. \[fig:fig2\] and \[fig:fig3\]\]. In those cases, as we show next, although the field amplitude was symmetrically redirected to the two opposite lateral directions, the phases of the fields were opposite in sign. In this section, we go beyond the limit of symmetrical power distribution and show that the power amplitude can be tuned asymmetrically in the opposite lateral directions \[the $y$-direction, see e.g. Fig. \[fig:fig2\]\]. In particular, we present the extreme case of a subwavelength superdirective scatterer where all the received power is redirected into one side only.
Symmetrical pattern of shadow-free dimers
-----------------------------------------
We first consider the dimer example and prove that it is impossible to asymmetrically tune the pattern in the lateral directions while the forward and backward scatterings are canceled. That is, when one imposes the simultaneous zero forward and backward scattering condition, then the lateral distribution of power is unconditionally symmetric. To demonstrate that, let us consider the vector potential of a dimer \[see Fig. \[fig:fig1A\]\] as is discussed in Appendix \[AppA\], i.e., $${{A}_{z}}=\frac{\mu_0 l}{4\pi }\frac{{{e}^{-jkr}}}{r}({{I}_{1}}{{\rm e}^{jk{{d}_{1}}\sin \theta \sin \varphi }}+{{I}_{2}}{{\rm e}^{jk{{d}_{2}}\sin \theta \sin \varphi }}).$$ Notice that $d_1$ and $d_2$ are the distances of the two dipoles from the origin of the coordinate system and, in our previous examples, we had always considered $d_1=d_2=d/2$ for simplicity while, here, we consider them to be unequal for generality. Next, if we impose the condition of simultaneous zero forward ($\phi=0$) and backward ($\phi=\pi$) scattering, we require ${{I}_{1}}=-{{I}_{2}}=I$, as we discussed earlier, and therefore $${{A}_{z}}=\frac{\mu_0 l I}{4\pi }\frac{{{e}^{-jkr}}}{r}({{\rm e}^{jk{{d}_{1}}\sin \theta \sin \varphi }}-{{\rm e}^{jk{{d}_{2}}\sin \theta \sin \varphi }}). \l{Az_dif}$$ Our goal is to obtain asymmetric patterns in the opposite lateral directions $\phi=\pi/2$ and $\phi=-\pi/2$ at $\theta=\pi/2$. From , while the pattern in $\phi=\pi/2$ direction is proportional to $
\left({\rm e}^{jk{{d}_{1}}}-{{\rm e}^{jk{{d}_{2}}}}\right)$, that of $\phi=-\pi/2$ is proportional to $\left({\rm e}^{-jk{{d}_{1}}}-{{\rm e}^{-jk{{d}_{2}}}}\right)$. Therefore, the amplitudes of the pattern in the opposite lateral directions $\phi=\pm\pi/2$ are equal, i.e., $\left| {{e}^{jk{{d}_{1}}}}-{{e}^{jk{{d}_{2}}}} \right|=\left| {{e}^{-jk{{d}_{1}}}}-{{e}^{-jk{{d}_{2}}}} \right|$ while the phases are not, i.e., $\angle \left({{e}^{jk{{d}_{1}}}}-{{e}^{jk{{d}_{2}}}}\right) \neq \angle \left({{e}^{-jk{{d}_{1}}}}-{{e}^{-jk{{d}_{2}}}}\right)$. Moreover, the phases only differ by sign, i.e., $\angle \left({{e}^{jkd}}-{{e}^{-jkd}}\right)=-\angle \left({{e}^{-jkd}}-{{e}^{jkd}}\right)$, if we consider $d_{1}=-d_{2}=d$. Note that in Refs. , asymmetric scattering patterns for dimers operating close to the PT-symmetry point were predicted, however, such asymmetry is only possible when the induced polarizations in the two dimer elements are different (which is the case in papers ), and the loss and gain are not fully balanced. Next, we present an alternative approach to overcome this limitation.
Asymmetrical scattering patterns of loss-compensated trimers
------------------------------------------------------------
We expect that one of the exciting possibilities for controlling scattering fields using loss-compensated scatterers will be a possibility to send the scattered power into a specific lateral direction, orthogonal to the illumination direction. The dimers considered above exhibit full control over scattering in the forward and backward directions, but in the regime of zero forward scattering the energy is symmetrically scattered in the lateral directions (see Fig. \[fig:fig2\]).
Here we show that it is possible to tune the amplitudes of the waves scattered in the opposite lateral directions. The shadow-free dimers have a symmetric scattering pattern in the lateral plane because the two dipoles were required to have electric dipoles with equal amplitudes and opposite phases (i.e., $\_p_1=-\_p_2=\_p$) to cancel out the overall electric dipole moment while generating a pure magnetic dipole moment in the system, corresponding to simultaneously zero forward and backward scattering amplitudes. In order to overcome this limitation, we add one more dipole to the system, creating possibilities to tune the total dipole moment of the system to zero (i.e., $\_p_1+\_p_2+\_p_3=0$) in an asymmetric system. Here we consider the extreme case where the ratio of the scattering amplitudes along the two opposite lateral directions ($\phi=\pi/2$ and $\phi=-\pi/2$) is infinite or zero. This corresponds to total cancellation of scattering into one of the side half-spaces. In terms of the antenna theory, such an object is a sub-wavelength superdirective scatterer.
{width="35.00000%"}
. \[simulationfigure\]
Without loss of generality and for simplicity, we consider three equispaced dipoles (see Fig. \[simulationfigure\]). As shown in Appendix \[AppB\], the scattered power of this trimer system reads $$P_{\rm scatt}={\eta_0\over 2}\left({kI_{3}l\over 4\pi r}\right)^2(kd)^{6}\left(\sin^{2} \theta \sin \varphi\right)^2\left(1-\sin \theta \sin \varphi\right)^2\l{spatt_3}.$$ The total scattering power of the proposed structure in this case reads $$P_{\rm scatt}^{\rm tot}= \frac{\eta_0}{2}{232\over{3465\pi}}(k^4d^3l)^2I_1^2,$$ and the normalized total scattered power with respect to the total power of a dipole [with the same current]{} \[see \] reads $$P_{\rm scatt}^{\rm norm}=\frac{P_{\rm scatt}^{\rm tot}}{P^{\rm tot}_{\rm dipole}}={464\over 1155}(kd)^6\approx 0.4(kd)^6.$$
As is proven in Appendix \[AppC\], to obtain such scattered power, we need to satisfy the conditions $$I_1={{e}^{-jkd}}I_3, \qquad
I_{2}=-\left({1+{{e}^{-jkd}}}\right)I_3\l{curr_1_2}$$ for the trimer currents. The radiation pattern of this system is plotted in Fig. \[simulationfigure\]. As is clear from this figure, the pattern has three nulls in $\theta=\pi/2,\phi=0,\pi/2,\pi$ with the main beam directed along $\theta=\pi/2,\phi=-\pi/2$. This behavior is also inferred from Eq. .
Next, similarly to what we have performed to obtain , we derive the condition required for an overall lossless trimer system of loaded dipoles with both active and passive loads (loss-compensated, shadow-free trimers) to generate such superdirective patterns. We consider mutual impedances of $Z_{ij}$ between the $i$-th and $j$-th ($i,j=1,2,3$) elements and equal input impedances of equi-sized dipoles. Moreover, the loads are denoted as $Z_{\rm iL}$. The three equations for induced currents in the loaded trimer system of dipoles read $$\begin{aligned}
& {{I}_{1}}({{Z}_{\rm inp}}+{{Z}_{\rm 1L}})+{{I}_{2}}{{Z}_{12}}+{{I}_{3}}{{Z}_{13}}={{E}_{\rm inc}}l, \\
& {{I}_{1}}{{Z}_{21}}+{{I}_{2}}({{Z}_{\rm inp}}+{{Z}_{\rm 2L}})+{{I}_{3}}{{Z}_{23}}={{E}_{\rm inc}}l, \\
& {{I}_{1}}{{Z}_{31}}+{{I}_{2}}{{Z}_{32}}+{{I}_{3}}({{Z}_{\rm inp}}+{{Z}_{\rm 3L}})={{E}_{\rm inc}}l.\end{aligned}$$ Next, by using the required currents of Eq. and considering the mutual impedances of $Z_{\rm m,d}$ and $Z_{\rm m,2d}$ between the closer (with distance $d$) and farther (with distance $2d$) dipoles, respectively, the above equations reduce to $$\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle
({{e}^{-jkd}}-1)({{Z}_{\rm inp}}+{{Z}_{\rm 1L}})+({{e}^{jkd}}-{{e}^{-jkd}}){{Z}_{\rm m,d}}
\vspace*{.2cm}\\\displaystyle
\hspace*{2.8cm}
+(1-{{e}^{jkd}}){{Z}_{\rm m,2d}}=\frac{{{E}_{\rm inc}}l}{I},
\end{array}\l{eqT1}$$ $$\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle
({{e}^{-jkd}}-1){{Z}_{\rm m,d}}+({{e}^{jkd}}-{{e}^{-jkd}})({{Z}_{\rm inp}}+{{Z}_{\rm 2L}})
\vspace*{.2cm}\\\displaystyle
\hspace*{2.8cm}
+(1-{{e}^{jkd}}){{Z}_{\rm m,d}}=\frac{{{E}_{\rm inc}}l}{I},
\end{array}\l{eqT2}$$ $$\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle
({{e}^{-jkd}}-1){{Z}_{\rm m,2d}}+({{e}^{jkd}}-{{e}^{-jkd}}){{Z}_{\rm m,d}}
\vspace*{.2cm}\\\displaystyle
\hspace*{2.8cm}
+(1-{{e}^{jkd}})({{Z}_{\rm inp}}+{{Z}_{\rm 3L}})=\frac{{{E}_{\rm inc}}l}{I}.
\end{array}\l{eqT3}$$ Notice that $Z_{\rm m,d}$ and $Z_{\rm m,2d}$ can be derived from and . Finally, combining the above equations leads to the conditions ł[cond31]{} e\^[-jkd]{}Z\_[1L]{}-Z\_[3L]{}=(1-e\^[-jkd]{})(Z\_[inp]{}-Z\_[m,2d]{}) $$\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle
e^{-jkd}Z_{\rm 1L}+(1+e^{-jkd})Z_{\rm 2L}=2(1+e^{-jkd})Z_{\rm m,d}
\vspace*{.2cm}\\\displaystyle
\hspace*{3.2cm}
-(1+2e^{-jkd})Z_{\rm inp}-Z_{\rm m,2d},
\end{array}\l{cond32}$$ which imply simultaneous absence of forward and backward scattering and a unidirectional scattering pattern in the lateral plane. Similarly to the analysis in Sec. \[sec:pt\_dim\] it is possible to derive the required active-passive loads for the trimer system to realize these properties.
{width="85.00000%"}
As a particular example, we consider three short dipole antennas of equal length loaded by three bulk impedances $Z_{1\rm L}$, $Z_{2\rm L}$, and $Z_{3\rm L}$, as shown in Fig. \[fig:fig3elem\]. We assume similar physical parameters for the antennas as in the previous case, i.e., $l=\lambda/20$ and $r_0=l/50$ for all the dipoles, and $d=0.15\lambda$. Next, by using , , , and , we find the mutual impedances $Z_{\rm m,d}=(1.639 -j 2.929)\Omega$ and $Z_{\rm m,2d}=(0.816 -j 1.141)\Omega$, respectively. To verify the analytical estimations, we also calculated these impedances using full-wave simulations (COMSOL) which leads to $Z_{\rm m,d}=(1.418 -j 2.068)\Omega$ and $Z_{\rm m,2d}=(0.703 -j0.974
)\Omega$. These values from full-wave simulations show weaker agreement with the analytical formulas comparing to the previous case of a dimer. The reason is that in the full-wave simulations of this structure, the mutual coupling between the two antennas is calculated at the presence of the third dipole. Next, by applying conditions and , we can find the required load impedances for the simultaneous absence of forward and backward scatterings and for creation of a unidirectional pattern in the lateral direction. The results are summarized in Table \[tab3\].
Impedance analytically estimated values after fine-tuning
---------------------- ------------------------------- -------------------
$Z_{\rm 1L}(\Omega)$ $0+j997.511$ $0.1094+j1000.41$
$Z_{\rm 2L}(\Omega)$ $-0.665+j998.541$ $-0.8472+j999.37$
$Z_{\rm 3L}(\Omega)$ $1.456+j999.274$ $1.1231+j1001.15$
: The required load impedances for the simultaneous absence of forward and backward scattering and unidirectional pattern in the lateral direction in the case of a loss-compensated trimer.[]{data-label="tab3"}
Obviously, since we control the lateral scattering pattern of a *shadow-free* meta-atom, we need simultaneous presence of both active (${\Re}(Z_{\rm 2L})<0$) and passive (${\Re}(Z_{\rm 1L,3L})>0$) loads. The radiation pattern and the local electric field distribution for the chosen load impedances of Table \[tab3\] are shown in Fig. \[fig:fig3\]. From Fig. \[fig:fig3elem\](b), one clearly observes scattering nulls in the forward, backward, and one lateral direction. That is, our loss (${\Re}(Z_{\rm 1L,3L})>0$) and gain (${\Re}(Z_{\rm 2L})<0$) scheme is obviously granting superdirective lateral radiation. Figure \[fig:fig3elem\](c) presents the local electric field distribution around this triplet scatterer. The general formulation for arbitrary tuning of the scattering pattern is given in Appendix \[AppC\].
Discussion and conclusion
=========================
We have introduced the concept of shadow-free or loss-compensated meta-atoms enabling extraordinary control over scattering properties. We have demonstrated on numerical examples that the scattering response control freedom of these meta-atoms is not limited by the commonly adopted restrictions. We have benefited from the combination of lossy and active impedances as the loads for two closely spaced dipole antennas to compensate the loss of one scatterer with the gain of another and, hence, to suppress the forward scattering of the overall lossless meta-atoms while preserving non-zero radiation towards other directions. Moreover, we have demonstrated that within this paradigm it becomes possible to create purely bianisotropic meta-atoms, where the only existing polarization mechanism is the magnetoelectric coupling. Furthermore, generalizing the proposed scenario to dipole trimers, it becomes possible to shape the scattering pattern in the lateral plane, pushing the scattered power aside from the propagation direction of the incident waves and providing end-fire superdirective radiation properties.
The proposed meta-atoms can be employed in the design of engineered materials with extraordinary electromagnetic and optical properties, where, for instance, magnetic response is created by external high-frequency electric fields. As another example, materials with unity permittivity and permeability and non-zero and resonant chirality coefficient or omega coupling parameter. The extreme values of optical parameters are realized by exploiting combinations of passive and active impedances which serve as the loads in our coupled-dipole systems. The introduced shadow-free meta-atom is hopefully defining a new paradigm in engineering materials with extraordinary properties which are otherwise impossible to achieve. Indeed, due to the advent of new techniques in the compact and efficient design of active networks, the realization of our proposed scheme is a straightforward task at radio and microwave frequencies, although special cares should be taken to ensure stability of the active components [@Ziolk; @Hrabar].
Calculation of scattered power from two oppositely oriented closely spaced dipoles {#AppA}
==================================================================================
![Geometry of the problem[]{data-label="fig:fig1A"}](Fig1A.pdf){width="35.00000%"}
Here we derive the expression for scattered power density of two closely spaced dipole antennas with equal amplitudes and opposite phases of the antenna currents (i.e., $I_2=-I_1$). The geometry of the problem is illustrated in Fig. \[fig:fig1A\]. The vector potential for two dipoles of Fig. \[fig:fig1A\] reads $${{A}_{z}}=\frac{\mu_0 {{I}_{1}}l}{4\pi }\left(\frac{{{e}^{-jk{{r}_{1}}}}}{{{r}_{1}}}-\frac{{{e}^{-jk{{r}_{2}}}}}{{{r}_{2}}}\right),$$ were $r_1$ and $r_2$ are the distances from each dipole, respectively, to the observation point. Next, for the phase term, we assume ${{r}_{1}}\simeq r-\frac{d}{2}\cos \chi$ and ${{r}_{2}}\simeq r+\frac{d}{2}\cos \chi $ (where $\cos\chi=\sin\theta\sin\varphi$) while for the amplitude terms we assume $r\simeq {{r}_{1}}$ and $r\simeq {{r}_{2}}$. Therefore, the vector potential of the system of two dipole reads $${{A}_{z}}=\frac{\mu_0 {{I}_{1}}l}{4\pi }\left[\frac{{{e}^{-jk(r-\frac{d}{2}\cos \chi)}}}{r}-\frac{{{e}^{-jk(r+\frac{d}{2}\cos \chi)}}}{r}\right]$$ or, equivalently, $${{A}_{z}}=j\frac{\mu_0 {{I}_{1}}l}{2\pi r}{{e}^{-jkr}}\sin \left(k\frac{d}{2}\sin \theta \sin \varphi \right).$$ Since $k{d}\ll 1$, we can approximate the vector potential as $${{A}_{z}}\simeq j\frac{\mu_0 {{I}_{1}}l}{4\pi r}{{e}^{-jkr}}kd\sin \theta \sin \varphi .$$ Next, by using relations $\mathbf{H}=\frac{1}{\mu_0 }\nabla \times \mathbf{A}
$ and $\mathbf{E}=\frac{1}{j\omega \epsilon_0 }\nabla \times \mathbf{H}$, we can find the scattered far-fields as $$\begin{aligned}
&E_{\theta }=\eta_0\frac{k{{I}_{1}}l}{4\pi r}{{e}^{-jkr}}kd\, {{\sin }^{2}}\theta \sin \varphi ,\\
& H_{\varphi }=\frac{k{{I}_{1}}l}{4\pi r}{{e}^{-jkr}}kd\, {{\sin }^{2}}\theta \sin \varphi .
\end{aligned}\l{EH}$$ The scattered power density reads P\_[scat]{}=(E\_ H\_\^\*)=()\^2(kd)\^2 \^4 \^2 , ł[eqend1]{} which is Eq. . Eq. \[or \] demonstrates that forward and radar cross section are zero and this result is in agreement with the simulation since the total (integrated over all space) scattering cross section is not zero.
Calculation of scattered power of two oppositely oriented closely spaced dipoles with a phase difference ${2\pi\over\lambda}d$ {#AppB}
==============================================================================================================================
If we excite the system of coupled dipoles in their plane, i.e., the electric field and the propagation vector of the excitation field lie in the plane of dipoles, then we face a similar problem as in the previous section. However, in this case the two dipoles have an extra phase difference of ${2\pi\over\lambda}d$ rather than only a $180^\circ$ phase difference (i.e., $I_2=-I_1{\rm e}^{jkd}$). In this case for $k{d}\ll 1$, the vector potential approximately reads =jkd(1-) and, therefore, we can find the scattered far-field as $$\begin{aligned}
&E_{\theta}=\eta_0\frac{ k{{I}_{1}}l}{4\pi r}{{e}^{-jkr}}kd\, \sin \theta\left(1 - \sin\theta \sin \varphi\right), \\
& H_{\varphi}=\frac{k{{I}_{1}}l}{4\pi r}{{e}^{-jkr}}kd\, \sin\theta\left(1-\sin\theta \sin \varphi\right) ,
\end{aligned}$$ and the scattered power reads $$\begin{aligned}
\nonumber {{P }_{\rm scat}}&=&\frac{1}{2}\Re({{E}_{\rm scat}}{{H}_{\rm scat}^{*}}) \\
& = & \frac{\eta_0}{2}\left(\frac{k{{I}_{1}}l}{4\pi r}\right)^2(kd)^2\left[\sin\theta\left(1-\sin\theta\sin\varphi\right)\right]^2, \l{eqendU1}\end{aligned}$$ which is Eq. . In this case the scattered power density equals zero only for $\phi=90^\circ$ (i.e., the forward direction) in the $\phi$-plane (i.e., $\theta=90^\circ$). Moreover, the obtained power density is in full agreement with Fig. \[fig:fig4\] since it also possesses two zeros for $\theta=0$ and $180^\circ$ due to the presence of a quadrupole.
Calculation of scattered power from three closely spaced dipoles with unequal currents {#AppC}
======================================================================================
Here we derive the expression for scattered power density from three equispaced dipole antennas with unequal currents $I_1$, $I_2$, and $I_3$. The geometry of the problem is illustrated in Fig. \[fig:fig1B\].
![Geometry of the problem[]{data-label="fig:fig1B"}](Fig1B.pdf){width="35.00000%"}
Similarly to Appendix \[AppA\], the vector potential of the three dipoles read $${{A}_{z}}=\frac{\mu_0 l}{4\pi }\left({{I}_{1}}\frac{{{e}^{-jk{{r}_{1}}}}}{{{r}_{1}}}+{{I}_{2}}\frac{{{e}^{-jk{{r}_{2}}}}}{{{r}_{2}}}+{{I}_{3}}\frac{{{e}^{-jk{{r}_{3}}}}}{{{r}_{3}}}\right),$$ where ${{r}_{i}}\simeq r-d_{i}\cos\chi$. Again, in the far-field zone we have $r\simeq {{r}_{1}}\simeq {{r}_{2}}\simeq {{r}_{3}}$ for the denominators. Next, since $\cos\chi=\sin\theta\sin\varphi$, we get $$\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle
{{A}_{z}}=\frac{\mu_0 l}{4\pi }\frac{{{e}^{-jkr}}}{r}\left({{I}_{1}}{{e}^{jk{{d}_{1}}\sin \theta \sin \varphi }}
\right.\vspace*{.2cm}\\
\displaystyle
\hspace*{1.5cm}\left.
\displaystyle+{{I}_{2}}{{e}^{jk{{d}_{2}}\sin \theta \sin \varphi }}+{{I}_{3}}{{e}^{jk{{d}_{3}}\sin \theta \sin \varphi }}\right).
\end{array}\l{Az_three}$$
Therefore, from , we have two parameters to tune in order to synthesize required patterns, i.e., the currents $I_i$ and distances $d_i$. We require zero forward ($\phi=0$) and backward ($\phi=\pi$) scattering, which implies the cancellation of $\left.A_z\right\vert_{\phi=0,\pi}=0$, that is, +[[I]{}\_[2]{}]{}+[[I]{}\_[3]{}]{}=0. ł[cond\_curr]{}This condition simply means that the overall electric dipole moment of the trimer system is zero. For simplicity, we may position one dipole at the origin, and the other two dipoles symmetrically spaced ($d_1=d_2=d$) along the $y$-axis, as is shown in Fig. \[fig:fig1B\], which reduces the number of tuning parameters. The vector potential reduces to $${{A}_{z}}=\frac{\mu_0 l}{4\pi }\frac{{{e}^{-jkr}}}{r}\left({{I}_{1}}{{e}^{jkd\sin \theta \sin \varphi }}+{{I}_{2}}+{{I}_{3}}{{e}^{-jkd\sin \theta \sin \varphi }}\right).\l{Az_three_final}$$ Now, by using one is able to asymmetrically tune the radiation pattern in the opposite directions $\phi=\pm\pi/2$ at $\theta=\pi/2$. As mentioned in the main text, we are interested in an extreme case when all the radiated power is directed to one lateral direction which implies superdirectivity. To ensure that, we choose the currents in a way that the radiation from these elements cancels out in either one of the lateral directions, e.g., in $\theta=\pi/2$ and $\phi=\pi/2$. Therefore, from , we require $${{I}_{1}}{{e}^{jkd}}+{{I}_{2}}+{{I}_{3}}{{e}^{-jkd}}=0.\l{cond_curr2}$$ Next, from conditions and , the current of each dipole is found: $$I_1=-\left(\frac{1-{{e}^{-jkd}}}{1-{{e}^{jkd}}}\right)I_3={{e}^{-jkd}}I_3,\l{curr1}$$ $$I_{2}=-\left(I_{1}+I_{3}\right)= -\left({1+{{e}^{-jkd}}}\right)I_3.\l{curr2}$$ Now, introducing and into and considering $kd\, \sin \theta \sin \varphi \ll 1$, the vector potential for this case reduces to $${{A}_{z}}=\frac{\mu_0 I_{0} l}{4\pi }\frac{{{e}^{-jkr}}}{r}j(kd)^{3}(\sin \theta \sin \varphi)(1-\sin \theta sin \varphi),$$ in the Cartesian and $$\begin{aligned}
& {{A}_{r}}=\frac{\mu_0 I_{3} l}{4\pi }\frac{{{e}^{-jkr}}}{r}j(kd)^{3}\cos \theta(\sin \theta \sin \varphi)(1-\sin \theta sin \varphi), \\
&{{A}_{\theta}}=\frac{\mu_0 I_{3} l}{4\pi }\frac{{{e}^{-jkr}}}{r}j(kd)^{3}\sin \theta(\sin \theta \sin \varphi)(1-\sin \theta sin \varphi), \\
&{{A}_{\varphi}}=0,\end{aligned}$$ in the spherical coordinate system and, similarly to Appendix \[AppA\], the electric and magnetic fields read $$\begin{aligned}
& {{E}_{\theta}}=\frac{\eta_0 kI_{3}l}{4\pi}\frac{{{e}^{-jkr}}}{r}(kd)^{3}(\sin^{2} \theta \sin \varphi)(1-\sin \theta sin \varphi), \\
& {{H}_{\varphi}}=\frac{kI_{3}l}{4\pi}\frac{{{e}^{-jkr}}}{r}(kd)^{3}(\sin^{2} \theta \sin \varphi)(1-\sin \theta sin \varphi). \end{aligned}$$ Finally, the scattered power is derived from the last two equations, which gives Eq. .
[11]{}
A. V. Kildishev, A. Boltasseva, and V. M. Shalaev, Planar photonics with metasurfaces, Science [**339**]{}, 1232009 (2013).
N. Yu and F. Capasso, Flat optics with designer metasurfaces, [Nat. Mater.]{} [**13**]{}, 139 (2014).
S. A. Tretyakov, Metasurfaces for general transformations of electromagnetic fields, [Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A]{} [**373**]{}, 20140362 (2015).
S. B. Glybovski, S. A. Tretyakov, P. A. Belov, Y. S. Kivshar, and C. R. Simovski, Metasurfaces: From microwaves to visible, [Phys. Rep.]{} [**634**]{}, 1 (2016).
M. Albooyeh, S. Tretyakov, and C. Simovski, Electromagnetic characterization of bianisotropic metasurfaces on refractive substrates: General theoretical framework, [Ann. der Phys.]{} [**528**]{}, 721 (2016).
A.N. Serdyukov, I.V. Semchenko, S.A. Tretyakov, and A. Sihvola, [*Electromagnetics of Bi-anisotropic Materials: Theory and Applications*]{} (Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, Amsterdam, 2001).
M. Yazdi and M. Albooyeh, Analysis of metasurfaces at oblique incidence, [IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag.]{} [**65**]{}, 2397 (2017).
P.A. Belov, S.I. Maslovski, K.R. Simovski, S.A. Tretyakov, A condition imposed on the electromagnetic polarizability of a bianisotropic scatterer, [Tech. Phys. Lett.]{} [**29**]{}, 718 (2003).
J. E. Sipe and J. van Kranendonk, Macroscopic electromagnetic theory of resonant dielectrics, Phys. Rev. A [**9**]{}, 1806 (1974).
S.A. Tretyakov, [*Analytical Modeling in Applied Electromagnetics*]{} (Artech House, Inc., Norwood, MA, 2003).
For more general conditions refer to [@Alaeegeneralized; @Liberal].
M. Albooyeh, V. S. Asadchy, R. Alaee, S. M. Hashemi, M. Yazdi, M. S. Mirmoosa, C. Rockstuhl, C. R. Simovski, and S. A. Tretyakov, Purely bianisotropic scatterers, [Phys. Rev. B]{} [**94**]{}, 245428 (2016).
R. Alaee, M. Albooyeh, M. Yazdi, N. Komjani, C. Simovski, F. Lederer, and C. Rockstuhl, Magnetoelectric coupling in nonidentical plasmonic nanoparticles: Theory and applications, [Phys. Rev. B]{} [**91**]{}, 115119 (2015).
R. Alaee, M. Albooyeh, S. Tretyakov, and C. Rockstuhl, Phase-change material-based nanoantennas with tunable radiation patterns, [Opt. Lett.]{} [**41**]{}, 4099 (2016).
M. D.-Varcheie, C. Guclu, and F. Capolino, Magnetic nanoantennas made of plasmonic nanoclusters for photoinduced magnetic field enhancement, [Phys. Rev. Appl.]{} [**8**]{}, 024033 (2017).
M. Yazdi, M. Albooyeh, R. Alaee, V. Asadchy, N. Komjani, C. Rockstuhl, C. R. Simovski, and S. Tretyakov, A bianisotropic metasurface with resonant asymmetric absorption, [IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag.]{} [**63**]{}, 3004 (2015).
C. M. Bender, D. C. Brody, and H. F. Jones, Complex extension of quantum mechanics, [Phys. Rev. Lett.]{} [**89**]{}, 270401 (2002).
A. A. Zyablovsky, A. P. Vinogradov, A. A. Pukhov, A. V. Dorofeenko, and A. A. Lisyansky, PT-symmetry in optics, Phys. Usp. [**57**]{}, 1063 (2014).
R. Fleury, D. L. Sounas, and A. Alù, An invisible acoustic sensor based on parity-time symmetry, [Nat. Commun.]{} [**6**]{}, 5905 (2015).
R. Duggan, M.-A. Miri, and A. Alù, Scattering properties of parity-time symmetric nanoparticle dimers, *2017 IEEE AP-S Symposium on Antennas and Propagation and USNC-URSI Radio Science Meeting*, San Diego, California, USA, July 9–-14, 2017.
M.-A. Miri, M. A. Eftekhar, M. Facao, A. F. Abouraddy, A. Bakry, M. A. N. Razvi, A. Alshahrie, A. Alù , and D. N. Christodoulides, Scattering properties of PT-symmetric objects, J. Opt. [**18**]{}, 075104 (2016).
S.A. Schelkunoff and H.T. Friis, [*Antennas: Theory and Practice*]{} (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1952).
R. Alaee, C. Rockstuhl, and I. Fernandez-Corbaton, An electromagnetic multipole expansion beyond the long-wavelength approximation, Opt. Commun. [**407**]{}, 17 (2018).
R.W.P. King, [*The Theory of Linear Antennas*]{} (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1956).
R.W.P. King and C.W. Harrison, [*Antennas and Waves: A Modern Approach*]{} (The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, and London, 1969).
M. Polivka, Closed-form expression for mutual impedance of the short not-too-closely spaced dipoles with constant current distribution, [*7th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EuCAP 2013)*]{}, G[ö]{}teborg, Sweden, 2013.
C.A. Balanis, [*Antenna Theory: Analysis and Design*]{} (John Wiley $\&$ Sons, New York, Chichester, Brisbane, Toronto, and Singapore, 1997).
Y. R[a’]{}di and S.A. Tretyakov, Electromagnetic phenomena in omega nihility media, in [*Proc. of The Sixth International Congress on Advanced Electromagnetic Materials in Microwaves and Optics (Metamaterials’ 2012)*]{}, St. Petersburg, Russia, 2012.
J. Vehmas, Y. Ra’di, A.O. Karilainen, and S. Tretyakov, Eliminating electromagnetic scattering from small particles, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. [**61**]{}, 3747 (2013).
S.A. Tretyakov, A.J. Viitanen, Line of periodically arranged passive dipole scatterers, Elecr. Eng. (Archiv für Elektrotechnik) [**82**]{}, 353 (2000).
Hansen, R.C. Fundamental limitations in antennas, [ Proc. IEEE]{} [**69**]{}, 170 (1981).
Manjavacas, A., Anisotropic optical response of nanostructures with balanced gain and loss, ACS Photonics [**3**]{}, 1301 (2016).
A. Varas, P. Garcia-Gonzalez, F. J. Garcia-Vidal and A. Rubio, Anisotropy effects on the plasmonic response of nanoparticle dimers, J. Phys. Chem. Lett. [**6**]{}, 1891 (2015).
Z. Ning and R. W. Ziolkowski, Design and measurements of an electrically small, broad bandwidth, non-Foster circuit-augmented protractor antenna, Appl. Phys. Lett. [**101**]{}, 024107 (2012).
J. Loncar, S. Hrabar, and D. Muha, Stability of simple lumped-distributed networks with negative capacitors, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. [**65**]{}, 390 (2017).
R. Alaee, R. Filter, D. Lehr, F. Lederer, and C. Rockstuhl, A generalized kerker condition for highly directive nanoantennas, [*O*pt. Lett.]{} [**40**]{}, 2645 (2015).
I. Liberal, Y. R[a]{}’di, R. Gonzalo, I. Ederra, S. A. Tretyakov, and R. W. Ziolkowski, Least upper bounds of the powers extracted and scattered by bianisotropic particles, [IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag.]{} [**62**]{}, 4726 (2014).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
Consider a weighted graph $G$ where vertices are points in the plane and edges are line segments. The weight of each edge is the Euclidean distance between its two endpoints. A routing algorithm on $G$ has a *competitive ratio* of $c$ if the length of the path produced by the algorithm from any vertex $s$ to any vertex $t$ is at most $c$ times the length of the shortest path from $s$ to $t$ in $G$. If the length of the path is at most $c$ times the Euclidean distance from $s$ to $t$, we say that the routing algorithm on $G$ has a *routing ratio* of $c$.
We present an online routing algorithm on the Delaunay triangulation with competitive and routing ratios of $5.90$. This improves upon the best known algorithm that has competitive and routing ratio $15.48$. The algorithm is a generalization of the deterministic $1$-local routing algorithm by Chew on the $L_1$-Delaunay triangulation. When a message follows the routing path produced by our algorithm, its header need only contain the coordinates of $s$ and $t$. This is an improvement over the currently known competitive routing algorithms on the Delaunay triangulation, for which the header of a message must additionally contain partial sums of distances along the routing path.
We also show that the routing ratio of any deterministic $k$-local algorithm is at least $1.70$ for the Delaunay triangulation and $2.70$ for the $L_1$-Delaunay triangulation. In the case of the $L_1$-Delaunay triangulation, this implies that even though there exists a path between two points $x$ and $y$ whose length is at most $2.61|[xy]|$ (where $|[xy]|$ denotes the length of the line segment $[xy]$), it is not always possible to route a message along a path of length less than $2.70|[xy]|$. From these bounds on the routing ratio, we derive lower bounds on the competitive ratio of $1.23$ for Delaunay triangulations and $1.12$ for $L_1$-Delaunay triangulations.
author:
- Nicolas Bonichon
- Prosenjit Bose
- 'Jean-Lou De Carufel'
- Ljubomir Perković
- André van Renssen
bibliography:
- 'bib.bib'
title: 'Upper and Lower Bounds for Competitive Online Routing on Delaunay Triangulations[^1]'
---
Chew’s Routing Algorithm {#sec:chew}
========================
In this section we present the routing algorithm. This algorithm is a natural adaptation to Delaunay triangulations of Chew’s routing algorithm originally designed for $L_1$-Delaunay triangulations [@Che86] and subsequently adapted for $TD$-Delaunay triangulations [@Che89].
We consider the Delaunay triangulation defined on a finite set of points $P$ in the plane. In this paper, we denote the source of the routing path by $s\in P$ and its destination by $t\in P$. We assume that an orthogonal coordinate system consisting of a horizontal $x$-axis and a vertical $y$-axis exists and we denote by $x(p)$ and $y(p)$ the $x$- and $y$-coordinates of any point $p$ in the plane. We denote the line supported by two points $p$ and $q$ by $pq$, and the line segment with endpoints $p$ and $q$ by $[pq]$. Without loss of generality, we assume that $y(s) = y(t) = 0$ and $x(s) < x(t)$.
When routing from $s$ to $t$, we consider only (the vertices and edges of) the triangles of the Delaunay triangulation that intersect $[st]$. Without loss of generality, if a vertex (other than $s$ and $t$) is on $[st]$, we consider it to be slightly above $st$. Therefore, the triangles that intersect $[st]$ can be ordered from left to right. Notice that all vertices (other than $s$ and $t$) from this ordered set of triangles belong to at least $2$ of these triangles.
The routing algorithm can be described as follows. When we reach a vertex $p_i$ (initially $p_0 = s$), we consider the [*rightmost*]{} triangle $T_i$ that has $p_i$ as a vertex. Let $x$ and $y$ be the other two vertices of $T_i$ and denote by $C_i$ the the circle circumscribing $T_i$. Let $w_i$ ($w$ as in *west*) be the leftmost point of $C_i$ and let $r_i$ be the rightmost intersection of $C_i$ with $[st]$. The line segment $[w_ir_i]$ splits $C_i$ in two arcs: the [*upper*]{} one, defined by the clockwise walk along $C_i$ from $w_i$ to $r_i$ and the [*lower*]{} one, defined by the counterclockwise walk along $C_i$ from $w_i$ to $r_i$. Both arcs include points $w_i$ and $r_i$. Because $T_i$ is rightmost, $x$ and $y$ cannot both lie on the interior of the same arc so we can assume that $x$ belongs to the upper arc and $y$ belongs to the lower arc. The forwarding decision at $p_i$ is made as follows:
- If $p_i$ belongs to the upper arc, we walk clockwise along $C_i$ until we reach vertex $x$.
- If $p_i$ belongs to the lower arc, we walk counterclockwise along $C_i$ until we reach $y$.
If $p_i = w_i$ we apply the first (upper arc) rule.
Once we reach $p_{i+1} = x$ or $y$, we repeat the process until we reach $t$. Note that because the two vertices of $T_i$ other than $p_{i+1}$ are not both below or both above line segment $[st]$, $T_i$ must be the leftmost triangle that has $p_{i+1}$ as a vertex. Unless $p_{i+1} = t$, $p_{i+1}$ is a vertex of at least another triangle intersecting $[st]$, so $T_i$ cannot be the rightmost triangle that has $p_{i+1}$ as a vertex.
Figure \[fig:exampleRouting\] shows an example of a route computed by this algorithm.
Because the routing decision can always be applied, because the decision is based on the rightmost triangle and progress is made from left to right, and because $P$ is finite, we can conclude that the following results by Chew from [@Che86] extend to Delaunay triangulations. The following is Lemma 2 in [@Che86]:
\[lem:Chew2\] The triangles used ($T_0,T_1\dots,T_k$) are ordered along $[st]$. Although not all Delaunay triangulation triangles intersecting $[st]$ are used, those used appear in their order along $[st]$.
In Figure \[fig:exampleRouting\] the triangles $T_i$ are drawn with blue edges. The following corollary is in [@Che86] as well:
The algorithm terminates, producing a path from $s$ to $t$.
Routing Ratio {#sec:compet}
=============
In this section, we prove the main theorem of this paper.
\[thm:main\] The Chew’s routing algorithm on the Delaunay triangulation has a routing ratio of at most $(1.185043874 + 3\pi/2) \approx 5.89743256$.
As shown in Figure \[fig:LBChew\], Chew’s algorithm has routing ratio at least 5.7282 (see Section \[sec:lower\]).
We devote this section to the proof of Theorem \[thm:main\].
Preliminaries
-------------
We start by introducing additional definitions, notations, and structural results about Chew’s routing algorithm. Some of the notations are illustrated in Figure \[fig:example\].
We denote by $|[pq]|$ the Euclidean length of the line segment $[pq]$, and by $|{\ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}|$ the length of a path ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}$ in the plane. Given a path ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}$ from $p$ to $q$ and a path ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{Q}}}$ from $q$ to $r$, ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}+{\ensuremath{\mathcal{Q}}}$ denotes the concatenation of ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}$ and ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{Q}}}$. We say that the path ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}$ from $p$ to $q$ is *inside* a path ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{Q}}}$ that also goes from $p$ to $q$ if the path ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}$ is inside the region delimited by ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{Q}}}+[qp]$. Note that if ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}$ is convex and inside ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{Q}}}$ then $|{\ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}| \leq |{\ensuremath{\mathcal{Q}}}|$. Given a path ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}$ and two points $p$ and $q$ on ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}$, we denote by ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}{\mbox{\textless}p,q\mbox{\textgreater}}$ the sub-path of ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}$ that goes from $p$ to $q$.
Let $s=p_0,p_1, \dots, p_k=t$ be the sequence of vertices visited by Chew’s routing algorithm. If some $p_i$ other than $s$ or $t$ lies on the segment $[st]$, we can separately analyze the routing ratio of the paths from $s$ to $p_i$ and from $p_i$ to $t$. We assume, therefore, that no $p_i$, other than $s=p_0$ and $t=p_k$, lies on segment $[st]$.
For every edge $(p_i,p_{i+1})$, there is a corresponding oriented arc of $C_i$ used by the algorithm which we refer to as ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{R}}}}}}{\mbox{\textless}p_i,p_{i+1}\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}$ (shown in gray in Figures \[fig:exampleRouting\] and \[fig:example\]). The orientation (clockwise or counterclockwise) of ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{R}}}}}}{\mbox{\textless}p_i,p_{i+1}\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}$ is the orientation taken by the routing algorithm when going from $p_i$ to $p_{i+1}$. Let ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{R}}}}}}$ be the union of these arcs. We call ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{R}}}}}}$ the routing path from $s$ to $t$. The length of the path $s=p_0,p_1, \dots,p_{k-1},p_k=t$ along the edges of the Delaunay triangulation is smaller than the length of ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{R}}}}}}$. In the remainder of this section, we analyze the length of ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{R}}}}}}$ to obtain an upper bound on the length of the path along the edges of the Delaunay triangulation.
Worst Case Circles ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i}}}}$
-----------------------------------------------------------
In order to bound the length of ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{R}}}}}}$, we work with the circles ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i}}}}$ defined as follows. Let $A_1$ and $A_2$ be two circles that go through $p_i$ and $p_{i+1}$ such that $A_1$ is tangent to $[st]$ and the tangent of $A_2$ at $p_i$ is vertical. We define ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i}}}}$ to be $A_2$ if $A_2$ intersects $[st]$ twice and $A_1$ otherwise. Let $w'_i$ be the leftmost vertex of ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i}}}}$ and $O'_i$ the center of ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i}}}}$. In the example of Figure \[fig:example\], $w'_1 = p_1$ and $w'_3 \neq p_3$.
Note that if $[p_{i}p_{i+1}]$ crosses $[st]$, then ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i}}}}$ is $A_2$. We consider three types of circles ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i}}}}$:
- Type $A_1$: $p_i \neq w'_i$ and $[p_{i-1}p_i]$ does not cross $[st]$.
- Type $A_2$: $p_{i}=w'_i$ and $[p_{i-1}p_i]$ does not cross $[st]$.
- Type $B$: $[p_{i-1}p_i]$ crosses $[st]$.
In Figure \[fig:example\], ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{0}}}}, {{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{1}}}} \dots {{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{4}}}}$ are respectively of type $A_2$, $B$, $B$, $A_1$, $A_2$. Note that if ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i}}}}$ is of type $B$, then $p_i = w'_i$. We use the expression “type $A$” instead of “type $A_1$ or $A_2$”.
Given two points $p,q$ on ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i}}}}$, let ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{i}{\mbox{\textless}p,q\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}$ be the arc on ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i}}}}$ from $p$ to $q$ whose orientation (clockwise or counterclockwise) is the same as the orientation of ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{R}}}}}}{\mbox{\textless}p_i,p_{i+1}\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}$ around $C_i$. Notice that $|{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{R}}}}}}{\mbox{\textless}p_i,p_{i+1}\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}| \leq |{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{i}{\mbox{\textless}p_i,p_{i+1}\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}|$.
Let $t_i$ be the first point $p_j$ after $p_i$ such that $[p_ip_j]$ intersects $st$. Notice that $t_{k-1} = t$. We also set $t_k=t$. In Figure \[fig:example\], $t_0=p_1$, $t_1=p_2$, $t_2 = p_3$ and $t_3=t_4=t_5=t$. In addition, let $t'_i=(x(t_i),0)$ and $s_i = (x(w'_i), 0)$.
\[lem:siOrder\] For all $0 < i \leq k$: $$\begin{aligned}
x(s_{i-1}) \leq x(s_{i}),\label{eq:siOrder}\\
x(s_{i}) \leq x(t_{i-1}) \leq x(t_{i}).\label{eq:tiOrder}\end{aligned}$$
We first prove (\[eq:siOrder\]). If $p_{i}=w'_{i}$ then $x(s_{i}) = x(p_{i})$. Since $p_{i}$ lies on ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i-1}}}}$ and $x(s_{i-1})$ is the $x$-coordinate of the leftmost point of ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i-1}}}}$, we have that $x(s_{i-1})\leq x(p_{i})=x(s_{i})$. If $p_{i} \not= w'_{i}$ then ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i}}}}$ is of type $A_1$. We assume without loss of generality that $p_i$ lies above $st$. If $w'_{i}$ is on or in the interior of ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i-1}}}}$ then (\[eq:siOrder\]) holds. Otherwise, the rightmost intersection of ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i-1}}}}$ with $st$ must be to the left of the intersection of $w'_ip_i$ and $st$. This, in turn, implies (\[eq:siOrder\])
We now prove (\[eq:tiOrder\]). We first observe that $t_{i-1}=p_j$ and $t_{i}=p_{j'}$ for some $i \leq j \leq j'$. Using inequality (\[eq:siOrder\]), we have that $x(s_i) \leq x(s_j) \leq x(p_j) = x(t_{i-1})$, so the first inequality in (\[eq:tiOrder\]) holds. The second inequality trivially holds when $j=j'$, so we assume otherwise. In that case, $p_j, p_{j+1}, \dots, p_{j'-1}$ must all be on the same side of $st$. Without loss of generality, we assume that $p_{j'}$ lies above $st$. This implies that $[p_{j'-1}p_{j'}]$ crosses $[st]$ and therefore ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{j-1}}}}$ is of type $B$. Moreover, $p_{j'-1}=w'_{j'-1}$ and $p_{j'-1}$ lies below $st$. On the other hand, $p_j$ lies below $st$ and on ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{j-1}}}}$, which is of type $B$ and whose center $O'_{j-1}$ is above $st$. Note that $p_{j'-1}$ and $p_{j'}$ lie outside of ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{j-1}}}}$ and that $x(w'_{j-1}) \leq x(w'_{j'-1})$ (recall that $w'_{j'-1} = p_{j'-1})$. Therefore, if $q$ is the intersection of ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{j'-1}{\mbox{\textless}p_{j'-1},p_{j'}\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}$ and $st$, no point of ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{j-1}}}}$ below $st$ and outside of ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{j'-1}}}}$ has an $x$-coordinate larger than $x(q)$. Since $x(q) < x(p_{j'})$, the second inequality in (\[eq:tiOrder\]) holds.
Proof of Theorem \[thm:main\]
-----------------------------
In this section, we prove our main theorem. Given two points $p$ and $q$ such that $x(p) < x(q)$ and $y(p) = y(q)$, we define the path ${\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{p,q}}}$ as follows. Let $C$ be the circle above $pq$ that is tangent to $pq$ at $q$ and tangent to the line $x = x(p)$ at a point that we denote by $p'$. The path ${\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{p,q}}}$ consists of $[pp']$ together with the clockwise arc from $p'$ to $q$ on $C$. We call ${\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{p,q}}}$ the *snail curve* from $p$ to $q$. Note that $|{\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{p,q}}}| = (1+3\pi/2)(x(q)-x(p))$. We also define the path ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i}}}}$ to be $[s_iw'_i] + {{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{i}{\mbox{\textless}w'_{i}, p_{i+1}\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}$ for $0\leq i \leq k-1$ (see Figure \[fig:example\]).
We start with a lemma that motivates these definitions.
\[lem:warmup\] $|{{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{k-1}}}}| \leq |{\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{s_{k-1},t}}}|$
This follows from the fact that ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{k-1}}}}$ from $s_{k-1}$ to $t$ is convex and inside ${\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{s_{k-1},t}}}$.
The following lemma is the key to proving Theorem \[thm:main\].
\[lem:induction\] For all $0 < i < k$ and $\delta = \deltaMin$, $$\label{eq:induction2}
|{{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i-1}}}}| + |y(t_{i-1})| \leq |{{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i}}}}{\mbox{\textless}s_i,p_i\mbox{\textgreater}}| + |{\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{s_{i-1},s_i}}}| + |y(t_i)| + \delta |[t'_{i-1}t'_{i}]|.$$ Moreover, if ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i-1}}}}$ is of type $A$ (then $t_{i-1}=t_{i}$), the previous inequality is equivalent to $$\label{eq:induction1}
|{{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i-1}}}}| \leq |{{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i}}}}{\mbox{\textless}s_i,p_i\mbox{\textgreater}}| + |{\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{s_{i-1},s_i}}}|.$$
This lemma is illustrated in Figure \[fig:example\]. We first show how to use Lemma \[lem:induction\] to prove Theorem \[thm:main\], then we prove Lemma \[lem:induction\] in Section \[subsection proof key lemma\].\
[**Theorem \[thm:main\].**]{} By Lemma \[lem:siOrder\], $\sum_{i=1}^{k-1} |[t'_{i-1}t'_i]| < |[st]|$ and $\sum_{i=1}^{k} |{\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{s_{i-1},s_i}}}| = |{\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{s,t}}}|$. By summing the $k-1$ inequalities from Lemma \[lem:induction\] and the inequality from Lemma \[lem:warmup\], we get $$\sum_{i=1}^{k} |{{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i-1}}}}| + |y(t_0)| < \sum_{i=1}^{k-1} |{{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i}}}}{\mbox{\textless}s_i,p_i\mbox{\textgreater}}| + |{\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{s,t}}}| + |y(t_{k-1})| + \delta |[st]|.$$ The fact that $t_{k-1} = t$ implies $y(t_{k-1}) = 0$. Therefore, since ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i-1}}}} = {{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{i-1}{\mbox{\textless}p_{i-1}p_i\mbox{\textgreater}}}}} + {{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i-1}}}}{\mbox{\textless}s_{i-1},p_{i-1}\mbox{\textgreater}}$, we have $$|{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{R}}}}}}| \leq \sum_{i=1}^{k} {{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{i-1}{\mbox{\textless}p_{i-1}p_i\mbox{\textgreater}}}}} < |{\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{s,t}}}| + \delta |[st]| \leq (1.185043874 + 3\pi/2) |[st]|$$ which completes the proof.
Proof of the Key Lemma {#subsection proof key lemma}
----------------------
In this section, we prove Lemma \[lem:induction\]. We will make use of the following lemma whose proof is in the Appendix.\
\[lem:alpha\] Let $\theta = \angle w'_{i-1}O'_{i-1}p_i$ and $\alpha = \angle w'_iO'_{i}p_i$ be the angles defined using the orientations ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{i}{\mbox{\textless}p_{i-1},p_{i}\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}$ and ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{i}{\mbox{\textless}p_i,p_{i+1}\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}$, respectively. Then $$\label{eq:anglesp}
0 \leq \alpha < \theta < 3\pi/2.$$
[**Lemma \[lem:induction\].**]{} Notice that if ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i-1}}}}$ is of type $A$, then $|y(t_{i-1})| = |y(t_i)|$. Hence, in this case, it sufficient to prove $$\label{eq:induction1-bis}
|{{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i-1}}}}| \leq |{{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i}}}}{\mbox{\textless}s_i,p_i\mbox{\textgreater}}| + |{\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{s_{i-1},s_i}}}| .$$ For the rest of the proof, we consider three cases depending on the types of ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i-1}}}}$ and ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i}}}}$.
$\bullet$ [**${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i-1}}}}$ is of type $A$ and ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i}}}}$ is of type $A_2$ or $B$**]{}. In this case, $p_i = w'_i$ from which $x(s_i) = x(p_i)$ follows. Let $X$ be the orthogonal projection of $p_i$ onto $s_{i-1}w'_{i-1}$. Then $$\label{eq:flip}
|[s_{i-1},X]+{\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{X,p_i}}}| = |{{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i}}}}{\mbox{\textless}s_i,p_i\mbox{\textgreater}}| + |{\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{s_{i-1},s_i}}}|.$$ Since the path ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i-1}}}}$ is convex and inside the path $[s_{i-1},X]+{\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{X,p_i}}}$ (see Figure \[fig:caseA1B\]),
we get $|{{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i-1}}}}| \leq |[s_{i-1},X]+{\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{X,p_i}}}|$. Applying Inequality (\[eq:flip\]) completes the proof of this case.
$\bullet$ [**${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i-1}}}}$ is of type $A$ and ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i}}}}$ is of type $A_1$.**]{} (See Figure \[fig:caseAA1\].) Let $b_i$ the lowest point of ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i}}}}$. Let $X$ and $Y$ be respectively the projections of $s_{i-1}$ and $b_i$ on the line $y=y(b_{i-1})$. We consider the snail curve ${\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{s_{i},b_i}}} = {{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i}}}}{\mbox{\textless}s_i,p_i\mbox{\textgreater}} + {{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{i}{\mbox{\textless}p_{i},b_i\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}$ (${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{i}{\mbox{\textless}p_{i},b_i\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}$ see Figure \[fig:caseAA1\]).
Let ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}} = {\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{X,Y}}}$. We have: $$\label{eq:Gp}
|{{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i}}}}{\mbox{\textless}s_i,p_i\mbox{\textgreater}}| + |{\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{s_{i-1},s_i}}}| + |{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{i}{\mbox{\textless}p_{i},b_i\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}| = |{\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{s_{i-1},b_i}}}| =|{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}|.$$ Let ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{B}}}=[Xs_{i-1}]+{{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i-1}}}}$ and $Z\neq X$ be the intersection of $X p_i$ with ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}$. Denote by ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{Y}}}$ the path from $p_i$ to $Z$ that is homothetic to ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{B}}}$. Note that ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{B}}}$ and ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{Y}}}$ are both homothetic to ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}{\mbox{\textless}X,Z\mbox{\textgreater}}$. Hence, $$\label{eq:homoY}
|{\ensuremath{\mathcal{B}}} + {\ensuremath{\mathcal{Y}}}| = |{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}{\mbox{\textless}X,Z\mbox{\textgreater}}|.$$
Let $C''_i$ be the curve obtained by translating down ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i}}}}$ until $b_i$ lies on $Y$. Denote by ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{R}}}$ and $W$ the images of ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{i}{\mbox{\textless}p_{i},b_i\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}$ and $p_i$ by the same translation, respectively. The circle $C''_i$ is tangent to the circular section of ${\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{s_{i-1},b_i}}}$ at $Y$. Moreover, the radius of $C''_i$ is smaller than the radius of the circular section of ${\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{s_{i-1},b_i}}}$. Hence, it does not intersect ${\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{s_{i-1},b_i}}}$. This implies that if ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{R}}}$ intersects the line $p_iZ$, the intersection points must be in $[p_iZ]$. We can show that ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{R}}}$ does not intersect ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{Y}}}$. Since ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{i}{\mbox{\textless}p_{i},b_i\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}$ is convex and lies inside $[Wp_i]+{\ensuremath{\mathcal{Y}}}+{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}{\mbox{\textless}Z,Y\mbox{\textgreater}}$, we have $$\label{eq:insideG1}
|{\ensuremath{\mathcal{R}}}| \leq |[Wp_i]+{\ensuremath{\mathcal{Y}}}+{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}{\mbox{\textless}Z,Y\mbox{\textgreater}}|.$$
Summing (\[eq:homoY\]) and (\[eq:insideG1\]), and removing $|{\ensuremath{\mathcal{Y}}}|$ and $|[b_iY]|=|[Xs_{i-1}]|$ from both sides, we get $|{{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i-1}}}}| + |{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{i}{\mbox{\textless}p_{i},b_i\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}| \leq |{\ensuremath{\mathcal{G}}}|$. Using (\[eq:Gp\]) and removing $|{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{i}{\mbox{\textless}p_{i},b_i\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}|$ from both sides, we get (\[eq:induction1-bis\]).
$\bullet$ [**${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i-1}}}}$ is of type $B$ and ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i}}}}$ is of type $A$ or $B$**]{}. In this case, $w'_{i-1} = p_{i-1}$ and $t_{i-1} = p_i \not= t_i$. We consider the case where $|y(p_{i-1})-y(p_{i})| < |y(p_{i-1})-y(t_i)|$ first (refer to Figure \[fig:caseBall2\]).
Recall that ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i-1}}}} = {{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{i-1}{\mbox{\textless}p_{i-1}p_i\mbox{\textgreater}}}}} + [s_{i-1}p_{i-1}]$ and let ${\cal P^*}$ be the curve obtained by translating ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i}}}}{\mbox{\textless}s_i,p_i\mbox{\textgreater}}$ to the left until $s_i$ lies on $s_{i-1}$. Denote the highest point of ${\cal P^*}$ by $X$. Notice that $x(p_i) - x(X) = x(s_i) - x(s_{i-1})$, ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{i-1}{\mbox{\textless}p_{i-1}p_i\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}$ is convex and ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{i-1}{\mbox{\textless}p_{i-1}p_i\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}$ is inside $[p_{i-1}s_{i-1}] + {\cal P^*} + {\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{X, p_i}}}$, which is also convex. Consequently, we get $$\label{eq:halfTi1}
|{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{i-1}{\mbox{\textless}p_{i-1}p_i\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}| \leq |[p_{i-1}s_{i-1}]| + |{\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{s_{i-1},s_i}}}| + |{{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i}}}}{\mbox{\textless}s_i,p_i\mbox{\textgreater}}|.$$ Moreover, since $|y(p_{i-1})-y(p_{i})| < |y(p_{i-1})-y(t_i)|$, we have $$\label{eq:halfTi2}
|[s_{i-1}p_{i-1}]| + y(t_{i-1}) \leq |y(t_i)|-|[s_{i-1}p_{i-1}]| .$$ Summing (\[eq:halfTi1\]) and (\[eq:halfTi2\]), we get $$|{{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i-1}}}}| + |y(t_{i-1})| \leq |{{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i}}}}{\mbox{\textless}s_i,p_i\mbox{\textgreater}}| + |{\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{s_{i-1},s_i}}}| + |y(t_i)|.$$ Notice that we did not need the additional potential $\delta|[t'_{i-1}t'_i]|$ in this case.
For the rest of the proof, we can assume that $|y(p_{i-1})-y(p_{i})| \geq |y(p_{i-1})-y(t_i)|$. If we assume that $p_i$ lies above $st$, then $t_i$ must lie below $st$. The point $t_i$ is outside of $C_{i-1}$. By Lemma \[lem:siOrder\], $x(p_i) = x(t_{i-1}) < x(t_i)$. Moreover, all points $p$ on ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i-1}}}}$ or inside of it, and such that $x(p_i) < x(p)$ are in the interior of $C_{i-1}$. Therefore, $t_i$ is outside of ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i-1}}}}$.
Recall that by Lemma \[lem:alpha\], if $\theta = \angle w'_{i-1}O'_{i-1}p_i$ and $\alpha = \angle w'_iO'_{i}p_i$, then $0 \leq \alpha < \theta < 3\pi/2$. Without loss of generality, assume that the radius of ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i-1}}}}$ is $1$ and the radius of ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i}}}}$ is $R$. Then we have $|{{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i}}}}{\mbox{\textless}s_i,p_i\mbox{\textgreater}}| = (1 + \alpha)R$ and $[s_it'_{i-1}] = (1-\cos(\alpha))R$. Let $D$ be the difference between the left-hand side and the right-hand side of inequality (\[eq:induction2\]). We can write $D$ as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:worstcase}
D &= |{\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{s_{i-1},s_{i}}}}| +|{{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i}}}}{\mbox{\textless}s_i,p_i\mbox{\textgreater}}| + \delta
|[t'_{i-1}t'_{i}]| + |y(t_i)| - |{{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{P}}}}_{i-1}}}}| - |y(t_{i-1})| \\
&= (1+3\pi/2)(1-\cos(\theta) - (1-\cos(\alpha))R) + (1+\alpha)R +\delta |[t'_{i-1}t'_{i}]|+ |y(t_i)| -\theta - \sin(\theta).\end{aligned}$$ It remains to prove that $D>0$.
We first consider the case where $\theta \leq \pi/4$, which implies that $\alpha < \pi/4$ as well. Let $p'_{i} \neq p_i$ be the intersection of ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i-1}}}}$ with the horizontal line through $p_i$. Since $\theta \leq \pi/4$, we have $x(p'_i)> x(O'_i)$.
Since $|y(p_{i-1})-y(p_{i})| < |y(p_{i-1})-y(p)|$ for all points $p$ outside of ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i-1}}}}$ such that $x(p_i) \leq x(p) \leq x(p'_i)$, it follows that $x(t_i) > x(p'_i)$. Note that $\angle w'_{i-1}O'_{i-1}p'_{i} = \pi - \theta$, as illustrated in Figure \[fig:caseBall\].
Since $|[t'_{i-1}t'_i]| > |[t_{i-1}p'_{i}]| = 2 \cos(\theta)$ (recall that $p_i = t_{i-1}$), we have $$\begin{aligned}
D &\geq (1+3\pi/2)(1-\cos(\theta) - (1-\cos(\alpha))R) + (1+\alpha)R +2\delta\cos(\theta) -\theta - \sin(\theta) \\
&\geq R[1+\alpha-(1+3\pi/2)(1-\cos(\alpha))] + (1+3\pi/2)(1-\cos(\theta)) +2\delta\cos(\theta) -\theta - \sin(\theta).\end{aligned}$$ There exists an $\alpha_0>\pi/4$ such that $1 + \alpha - (1+3\pi/2)(1-\cos(\alpha))$ is positive for all $\alpha\in[0,\alpha_0]$. Therefore, to prove that $D > 0$ (and therefore that inequality (\[eq:induction2\]) holds), it is sufficient to prove that $$\begin{aligned}
0 &\leq (1+3\pi/2)(1-\cos(\theta)) + 2\delta\cos(\theta) - \theta - \sin(\theta).\end{aligned}$$ If we take $\delta = \deltaMin$, we can show that this inequality is true using elementary calculus arguments.
To complete the proof, it remains to consider the case where $\theta\in [\pi/4,\pi]$. If $\alpha\leq \alpha_0$, we have $D \geq (1+3\pi/2)(1-\cos(\theta)) - \theta - \sin(\theta)$, which is positive for all $\theta\in [\pi/4,\pi]$. If $\alpha \in [\alpha_0,\pi]$, $1 + \alpha - (1+3\pi/2)(1-\cos(\alpha))$ is negative and decreasing. Thus, since $\alpha\leq \theta$ and $R<1$, we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
D &\geq 1+\theta-(1+3\pi/2)(1-\cos(\theta)) + (1+3\pi/2)(1-\cos(\theta)) +\delta |[t'_{i-1}t'_{i}]|+ |y(t_i)| -\theta - \sin(\theta)\\
&\geq 1-\sin(\theta)+\delta |[t'_{i-1}t'_{i}]|+ |y(t_i)| .\end{aligned}$$ This lower bound is trivially positive, hence inequality (\[eq:induction2\]) holds in all cases.
Lower Bounds {#sec:lower}
============
In this section, we provide lower bounds on the routing ratio and the competitive ratio of any $k$-local routing algorithm on the Delaunay triangulation and the $L_1$- and $L_\infty$-Delaunay triangulation.
\[thm:ChewLower\] The routing ratio of Chew’s routing algorithm on Delaunay triangulations is at least $5.7282$.
Let $C_0$ and $C_1$ be two circles such that the west point of $C_0$ lies on the $x$-axis and the west point $w_1$ of $C_1$ lies on $C_0$ and below the $x$-axis. Let $s$ be the west point of $C_0$ and let $t$ the rightmost intersection of $C_1$ with the $x$-axis. Let $p_1 = w_1$ and $p_2$ be the intersections of $C_0$ and $C_1$. We perturb the configuration such that $s$ lies slightly below the $x$-axis and $p_1$ lies slightly above the horizontal line through $w_1$ (see Figure \[fig:LBChew\]). This implies that the first two edges of the path computed by Chew’s algorithm are $[s p_1]$ and $[p_1 p_2]$.
Next, we add circles $C_i$ with west point $w_i$ such that $t$ lies on $C_i$, $p_i$ lies slightly above $w_i$, and point $p_{i+1}$ lies slightly above $p_i$. We place circles until $t$ is the lowest point of $C_j$ for some $j$. Finally, we add points $p_j, p_{j+1}, ..., p_k$ (for some integer $k$) on the ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{j}{\mbox{\textless}p_j t\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}$. We slightly perturb the configuration such that all chords reach $t$ (see Figure \[fig:LBChew\]). Observe that by placing sufficiently many vertices between $p_2$ and $p_j$, we create an almost vertical path from $p_2$ to $p_j$. The routing path computed by Chew’s algorithm tends to $[s p_1] + [p_1 p_2] + {\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{p_2,t}}}$.
We now pick $C_0$ to be the circle with center at $O_0 = (-0.7652277146, 0)$ and radius $0.2369448832$ and we pick $C_1$ to be the circle with center $O_1 = (0, -0.0320133045)$ and radius 1. This leads to a routing path whose length approaches $11.4660626$ as $j$ and $k$ approach infinity. Since the distance between $s$ and $t$ is $2.00166$, this implies that the routing ratio of Chew’s algorithm is at least $5.7282$.[^2]
We note that this lower bound is strictly larger that $|{\ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}}}_{s,t}}}|/|[st]| = 1+3\pi/2$. Next we show that no deterministic $k$-local routing algorithm on Delaunay triangulations can have routing ratio less than 1.7018.
\[thm:L2Lower\] There exist no deterministic $k$-local routing algorithm on Delaunay triangulations with routing ratio at most 1.7018 or that is $1.2327$-competitive.
Let $C_0$ be the circle with center $O_0 = (1, 0)$ and radius $1$ and let $C_1$ be the circle with center $O_1=(1.4804533538, 0.2990071425)$ and radius $1.2285346394$. Let $s$ be the leftmost intersection of $C_0$ with the $x$-axis and let $t$ be the rightmost intersection of $C_1$ with the $x$-axis. Let points $A$ and $B$ be the intersections of $C_0$ and $C_1$ such that $A$ lies above the $x$-axis. Let $A'$ and $B'$ be the vertices on $O_0 A$ and $O_0 B$ outside $C_0$ such that $|[AA']| = |[BB']|= 0.0718725166$ (see Figure \[fig:LBL2\]). These points (referred to as *shield vertices* by Bose et al. [@bose2011almost]) will ensure that no shortcuts between points on $C_0$ and points on $C_1$ are created.
Next, we place points densely on the arcs of $C_0$ and $C_1$ that are not contained in the other circle. To ensure that $A A'$ and $B B'$ are edges of the Delaunay triangulation, we leave small gaps along the arcs close to each shield vertex. Since all points of $C_0$ (respectively $C_1$) are co-circular, any planar triangulations of them is a valid Delaunay triangulation. Next, we perturb the points in order to both break co-circularity and to choose the triangulation of the interior of the circles (see Figure \[fig:LBL2\]). We compute a triangulation where the shortest paths between $t$ and any point of point set $P$ does not use any chord except $[A B]$. Let $q$ be the point on $C_0$ such that $q A'$ is the tangent of $C_0$ at $q$ and let $q'$ the reflection of $q$ over the $x$-axis.
Now let us consider any deterministic $k$-local routing algorithm. We consider two point sets: The first one is described above (see Figure \[fig:LBL2\]) and the second one is obtained from the first one by reflecting the part of the point set that lies to the right of $q q'$ over the $x$-axis. No deterministic $k$-local routing algorithm can distinguish between the two instances before it reaches $q''$, a $k$-neighbor of $q$ or $q'$, depending on if the routing algorithm followed the arc towards $q$ or $q'$. Since vertices are densely placed on the arc of $C_0$, $q''$ is arbitrary close to $q$ or $q'$. Hence, any deterministic $k$-local algorithm must route to the same vertex $q''$ in both instances. Either $q''$ is close to $q$ or $q'$. In one of the two instances this leads to a non-optimal route: On the instance of Figure \[fig:LBL2\], the length of the arc from $s$ to $q$ is $0.477998$ and the shortest paths from $q$ to $t$ go via vertex $A$ and have length $4.0693551467$. The Euclidean distance from $s$ to $t$ is $2.6720456033$. Hence, on one of the two instances the length of the computed path is at least $1.7018 \cdot |[st]|$. The shortest path between $s$ and $t$ in this configuration is of length $3.6888$, this configuration gives a lower bound on the competitiveness of any routing algorithm of $1.2327$.
Finally, we look at the routing ratio and competitiveness of any deterministic $k$-local routing algorithm on the $L_1$- and $L_\infty$-Delaunay triangulations.
\[thm:L1Lower\] There exists no deterministic $k$-local routing algorithm for the $L_1$- and $L_\infty$-Delaunay triangulations that has routing ratio less than $(2 + \sqrt 2/2)\approx 2.7071$ or that is $\frac{2 + \sqrt 2/2}{1+\sqrt 2}\approx 1.1213$-competitive.
The proofs for the $L_1$- and $L_\infty$-Delaunay triangulations are very similar as one can be created from the other by rotating the point set. We present only the point set of the $L_\infty$-Delaunay triangulation. First, we place the source vertex $s$ at the origin. Given some values $\epsilon>0$ and $d<1$, we then place $k$ vertices close to point $q=(\epsilon, (2-\sqrt 2)/4)$ and $q'=(2\epsilon,-(2-\sqrt 2)/4)$ (see Figure \[fig:LBL1\]). Next, we place a vertex A at $(3\epsilon,1-d+\epsilon)$, vertex $B$ at $(1+2\epsilon,1-d)$, and destination $t$ at $(1+3\epsilon,0)$. Finally, we place vertices densely on $[Bt]$ and on $[q'B']$, where $B'$ is picked such that $q',B,t,B'$ forms a parallelogram. As $\epsilon$ approaches 0, the resulting $L_\infty$-Delaunay triangulation approaches the one shown in Figure \[fig:LBL1\].
Now, consider any deterministic $k$-local routing algorithm. We consider two point sets: The first one is described above (see Figure \[fig:LBL1\]) and the second one is obtained from the first one by reflecting the part of the point set that lies to the right of $q q'$ over the $x$-axis. Since there are $k$ points between $s$ and $q$ and between $s$ and $q'$, the only information the $k$-local routing algorithm has before getting close to $q$ or $q'$ consists of the vertices to the left of $qq'$. If the first step made by the algorithm is towards a vertex close to $q$, we consider the point set shown in Figure \[fig:LBL1\]. Otherwise, we consider the reflected point set instead. We note that $|[sq]|= (2-\sqrt 2)/4$ and that the shortest paths from $q$ to $t$ have length $\min(|[qA]+[AB]+[Bt]|,|[qq']+[q'B]+[Bt]|)=\min(1-d-(2-\sqrt 2)/4+1+1-d,(2-\sqrt 2)/2+\sqrt 2 + 1-d)$. If we pick $d=(2-\sqrt 2)/4)$, the length of both paths is equal to $3-3(2-\sqrt 2)/4$. This leads to a path from $s$ to $t$ of length $2 + \sqrt 2/2$. Since the Euclidean distance between $s$ and $t$ approaches 1 as $\epsilon$ approaches 0, this gives a lower bound on the routing ratio of any deterministic $k$-local routing algorithm on the $L_1$- and $L_\infty$-Delaunay triangulations.
Finally, we observe that on the point set shown in Figure \[fig:LBL1\], the length of shortest path from $s$ to $t$ is $1+\sqrt 2$. This gives a lower bound of $\frac{2 + \sqrt 2/2}{1+\sqrt 2}$ on the competitive ratio of any deterministic $k$-local routing algorithm.
Appendix {#appendix .unnumbered}
========
\[lem:angles\] Let $O_i$ be the center of $C_i$ and let $\angle w_{i-1}O_{i-1}p_i$ and $\angle w_iO_ip_i$ be the angles defined using orientations of ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{R}}}}}}{\mbox{\textless}p_{i-1},p_{i}\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}$ and ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{R}}}}}}{\mbox{\textless}p_i,p_{i+1}\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}$, respectively. Then (as illustrated in Figure \[fig:angles\]), for every $1\leq i \leq k$, $$0 \leq \angle w_iO_ip_i < \angle w_{i-1}O_{i-1}p_i < 3\pi/2.$$
Without loss of generality, we assume that $p_{i-1}$ and $p_i$ belong to the upper arc from $w_{i-1}$ to $r_{i-1}$ of $C_{i-1}$. This implies that the orientation of ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{R}}}}}}{\mbox{\textless}p_{i-1},p_{i}\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}$ is clockwise and that $p_i$ lies above $st$. Because $r_{i-1}$ is the rightmost intersection of $C_{i-1}$ with $st$, it follows that $\angle w_{i-1}O_{i-1}r_{i-1} < 3\pi/2$, which implies the third inequality. Also, the first inequality holds because the angles are defined to be non-negative.
Consider the triangles which intersect $[st]$ that have $p_i$ as a vertex. Let $C_{i-1}=C_i^0, C_i^1, \dots, C_i^l=C_i$ be the circles circumscribing these triangles, ordered from left to right. Let $O_i^j$ be the center and $w_i^j$ be the leftmost point of circle $C_i^j$. The lemma will follow if we show that $\angle w_i^jO_i^jp_i < \angle w_i^{j-1}O_i^{j-1}p_i$ for every $j = 1, \dots, l$. Let $p_i$, $q_j$ and $q'_{j}$ be the vertices of the triangle circumscribed by $C_i^{j-1}$, in clockwise order. Then $q_j$ must lie below the $x$-axis and $O_i^j$ must lie on the perpendicular bisector of segment $[p_iq_j]$ and in the half-plane defined by $p_iO_i^{j-1}$ not including $w_i^{j-1}$. This implies that $\angle p_iO_i^{j-1}w_i^{j-1} > \angle p_iO_i^jw_i^j$.
[**Lemma \[lem:alpha\]**]{} This lemma is illustrated in Figure \[fig:angles\]. Consider the circles $C_{i-1}$ and $C_i$ with centers $O_{i-1}$ and $O_i$, respectively. Without loss of generality, we assume that $p_{i-1}$ and $p_i$ belong to the upper arc from $w_{i-1}$ to $r_{i-1}$ of $C_{i-1}$. This implies that the orientation of ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{R}}}}}}{\mbox{\textless}p_{i-1},p_{i}\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}$ is clockwise and that $y(p_i) \geq 0$. The center $O'_{i-1}$ of ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i-1}}}}$ lies on the half-line defined by the perpendicular bisector of $[p_{i-1}p_{i}]$, starting at $O_{i-1}$ and intersecting $[p_{i-1}p_{i}]$. This implies that a) $\angle w'_{i-1}O'_{i-1}p_{i} > \angle w_{i-1}O_{i-1}p_{i}$ and b) $\angle w'_{i-1}O'_{i-1}p_{i-1} < \angle w_{i-1}O_{i-1}p_{i-1}$. In the context of circle $C_i$, inequality b) becomes $\angle w'_{i}O'_{i}p_{i} < \angle w_{i}O_{i}p_{i}$ and the second inequality in (\[eq:anglesp\]) follows from Lemma \[lem:angles\]. Let $r$ be the rightmost intersection of ${{\color{{black}}\ensuremath{C'_{i-1}}}}$ with $st$. It follows that $\angle w'_{i-1}O'_{i-1}r \leq 3\pi/2$. Since $p_i$ lies on ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{i-1}{\mbox{\textless}w'_{i-1},r\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}$, the third inequality in (\[eq:anglesp\]) holds. Finally, the first inequality in (\[eq:anglesp\]) holds since either $p_i=w'_i$ or $p_i$ lies on ${{\color{{black}} \ensuremath{{\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}}_{i}{\mbox{\textless}w'_i,p_{i+1}\mbox{\textgreater}}}}}$ that is clockwise oriented.
[^1]: N. Bonichon partially supported by ANR grant JCJC EGOS ANR-12-JS02-002-01 and LIRCO. P. Bose partially supported by NSERC. A. van Renssen supported by JST, ERATO, Kawarabayashi Large Graph Project.
[^2]: GeoGebra files that describe the 2 first examples presented in this section are available at the following url: <http://www.labri.fr/perso/bonichon/DelaunayRouting/>
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Motivated by the propagation of nonlinear sound waves through relaxing hereditary media, we study a nonlocal third-order Jordan–Moore–Gibson–Thompson acoustic wave equation. Under the assumption that the relaxation kernel decays exponentially, we prove local well-posedness in unbounded two- and three-dimensional domains. In addition, we show that the solution of the three-dimensional model exists globally in time, while the energy of the system decays polynomially.'
address:
- |
Department of Mathematics\
Radboud University\
Heyendaalseweg 135, 6525 AJ Nijmegen, The Netherlands
- |
Department of Mathematics\
College of Sciences\
University of Sharjah, P. O. Box: 27272\
Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
author:
- '**Vanja Nikolić$^\ast$ and Belkacem Said-Houari**'
bibliography:
- 'references.bib'
title: Mathematical analysis of memory effects and thermal relaxation in nonlinear sound waves on unbounded domains
---
Introduction
============
Nowadays ultrasound waves are an indispensable tool in medicine, commonly used in imaging and non-invasive treatments of various disorders [@duck2002nonlinear; @cleveland2015nonlinear; @maresca2017nonlinear; @pinton2011effects]. Because of the high amplitude-to-frequency ratio that ultrasonic waves are likely to have, nonlinear effects can often be observed in their propagation. This necessitates a deeper understanding of the nonlinear acoustic models and their analytical properties.\
Our work is particularly motivated by nonlinear sound waves in relaxing media that exhibit memory effects. These relaxation processes can occur when there are inhomogeneities in the propagation region; for example, through excitation of molecular degrees of freedom or some impurity effects in the fluid; cf. [@naugolnykh2000nonlinear Chapter 1]. In such cases, the pressure-density state equation is not satisfied exactly but up to a term that involves the history of the process.\
Additionally, classical models of nonlinear acoustics, such as the Westervelt and Kuznetsov equation, are known to exhibit parabolic-like behavior with an infinite speed of propagation [@mizohata1993global; @kaltenbacher2009global]. To avoid this paradox, we can replace the Fourier temperature law by the Maxwell–Cattaneo law during the derivation, resulting in a third-order acoustic equation with a finite propagation speed [@jordan2008nonlinear].\
We investigate here such a third-order nonlinear acoustic model with a memory term. In particular, we are concerned with its behavior in terms of global solvability and energy decay in the whole $\R^n$. In bounded domains, it is known that the exponential decay of the relaxation kernel directly influences how the energy of the system decays [@lasiecka2017global]. The situation in the whole space $\R^n$ is different. As it turns out, although our memory kernel will decay exponentially, the solution at most decays polynomially.\
We organize the paper as follows. We begin by discussing the modeling aspects and setting our problem in Section \[Sec:ProblemSetting\]. Section \[Sec:Preliminaries\] contains the necessary theoretical preliminaries. In Section \[Sec:EnergyEstimates\], we formally derive several energy estimates for our problem rewritten as a first-order evolution equation. Section \[Sec:LocalExistence\] is dedicated to proving short-time well-posedness of the problem. In Section \[Sec:GlobalExistence\], we prove that in $\R^3$ the solution exists globally in time. Finally, in Section \[Sec:DecayRates\], we show the energy of the system decays polynomially with time.
Problem setting and modelling {#Sec:ProblemSetting}
=============================
In nonlinear acoustic, the Kuznetsov equation is one of the classical models. It is given by $$\label{Kuznt}
\psi_{tt}-c^{2}\Delta \psi-\delta \Delta \psi_{t}=\left( \tfrac{1}{c^{2}}\tfrac{B}{2A}(\psi_{t})^{2}+|\nabla \psi|^{2}\right)_t,$$ where $\psi=\psi(x,t)$ represents the acoustic velocity potential for $x \in \R^n$ and $t>0$; see [@kuznetsov1971equations]. The equation can be obtained as an approximation of the governing equations of fluid mechanics by means of asymptotic expansions in powers of small parameters; see [@crighton1979model; @kuznetsov1971equations; @kaltenbacher2007numerical]. The constants $c>0$ and $\delta >0$ are the speed and the diffusivity of sound, respectively. The ratio $B/A$ indicates the nonlinearity of the equation of state for the given medium. Typical values of these parameters in different media can be found in, e.g., [@kaltenbacher2007numerical; @naugolnykh2000nonlinear]. If we can neglect local nonlinear effects and assume $$\label{local_approximation}
|\nabla \psi|^2 \approx \frac{1}{c^2}\psi_t^2,$$ we arrive at the Westervelt equation in the potential form $$\label{Westervelt}
\psi_{tt}-c^{2}\Delta \psi-\delta \Delta \psi_{t}=\left( \tfrac{1}{c^{2}}(\tfrac{B}{2A}+1)(\psi_{t})^{2}\right)_t;$$ cf. [@westervelt1963parametric]. After solving equation or for the acoustic velocity potential, we can compute the acoustic pressure as $u= \varrho \psi_t$, where $\varrho$ denotes the mass density of the medium.\
In the derivation of these models, the classical Fourier law of heat conduction is used in the equation for the conservation of energy. It is, however, well-known that the Fourier law predicts an infinite speed of heat propagation: any thermal disturbance at one point has an instantaneous effect elsewhere in the medium [@liu1979instantaneous]. To overcome this drawback, the Maxwell–Cattaneo law can be used instead. Introducing this law of heat conduction in the derivation of leads to a third-order equation given by $$\label{JMGT}
\tau \psi_{ttt}+\psi_{tt}-c^{2}\Delta \psi-b\Delta \psi_{t}= \left( \tfrac{1}{c^{2}}(\tfrac{B}{2A}+1)(\psi_{t})^{2}\right)_t;$$ cf. [@jordan2008nonlinear]. This nonlinear equation is often referred to as the Jordan–Moore–Gibson–Thompson (JMGT) equation. Here $\tau>0$ stands for the relaxation time. The constant $b>0$ is given by $$\label{b}
b=\delta +\tau c^2.$$ Additionally, it is well-known that relaxation processes play an important role in high-frequency waves in fluids and gases. If relaxation occurs, acoustic pressure can depend on the density at all prior times. Such a process, therefore, introduces a memory term into the state equation. This motivates us to consider the general nonlocal JMGT equation in the form of $$\label{Main_Equation}
\begin{aligned}
&\tau \psi_{ttt}+\alpha \psi_{tt}-c^2\Delta \psi-b \Delta \psi_t+%
\displaystyle\int_{0}^{t}g(s)\Delta \psi(t-s)\ds
=\left( k \psi_{t}^{2}\right)_t.
\end{aligned}$$ The function $g$ denotes the relaxation memory kernel related to the particular relaxation mechanism. The constant $k \in \R$ indicates the nonlinearity of the model and $\alpha>0$ the friction. Equation is here considered with the following initial data: $$\label{initial data}
\psi(x,0)=\psi_{0}(x),\qquad \psi_{t}(x,0)=\psi_{1}(x), \qquad \psi_{tt}(x,0)=\psi_{2}(x),$$ whose regularity will be specified in the theorems below.
Memory kernel
-------------
Throughout the paper, we make the following standard assumptions on the relaxation kernel; cf. [@dell2016moore Section 1].
The memory kernel is assumed to satisfy the following conditions:
1. \[itm:first\] $g\in W^{1,1}(\R^+)$ and $g'$ is almost continuous on $\R^+=(0, +\infty)$.
2. $g(s) \geq 0$ for all $s>0$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\label{def_cg}
\ c^2_g:=c^2-\displaystyle\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\ds>0. \vspace{0.1 cm}
\end{aligned}$$
3. There exists $\zeta>0$, such that the function $g$ satisfies the differential inequality given by $$g^\prime(s)\leq -\zeta g(s)$$ for every $s\in (0,\infty)$.
4. It holds that $g^{\prime\prime}\geq0$ almost everywhere.
In relaxing media, the memory kernel typically has the exponential form $$g(s)=m c^2\exp{(-s/\tau)},$$ where $m$ is the relaxation parameter; see [@naugolnykh2000nonlinear Chapter 1] and [@lasiecka2017global Section 1]. The value of $m$ is small, so the condition , equivalent to $m< \tau$, is easily satisfied. With this choice of the kernel, we have $$g'(s) \leq -g(s);$$ i.e., we can take $\zeta=1$. We see also that for $\tau \rightarrow 0+$, the kernel tends to zero and we are formally in the regime of the Westervelt equation, as expected.\
\
In smooth bounded domains, exponential decay of the memory kernel $g$ leads to the exponential decay of the energy of the system; cf. [@lasiecka2017global Theorem 1.4]. This changes when waves propagate in the whole space $\R^n$. Even though our memory kernel decays exponentially, the solution will decay at most polynomially.\
The optimality of the decay in $\R^n$ is usually measured with respect to the decay rate of the heat kernel: the solution of $u_t-\Delta u=0$ with initial data being the delta distribution. For the heat equation in bounded domains, the solution decays exponentially fast, however, in the whole space $\R^n$ the solution (i.e., its energy norm) decays at most polynomially with the rate $(1+t)^{-n/4}$ provided that the initial datum is in $L^1(\R^n)$; see [@Giga_Book]. This decay rate of the heat energy is, in fact, optimal because we can explicitly deduce it from the form of the heat kernel.
Previous work
-------------
Theoretical preliminaries and notation {#Sec:Preliminaries}
======================================
We collect here several theoretical results that will be helpful in the later proofs.
The past-history framework
--------------------------
Following [@dell2016moore], we use the so-called past history framework of Dafermos [@dafermos1970asymptotic] to transform our problem into an evolution one. We then introduce the auxiliary past-history variable $\eta(t,s)=\eta^{t}(s)$ for $t \geq 0$, defined as $$\label{def of eta}
\eta^{t}(s)= \begin{cases}
\psi(t)-\psi(t-s), \quad &0<s\leq t, \\
\psi(t), \quad &s>t.
\end{cases}$$ By setting $\eta^0(x ,s)=\psi_0(x)$, the JMGT equation then transforms into the following problem: $$\label{eta syst}
\begin{cases}
\tau \psi_{ttt}+\alpha \psi_{tt}-b \Delta \psi_{t}-c^2_g\Delta \psi-%
\displaystyle\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta \eta^t(s)\ds
= 2k\psi_{t}\psi_{tt}, \\[2mm]
\eta^{t}_{t}(x,s)+\eta^{t}_{s}(x,s)=\psi_{t}(x,t),%
\end{cases}%$$ where we recall that the modified speed of sound squared $c^2_g$ is defined in . The problem is supplemented with the initial data .\
Note that from the second equation in we get via Duhamel’s formula, assuming that we set $\eta^0=\psi_0$; see also [@dell2016moore Remark 3.3]. Therefore, we can obtain equation from . Indeed, it is enough to check that $$\begin{aligned}
\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta \eta^t(s)\ds =&\, \int_{0}^{t}g(s)\Delta \eta^t(s)\ds +\int_{t}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta \eta^t(s)\ds \\
=&\, \int_{0}^{t}g(s)\Delta (\psi(t)-\psi(t-s))\ds +\int_{t}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta \psi(t)\ds\\
=&\, (c^2-c^2_g) \Delta \psi-\int_0^t g(s) \Delta \psi(t-s) \ds.
\end{aligned}$$
**Setting $\boldsymbol{\alpha=1}$**
-----------------------------------
From this point on, we set $\alpha=1$. We may do so without the loss of generality since we can always re-scale other coefficients in the equation. The critical condition then reads as $$\label{critical_condition_scaled}
b >\tau c^2,$$ which, having in mind relation , means that we need the sound diffusivity $\delta$ to be positive. In other words, we are assuming our medium to be non-inviscid. For our wel-posedness result, we will also require that $\tau c^2 > \tau c^2_g$, which is equivalent to assuming that $\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\ds>0$.
Functional spaces
-----------------
For future use, we introduce here the weighted $L^{2}$-spaces, $$L^2_{\tilde{g}}=L^{2}_{\tilde{g}}(\mathbb{R}^{+}, L^2(\mathbb{R}^{n})).$$ We will have three types of weights: $\tilde{g} \in \{g, -g' , g''\}$. The space is endowed with the inner product $$\left(\eta^{t},\tilde{\eta}^{t} \right)_{L^2, \tilde{g}}=%
\displaystyle\int_{0}^{t}\tilde{g}(s)\left(
\eta^{t}(s),\tilde{\eta}^{t}(s)\right)_{L^{2}(\mathbb{R}%
^{n})} \ds$$ and with the following norm: $$\Vert\eta^{t}\Vert^{2}_{L^2, \tilde{g}}=\int_{0}^{t}\tilde{g}(s)\Vert%
\eta^{t}(s)\Vert_{L^{2}}^{2}\ds,$$ for $\eta^{t}, \tilde{\eta}^{t}\in L^2_{\tilde{g}}.$ We can then further introduce the spaces $$H^{m}_{\tilde{g}}=\{\eta^t \in L^2_{\tilde{g}}: D^s \eta^t \in L^2_{\tilde{g}}, \ \forall |\alpha| \leq m\}, \quad m \in \{1, 2\}.$$ The infinitesimal generator of the right-translation $C_{0}$-semigroup on $L^2_{\tilde{g}}$ is given by the linear operator $\mathbb{T}$: $$\label{def_T_eta}
\mathbb{T}\eta^{t}=-\eta^{t}_s\quad \text{with}\quad D(\mathbb{T})=\{\eta^{t}\in%
L^2_{\tilde{g}}\, | \ \eta^{t}_s\in L^2_{\tilde{g}},\ \eta^{t}(0)=0\},$$ where the index $s$ denotes the distributional derivative with respect to the variable $s>0$; cf. [@dell2016moore; @Bounadja_Said_2019].
Auxiliary inequalities
----------------------
Throughout the paper, we often use the Ladyzhenskaya inequality for functions $f \in H^1(\R^n)$, with $ n \in \{2, 3\}$, given by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Ladyz_Ineq}
\Vert f\Vert_{L^4}\leq
C_n\Vert f\Vert_{L^2}^{1-n/4}\Vert \nabla f\Vert_{L^2}^{n/4},\end{aligned}$$ where the constant $C_n>0$ depends on $n$. Furthermore, we frequently rely also on this particular case of the Gagliardo–Nirenberg interpolation inequality [@Ner59; @nirenberg2011elliptic]: $$\label{Interpolation_inequality}
\begin{aligned}
\left\Vert \nabla u\right\Vert _{L^{4}}\leq C_n \left\Vert \nabla u\right\Vert
_{L^{2}}^{1-n/4}\left\Vert
\nabla^{2}u\right\Vert _{L^{2}}^{n/4}.
\end{aligned}$$ We need the following estimate as well: $$\Vert \nabla( uv) \Vert _{L^2}\leq C( \Vert u\Vert _{L^{\infty}}\Vert
\nabla v\Vert _{L^{2}}+\Vert v\Vert _{L^{4}}\Vert \nabla u\Vert
_{L^{4}}).
\label{First_inequaliy_Guass}$$ The next technical estimate will be employed when deriving the decay rate of the energy of our system.
\[Lemma:Ineq\] Let $n\geq 1$ and $t\geq 0 $. Then the following estimate holds: $$\label{eq of DR}
\int_{0}^{1}r^{n-1}e^{-r^{2}t}\textup{d}r \leq C(n)(1+t)^{-{n}/{2}}.$$
We state here one more useful inequality that will be crucial in our energy arguments.
\[Lemma\_Stauss\] Let $M=M(t)$ be a non-negative continuous function satisfying the inequality $$M(t)\leq C_1+C_2 M(t)^{\kappa},$$ in some interval containing $0$, where $C_1$ and $C_2$ are positive constants and $\kappa>1$. If $M(0)\leq C_1$ and $$C_1C_2^{1/(\kappa-1)}<(1-1/\kappa)\kappa^{-1/(\kappa-1)},$$ then in the same interval $$M(t)<\frac{C_1}{1-1/\kappa}.$$
Notation
--------
Throughout the paper, the constant $C$ denotes a generic positive constant that does not depend on time, and that may take different values of different occasions. We use $x \lesssim y$ to denote $x \leq C y$.
Energy estimates {#Sec:EnergyEstimates}
================
In this section, we formally derive several energy estimates for our problem that we will rely on later. We begin by rewriting our equation as a first-order in time system. To this end, we introduce the functions $$\label{Change_Variable}
v=\psi_{t}\quad \text{and}\quad w=\psi_{tt},$$ which leads to the following system of equations: $$\label{Main_System}
\begin{cases}
\psi_{t}=v, \\
v_{t}=w, \\
\tau w_{t}=- w+c^2_g\Delta \psi+b\Delta v + \displaystyle%
\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta\eta(s)\ds+2k vw,
\\
\eta_{t}=v-\eta_{s},%
\end{cases}%$$ with the initial data $$\label{Main_System_IC}
(\psi, v, w, \eta) |_{t=0} =(\psi_0, \psi_1, \psi_2, \psi_0).$$ By using the notation $$\Psi=(\psi, v, w, \eta^t)^T,$$ and setting $\Psi_0=\Psi(0)$, we can convert our problem into an initial value problem for a first-order abstract evolution equation. Indeed, $\Psi$ satisfies $$\label{abstract_evol_eq}
\begin{aligned}
\begin{cases}
\dfrac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\Psi(t)= \mathcal{A} \Psi(t)+\mathcal{F}(\Psi),\quad t>0, \vspace{0.2cm}\\[1mm]
\Psi(0)=\Psi_0,
\end{cases}
\end{aligned}$$ where the operator $ \mathcal{A}$ is defined as $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{A}\begin{bmatrix}
\psi \\[1mm]
v \\[1mm]
w \\[3mm]
\eta^t
\end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix}
v \\[1mm]
w \\[1mm]
-\dfrac{1}{\tau} w+ \dfrac{c^2_g}{\tau} \Delta \psi+\dfrac{b}{\tau} \Delta v+\dfrac{1}{\tau}\displaystyle \int_0^\infty g(s)\Delta \eta^t(s) \ds \\[3mm]
v+T \eta^t
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{aligned}$$ The nonlinear term in is given by $$\label{def_F}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{F}(\Psi)= \dfrac{2k}{\tau} \, [
0,\
0 ,\
v w ,\
0
]^T.
\end{aligned}$$ Going forward, our work plan is to introduce the mapping $$\begin{aligned}\label{Mapping_T}
\mathcal{T}(\Phi)=\Psi,
\end{aligned}$$ where $\Psi$ solves the inhomogeneous linear problem $$\begin{cases}
\partial_t \Psi-\mathcal{A} \Psi = \mathcal{F}(\Phi), \\
\Psi_{t=0}=\Psi_0
\end{cases}$$ on a suitably defined ball in a Banach space and employ the contraction principle on $\mathcal{T}$. The unique fixed-point is then the solution to our nonlinear problem.\
As a preparation, we first derive several energy estimates for which are uniform in time and thus crucial in later proving global existence.
Functional setting
------------------
In order to formulate our results, we introduce the Hilbert spaces $$\label{Hilbert_spaces}
\begin{aligned}
& \mathcal{H}^{s+1}= H^{s+1}(\R^n) \times H^{s+1}(\R^n) \times H^{s}(\R^n) \times H^{s+1}_{-g'}(\R^n), \\
\end{aligned}$$ for $s \in \{0, 1\}$ and $n \in \{2,3\}$. It is known that the homogeneous Sobolev space $\dot{H}^{1}(\R^n)$ is a Hilbert space if and only if $n>2$; see [@bahouri2011fourier Proposition 1.34]. For $n=3$, we can therefore work with the Hilbert spaces $$\label{dotHilbert_space_1}
\begin{aligned}
\dot{\mathcal{H}}^{1}=&\, \dot{H}^{1}(\R^3) \times H^{1}(\R^3) \times L^2(\R^3) \times \dot{H}^{1}_{-g'}(\R^3),
\end{aligned}$$ as well as $$\label{dotHilbert_space_2}
\begin{aligned}
\dot{\mathcal{H}}^{2}=&\, \begin{multlined}[t] \{ \psi: \ \psi \in \dot{H}^{1}(\R^3), \, \Delta \psi \in L^2(\R^3)\} \times H^{1}(\R^3) \times L^2(\R^3)\\
\times \{\eta^t \in \dot{H}^{1}_{-g'}(\R^3):\, \Delta \eta \in L^2(\R^3) \}. \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$ We intend to work with these spaces to show global well-posedness in $\R^3$.\
**Energy functionals.** We then define the energy of first order by $$\label{E_1_Eqv}
\begin{aligned}
\mathscr{E}_1[\Psi] =&\, \begin{multlined}[t]\Vert\nabla(\psi +\tau v)\Vert^{2}_{L^2} + \Vert v+\tau w\Vert^{2}_{L^2}+\Vert \nabla v\Vert^{2}_{L^2}
+\Vert \nabla\eta\Vert^{2}_{L^2, -g'}. % +\Vert \nabla\eta\Vert^{2}_{L^2, g}
\end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$ We also introduce the energy functional of second order as follows: $$\label{E_2_Eqv}
\begin{aligned}
\mathscr{E}_2[\Psi] =&\, \begin{multlined}[t] \Vert\Delta(\psi +\tau v)\Vert^{2}_{L^2} + \Vert\nabla(v+\tau w)\Vert^{2}_{L^2}+\Vert \Delta v(t)\Vert^{2}_{L^2}
+\Vert \Delta\eta\Vert^{2}_{L^2, -g'}. %+\Vert \Delta\eta\Vert^{2}_{L^2, g}.
\end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$ Thus, for $\Psi \in \dot{\mathcal{H}}^2$, we have the norm $$\|\Psi\|_{\dot{\mathcal{H}}^2}= \left(\mathscr{E}_1[\Psi]+\mathscr{E}_2[\Psi]+\Vert w\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2} \right)^{1/2},$$ whereas for $\Psi \in \mathcal{H}^2$, the norm is given by $$\|\Psi\|_{\mathcal{H}^2}= \left(\|\psi\|^2_{L^2}+\mathscr{E}_1[\Psi]+\mathscr{E}_2[\Psi]+\Vert w\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2} \right)^{1/2}.$$ For $\Psi \in C([0,T]; \mathcal{H}^2)$, we can introduce here the energy semi-norm by $$\label{EnergyNorm}
\begin{aligned}
|\Psi|_{\mathcal{E}(t)}
= \, \sup_{0\leq \sigma \leq t} \left(\mathscr{E}_1[\Psi](\sigma)+\mathscr{E}_2[\Psi](\sigma)+\Vert w(\sigma )\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2} \right)^{1/2} .
\end{aligned}$$ The corresponding dissipation semi-norm is given by $$\label{DissipativeEnergyNorm}
\begin{aligned}
&|\Psi|_{\mathcal{D}(t)}\\
=&\, \left\{ \vphantom{\int_{0}^{t}} \right.\begin{multlined}[t]\int_{0}^{t}\left(\Vert \nabla
v(\sigma )\Vert _{L^2}^{2}+\Vert \nabla \eta (\sigma )\Vert _{L^2, -g'}^{2}+\mathscr{E}_2[\Psi](\sigma)\right. \left. \left.
+\Vert w(\sigma )\Vert
_{L^{2}}^{2} \right) \textup{d} \sigma \vphantom{\int_{0}^{t}}\right\}^{1/2}. \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$We can easily see here one of the difficulties in the analysis of the JMGT equation in $\R^n$, which is that in general, we do not have direct control over $\|\psi(t)\|_{L^2}$ because of the lack of Poincaré’s inequality.
Derivation of the estimates
---------------------------
We derive the energy estimates under the assumption that a sufficiently smooth solution $\Psi=(\psi, v, w, \eta)^T$ of our system with initial conditions exists on some time interval $[0, T]$. In particular, we assume that $|\Psi|_{\mathcal{E}(T)}< \infty$. The estimates below will then be rigorously justified in Section \[Sec:LocalExistence\].\
To simplify the notation that involves the nonlinear term $2kvw$ in the system, we also introduce the functionals $R^{(1)}$ and $R^{(2)}$ as $$\label{Def_R}
\begin{aligned}
R^{(1)}(\varphi)= 2k(vw, \varphi)_{L^2}, \quad R^{(2)}(\varphi)= 2k(\nabla(vw), \nabla \varphi)_{L^2},
\end{aligned}$$ where $\varphi$ stands for various test functions that we use in the proofs.\
Our main goal now is to derive an estimate in the form $$\label{Main_Estimate_Bootstrap}
\begin{aligned}
|\Psi|^2_{\mathcal{E}(t)}+|\Psi|^2_{\mathcal{D}(t)} \lesssim&\, |\Psi|^2_{\mathcal{E}(0)}+\sum_i \int_0^t |R^{(1)}(\varphi_i) |\, \textup{d}\sigma+\sum_j \int_0^t |R^{(2)}(\varphi_j) |\, \textup{d}\sigma \\
\lesssim&\, |\Psi|^2_{\mathcal{E}(0)}+ |\Psi|_{\mathcal{E}(t)}|\Psi|^2_{\mathcal{D}(t)}
\end{aligned}$$ for all $t \in [0,T]$. On account of Lemma \[Lemma\_Stauss\], this inequality together with a bootstrap argument yields $$\begin{aligned}
|\Psi|_{\mathcal{E}(t)}+|\Psi|_{\mathcal{D}(t)} \lesssim |\Psi|_{\mathcal{E}(0)} \end{aligned}$$ provided that $|\Psi|_{\mathcal{E}(0)}$ is small enough. The hidden constant does not depend on time, and so the above estimates allow us to continue the solution to $T=\infty$.
Lower-order estimates
---------------------
In order to formulate our results and following [@dell2016moore], we introduce here the weighted lower-order energy of first order at time $t \geq 0$ as $$\label{energy}
\begin{aligned}
E_1(t)
=& \,\begin{multlined}[t] \dfrac{1}{2}\left [\vphantom{\int_{0}^{%
\infty}} c^2_g%
\|\nabla (\psi+\tau v)\|_{L^2}^{2}+\tau(b -\tau
c^2_g )\|\nabla v\|^{2}_{L^2}+\|v+\tau w\|^{2}_{L^2}\right. \\
\left. +\tau \Vert \nabla
\eta \Vert _{L^2, -g'}^{2}+ \|\nabla \eta\|^2_{L^2, g}
\right.
\left.+ 2\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}
\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s) \nabla \eta (s) \cdot \nabla v
\ds \dx\right]. \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$ We remark that the last term in has an undefined sign, but we will show that the other terms in the energy functional can absorb it. In fact, $E_1$ is equivalent to the energy $\mathscr{E}_1=\mathscr{E}_1[\Psi]$, introduced in .
\[Lemma\_EquivE\_0\] Assume that $b \geq \tau c^2 >\tau c^2_g.$ There exist positive constants $C_{1}$ and $C_{2}$, such that $$\label{equiv E and E0}
C_{1} \mathscr{E}_1(t)\leq E_1(t)\leq C_{2} \mathscr{E}_1(t),$$ for all $t\geq0$.
The statement follows by [@dell2016moore Lemma 3.1]; we include the proof here for completeness. To show , we first have by Young’s inequality $$\begin{aligned}
\left|2\tau\int_{\R^n}\int_{0}^\infty g(s)\nabla \eta(s) \cdot \nabla v \ds\dx \right|
\leq& \, \frac{\tau^{2}(c^2-c^2_g)}{\varepsilon+1}\Vert\nabla v\Vert^{2}_{L^2}+(\varepsilon+1)\dint_{0}^\infty g(s)\Vert\nabla\eta(s)\Vert^{2}_{L^2}\ds.
\end{aligned}$$ for every $\varepsilon>0$. By using assumption (G3) on the relaxation kernel $g$, we then have $$\begin{aligned}
2\tau\int_{\R^n}\int_{0}^\infty g(s)\nabla \eta(s) \cdot \nabla v \ds\dx
\geq& \, \begin{multlined}[t]-\frac{\tau^{2}(c^2-c^2_g)}{\varepsilon+1}\Vert\nabla v\Vert^{2}_{L^2}- \|\nabla \eta\|^2_{L^2, g} \\
-\frac{\varepsilon}{\zeta}\dint_{0}^\infty(- g'(s))\Vert\nabla\eta(s)\Vert^{2}_{L^2}\ds.\end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$ Since $b-\tau c^2_g > \tau (c^2-c^2_g)$, by reducing $\varepsilon$, we obtain $$\label{left-hand side}
\begin{aligned}
E_1(t)\geq&\, \begin{multlined}[t]\dfrac{1}{2}\left[ c^2_g\Vert\nabla(\psi +\tau v)\Vert^{2}_{L^2} +\Vert v+\tau w\Vert^{2}_{L^2}+(\tau-\varepsilon/\zeta)\Vert \nabla\eta\Vert^{2}_{L^2, -g'}\right. \\
\left. +\tau^2 \varepsilon (c^2- c^2_g)/(1+\varepsilon) \Vert \nabla v\Vert^{2}_{L^2}
\vphantom{\frac12}\right]. \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$ Consequently, the left-hand side inequality in holds. The right-hand side inequality follows analogously.
The next step is to derive a lower-order energy estimate for $E_1$.
\[Prop:E1\] Let $(\psi, v, w, \eta)$ be a smooth solution of the system with initial data . Then the following estimate holds: $$\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}E_1(t)+( b -\tau c^2 )\Vert \nabla v(t)\Vert_{L^2}^{2}+\frac{%
1}{2}\Vert \nabla \eta\Vert _{L^2, -g'}^{2}\leq \,
|R^{(1)}(v + \tau w)| \label{Energy_Indentity}$$ for all $t\geq 0$, where the functional $R^{(1)}$ is defined in .
Looking at the definition of the energy $E_1$, we begin by obtaining an expression for $\tfrac12 c^2_g \tfrac{\textup{d}}{\textup{d}t}\|\nabla (\psi+\tau v)\|_{L^2}$. It’s clear that $$\label{eq1_}
\left(\psi+\tau v\right) _{t}=v+\tau w.
\label{eq1}$$Multiplying the above equation by $-c^2_g \Delta \left( \psi+\tau v\right) $ and integrating over $\mathbb{R}^{n}$ gives the identity $$\label{eq2}
\begin{aligned}
&\dfrac{c^2_g }{2}\dfrac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}|\nabla (\psi+\tau
v)|^{2}\dx \\
=&\,\begin{multlined}[t] \tau c^2_g |\nabla v|^{2}+c^2_g \int_{\mathbb{R}%
^{N}}\nabla \psi \cdot\nabla v \dx
+\tau ^{2}c^2_g \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\nabla v \cdot \nabla w \dx + \tau c^2_g
\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\nabla w \cdot \nabla \psi \dx. \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$To tackle the time derivative of the second term in the energy , we then multiply the second equation in the system by $-\tau
( b -\tau c^2_g )\Delta v$ and integrate over $\mathbb{R}^{n}$. By doing so, we obtain $$\label{eq_nabla_v}
\dfrac{1}{2}\tau ( b -\tau c^2_g )\dfrac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\int_{\mathbb{R}%
^{n}}|\nabla v|^{2} \dx=\tau ( b -\tau c^2_g )\int_{\mathbb{R}%
^{n}}\nabla w \cdot \nabla v \dx. \label{eq3}$$To handle the term $\tfrac{1}{2}\tfrac{\textup{d}}{\dt} \|v+\tau w\|_{L^2}^{2}$, we add the second equation in the system to the third one. Then the $w$ terms cancel out and we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq_1}
(v+\tau w)_{t}=b \Delta v+c^2_g \Delta \psi+\displaystyle%
\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta \eta(s)\ds+2k vw. \end{aligned}$$Multiplying the above equation by $v+\tau w$ and integrating over $%
\mathbb{R}^{n}$ yields $$\begin{aligned}\label{eq2}
&\frac{1}{2}\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt} \|v+\tau w\|_{L^2}^{2}\\
=& \, \begin{multlined}[t]-b
\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}|\nabla v|^{2}\dx- \tau b \int_{\mathbb{R}%
^{N}}\nabla v \cdot \nabla w \dx-c^2_g \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\nabla \psi \cdot \nabla
v \dx \\
-c^2_g \tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\nabla \psi \cdot \nabla w \dx-\int_{%
\mathbb{R}^{n}} \int_{0}^{\infty}g(s) \nabla \eta
(s) \cdot \nabla v \ds\dx \\
-\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} \int_{0}^{\infty
}g(s) \nabla \eta(s) \cdot \nabla w
\ds \dx+ R^{(1)}(v + \tau w). \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$ We can further transform the first term on the right that contains the memory kernel by using the fact that $\eta _{t}+\eta _{s}=v$. Indeed, we have $$\begin{aligned}
-\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)
\nabla \eta(s) \cdot \nabla v \ds \dx=& -\int_{%
\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s) \nabla \eta
(s) \cdot \nabla \eta _{t}(s) \ds\dx \\
& -\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} \int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)
\nabla \eta(s) \cdot \nabla \eta _{s}(s) \ds \dx.\end{aligned}$$Integrating by parts with respect to $s$ in the second term on the right leads to $$\begin{aligned}
-\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} \int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)
\nabla \eta(s)\cdot \nabla v \ds \dx=& -\dfrac{1}{2}\dfrac{%
\textup{d}}{\dt}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} \int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)|\nabla
\eta(s)|^{2} \ds\dx \\
& +\frac{1}{2}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} \int_{0}^{\infty
}g^{\prime }(s)|\nabla \eta(s)|^{2} \ds \dx;\end{aligned}$$ noting that the boundary terms vanish; cf. [@pata2009stability]. Hence, we get $$\begin{aligned}
-\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)
\nabla \eta(s)\cdot \nabla v \ds \dx=& -\frac{1}{2}\dfrac{%
\textup{d}}{\dt}\Vert \nabla \eta\Vert _{L^2,g}^{2}
-\frac{1}{2}\Vert \nabla \eta \Vert _{L^2, -g'}^{2}.\end{aligned}$$Similarly, using the relation $\eta _{tt}+\eta _{ts}=w$ results in $$\begin{aligned}
&- \tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\displaystyle\int_{0}^{\infty
}g(s) \nabla \eta(s) \cdot \nabla w \ds \dx \\
=& - \tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} \int_{0}^{\infty
}g(s) \nabla \eta(s) \cdot \nabla \eta _{tt}(s)
\ds\dx - \tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} \int_{0}^{\infty
}g(s)\nabla \eta(s) \cdot \nabla \eta _{ts}(s)
\ds \dx.\end{aligned}$$Then, by integrating by parts with respect to $s$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
& - \tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} \int_{0}^{\infty
}g(s)\nabla \eta(s) \cdot \nabla w \ds \dx \\
=&\, \begin{multlined}[t] - \tau \dfrac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} \int_{0}^{\infty
}g(s) \nabla \eta(s)\cdot \nabla \eta _{t}(s)
\ds \dx
+ \tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} \int_{0}^{\infty
}g(s)\nabla \eta _{t}(s) \cdot \nabla \eta
_{t}(s) \ds \dx \\
- \tau \dfrac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} \int_{0}^{\infty
}g(s)\nabla \eta(s) \cdot \nabla \eta _{s}(s)\ds \dx + \tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} \int_{0}^{\infty
}g(s) \nabla \eta _{t}(s)\cdot \nabla \eta
_{s}(s) \ds \dx. \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$By inserting the derived identities into , we infer $$\label{identity1}
\begin{aligned}
& \frac{1}{2}\dfrac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\left( \left\Vert v+\tau w\right\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2}+\|\nabla \eta\|^2_{L^2, g} +2 \tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\displaystyle\int_{0}^{\infty
}g(s) \nabla \eta(s)\cdot \nabla v\ds
\dx\right)\\
=&\,\begin{multlined}[t]- b \left\Vert \nabla
v\right\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2}-\tau b \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\nabla
v \cdot \nabla w\dx-c^2_g
\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\nabla \psi \cdot \nabla v\dx
\\ -c^2_g \tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\nabla \psi \cdot \nabla w\dx
-\frac{1}{2}\Vert \nabla \eta(s)\Vert _{L^2, -g'%
}^{2}+ \tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} \displaystyle\int_{0}^{t
}g(s) \nabla \eta _{t}(s) \cdot \nabla v\ds \dx\\+R^{(0)}(v + \tau w). \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}%$$ By adding also equation to the above expression, we infer $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{2}\dfrac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\left(E_1(t)-\tau \Vert \nabla \eta\Vert _{L^2, -g'%
}^{2}\right)
=&\, \begin{multlined}[t]-(b -\tau c^2_g )\left\Vert
\nabla v\right\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2}-\frac{1}{2}\Vert \nabla \eta
(s)\Vert _{L^2, -g'}^{2} \\
+\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\displaystyle\int_{0}^{\infty
}g(s) \nabla \eta _{t}(s)\cdot \nabla v \ds\dx+2k(vw, v + \tau w)_{L^2}.\end{multlined}
\end{aligned}%$$ To further transform the memory term on the right, we can substitute $\eta _{t}=v-\eta _{s}$. This action leads to $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{2}\dfrac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\left(E_1(t)-\tau \Vert \nabla \eta\Vert _{L^2,-g'%
}^{2}\right) =&\, \begin{multlined}[t]-( b -\tau c^2_g )\left\Vert
\nabla v\right\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2}-\frac{1}{2}\Vert \nabla \eta
(s)\Vert _{L^2, -g'}^{2} \\
+\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} \int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\nabla (v- \eta _{s}(s))\cdot \nabla v \ds\dx +R^{(1)}(v + \tau w). \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$Integrating once by parts with respect to $s$ in the memory term yields $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{2}\dfrac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\left(E_1(t)-\tau \Vert \nabla \eta\Vert _{L^2,-g'%
}^{2}\right)
=& \, \begin{multlined}[t]-(b -\tau c^2_g )\left\Vert
\nabla v\right\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2}-\frac{1}{2}\Vert \nabla \eta
(s)\Vert _{L^2, -g'}^{2}+\tau (c^2 -c^2_g )\left\Vert \nabla
v\right\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2} \\
+\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} \int_{0}^{\infty}g^{\prime
}(s) \nabla \eta(s)\cdot \nabla v \ds
\dx+R^{(1)}(v + \tau w). \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$We then again use the same trick of substituting $v=\eta _{t}+\eta _{s}$, which results in $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{2}\dfrac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\left(E_1(t)-\tau \Vert \nabla \eta\Vert _{L^2, -g'%
}^{2}\right)
=& \, \begin{multlined}[t]-( b -\tau c^2 )\left\Vert
\nabla v\right\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2}-\frac{1}{2}\Vert \nabla \eta
(s)\Vert _{L^2, -g'}^{2}\\+\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}
\int_{0}^{\infty}g^{\prime }(s) \nabla \eta(s) \cdot \nabla \eta
_{t} \ds\dx \\
+\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} \int_{0}^{\infty}g^{\prime
}(s) \nabla \eta(s)\cdot \nabla \eta _{s}
\ds \dx+R^{(1)}(v + \tau w).\end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$Finally, integrating by parts once again with respect to $s$ in the second memory term on the right leads to $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{2}\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}E_1(t)
= \, \begin{multlined}[t]-( b -\tau c^2 )\left\Vert
\nabla v\right\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2}-\frac{1}{2}\Vert \nabla \eta
\Vert _{L^2, -g'}^{2}-\frac{\tau }{2}\Vert \nabla \eta
\Vert _{L^2, g''}^{2}
+R^{(1)}(v + \tau w),\end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$which immediately yields the desired result.
Higher-order estimates
----------------------
Next we analogously define the energy of the second order at time $t \geq 0$ as $$\label{E_2}
\begin{aligned}
E_{2}(t)
=&\, \begin{multlined}[t]\frac{1}{2}\left[\vphantom{\int_{0}^{%
\infty}} c^2_g\left\Vert \Delta
( \psi+\tau v)\right\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2}+\tau(b -\tau c^2_g )\left\Vert
\Delta v\right\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2}+\Vert \nabla (v+\tau w)\Vert
_{L^2}^2\right. \\ \left.+\tau \Vert \Delta \eta \Vert^2_{L^2, -g'}
+\Vert \Delta \eta\Vert^2_{L^{2}, g} +2\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{%
\infty}g(s)\Delta v\Delta \eta(s)\ds\dx\right]. \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$Observe that the last term above has an undefined sign; nevertheless, the other terms in the energy functional can absorb it. In fact, the functional $E_2$ is equivalent to $\mathscr{E}_2=\mathscr{E}_2[\Psi]$, which we introduced in .
\[Lemma\_EquivE\_1\] Assume that $b\geq \tau c^2> \tau c^2_g$. Then there exist positive constants $C_{1}$ and $C_{2}$, such that $$\label{equiv E and V}
C_{1} \mathscr{E}_2(t)\leq E_2(t)\leq C_{2} \mathscr{E}_2(t),$$ for all $t\geq0.$
The proof follows the same steps as proof of Lemma \[Lemma\_EquivE\_0\]. We omit the details here.
We move onto deriving a higher-order energy estimate for $E_2$, analogous to the one of Proposition \[Prop:E1\].
\[Prop:E2\] Let $(\psi, v, w, \eta)$ be a smooth solution of the system with initial data . Then the following inequality holds: $$\label{dE_1_Dt}
\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}E_2(t)+\left(b -\tau c^2 \right) \left\Vert
\Delta v\right\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2}+\frac{1}{2}\Vert \Delta \eta
\Vert _{L^2, -g'}^{2}\leq \, |R^{(2)}(v + \tau w)|,$$for all $t\geq 0$, where the functional $R^{(2)}$ is defined in .
The proof follows by testing our problem with convenient test functions. Looking at the definition of the higher-order energy, we first need to tackle the time derivative of the term $\tfrac12 c^2_g\|\Delta (\psi+\tau v)(t)\|^2_{L^2}$. Clearly, $$\Delta (\psi+\tau v)_{t}=\Delta (v+\tau w).
\label{Equation_u_v_Lap}$$Multiplying the above equation by $\Delta \left(\psi+\tau
v\right) $ and integrating over $\mathbb{R}^{n}$ results in $$\label{E_2_Second_Term}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{2}\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}|\Delta (\psi+\tau
v)|^{2}\dx
=&\, \begin{multlined}[t]\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\Delta w\Delta \psi\dx+\tau ^{2}\int_{%
\mathbb{R}^{n}}\Delta w\Delta v\dx\\
+\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\Delta
v\Delta \psi\dx+ \tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}|\Delta v|^{2}\dx. \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$Next we work with the time derivative of $\|\Delta v(t)\|^2_{L^2}$. By applying the Laplacian to the second equation of the system , multiplying the resulting expression by $-\tau (b -\tau c^2_g )\Delta v$, integrating over $\mathbb{R}^{n}$, and using integration by parts, we find $$\label{v_Estimate_E_2}
\frac{1}{2}\tau (b -\tau c^2_g )\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\int_{\mathbb{R}%
^{n}}|\Delta v|^{2}\dx=\tau (b -\tau c^2_g )\int_{\mathbb{R}%
^{n}}\Delta w \, \Delta v \dx.$$To handle the time derivative of the third term in , we apply the operator $\Delta $ to we get (in the sense of distribution) $$\begin{aligned}
(\Delta( v+\tau w))_{t}=b \Delta^2 v+c^2_g \Delta^2 \psi+\displaystyle%
\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta^2 \eta(s)\ds+2k \Delta(vw). \end{aligned}$$ We multiply the above equation by $ -(v+\tau w)$ and integrate over $\mathbb{R}^{n}$, yielding $$\label{E_2_First_Term}
\begin{aligned}
&\frac{1}{2}\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}|\nabla ( v+\tau
w)|^{2}\dx+b \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\left\vert \Delta v\right\vert
^{2}\dx \\
=&\, \begin{multlined}[t]-b \tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\Delta v\Delta w\dx-c^2_g \int_{\mathbb{R}%
^{n}}\Delta \psi\Delta (v+\tau w)\dx \\
-\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta (v+\tau w)\Delta
\eta(s)ds\dx +R^{(2)}(v + \tau w). \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$By summing up $+$ $%
+c^2_g$, we obtain $$\label{E_2_1}
\begin{aligned}
&\begin{multlined}[t]\frac{1}{2}\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\left[ \left\Vert \nabla ( v+\tau
w)\right\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2}+\tau (b -\tau c^2_g
)\left\Vert \Delta v\right\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2}+c^2_g \left\Vert
\Delta ( \psi+\tau v)\right\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2}\right] \\
+\left( b
-\tau c^2_g \right) \left\Vert \Delta v\right\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2} \end{multlined} \\
=&-\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta ( v+\tau
w)\Delta \eta(s)\ds\dx+R(\Delta( v+\tau
w)) \\
=&\,\begin{multlined}[t]- \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta v\Delta \eta
(s)\ds\dx-\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta w\Delta
\eta(s)\ds\dx\\
+R^{(2)}(v + \tau w). \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$ We next want to further transform the first two terms on the right-hand side. By taking the Laplacian of the last equation in , we obtain $\Delta v=\Delta \eta _{t}+\Delta \eta _{s}$. We can then use this relation to find that $$\begin{aligned}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta v\Delta \eta
(s)\ds\dx &=&\frac{1 }{2}\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\int_{\mathbb{R}%
^{N}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)|\Delta \eta(s)|^{2}\ds\dx \\
&&+ \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta \eta
_{s}\, \Delta \eta(s)\ds\dx.\end{aligned}$$By integrating by parts with respect to $s$ in the last term, we infer $$\label{First_Term_Integral}
\begin{aligned}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta v\Delta \eta
(s)\ds\dx
=&\,\frac{1}{2}\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\Vert \Delta \eta
\Vert _{L^2, g}^{2} +\frac{1 }{2}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g^{\prime
}(s)|\Delta \eta(s)|^{2}\ds\dx \\[1mm]
=&\,\frac{1 }{2}\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\Vert \Delta \eta
\Vert _{L^2, g}^{2}-\frac{1}{2}\Vert \Delta \eta
\Vert _{L^2, -g'}^{2}.
\end{aligned}$$To tackle the second memory term on the right in equation , we can use the relation $\Delta w=\Delta \eta _{tt}+\Delta \eta _{ts}$, which holds in the sense of distribution. Doing so yields $$\begin{aligned}
&\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta w\Delta \eta
(s)\ds\dx \\
=&\, \begin{multlined}[t]\tau \frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta \eta
_{t}\Delta \eta(s)\ds\dx-\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty
}g(s)\Delta \eta _{t}(s)\Delta \eta _{t}(s)\ds\dx \\
+\tau \frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta \eta
_{s}\Delta \eta(s)\ds\dx-\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty
}g(s)\Delta \eta _{s}\Delta \eta _{t}(s)\ds\dx. \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$ Since $v= \eta_t+\eta_s$, we further have $$\label{Second_Term_Integra}
\begin{aligned}
&\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta w\Delta \eta
(s)\ds\dx \\
=&\, \tau \frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta
v\Delta \eta(s)\ds\dx-\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty
}g(s)\Delta v\Delta \eta _{t}(s)\ds\dx.
\end{aligned}$$ Consequently, from , and , we have $$\begin{aligned}
&&\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}(E_2(t)-\frac{\tau}{2} \Vert \Delta \eta\Vert_{L^2, -g'}^2)+\left( b -\tau c^2_g \right) \left\Vert
\Delta v\right\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2}+\frac{1 }{2}\Vert \Delta \eta
\Vert _{L^2, -g'}^{2} \\
&=&\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta v\Delta \eta
_{t}(s)\ds\dx+R^{(2)}(v + \tau w). \end{aligned}$$ By using the fact that $$\begin{aligned}
\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta v\Delta \eta
_{t}(s)\ds\dx =& \, \tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta
v(\Delta v-\Delta \eta _{s}(s))\ds\dx \\
=& \, \begin{multlined}[t] \tau \left( c^2 -c^2_g \right) \left\Vert \Delta v\right\Vert
_{L^{2}}^{2}
+\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g^{\prime}(s)\Delta v\Delta \eta(s)\ds\dx, \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$we find that $$\label{dE_1_dt_1}
\begin{aligned}
&\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}(E_2(t)-\frac{\tau}{2} \Vert \Delta \eta\Vert_{L^2, -g'}^2)+\left( b -\tau c^2 \right) \left\Vert
\Delta v\right\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2}+\frac{1 }{2}\Vert \Delta \eta
\Vert _{L^2, -g'}^{2} \\
=&\, \tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g^{\prime }(s)\Delta v\Delta
\eta(s)\ds\dx+R^{(2)}(v + \tau w).
\end{aligned}$$The term on the right-hand side of can be written as, by using the fact that $\Delta v=\Delta \eta+\Delta \eta_s$, $$\begin{aligned}
&\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g^{\prime }(s)\Delta v\Delta
\eta(s)\ds\dx\\
=&\, \begin{multlined}[t]\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g^{\prime }(s)\Delta
\eta(s)\Delta\eta_t(s)\ds\dx
+ \tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g^{\prime }(s)\Delta
\eta(s)\Delta
\eta_s\ds\dx \end{multlined} \\
=&\, -\frac{\tau}{2}\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\Vert \Delta
\eta\Vert _{L^2, -g'}^{2}-\frac{\tau }{2}\Vert \Delta
\eta\Vert _{L^2, g''}^{2},
\end{aligned}$$ where we integrated by parts with respect to $s$ in the second term. By plugging this identity into , we deduce . This finishes the proof of Proposition \[Prop:E2\].
In order to capture the dissipation of the terms $\Vert \Delta( \psi+\tau v) \Vert_{L^2}$ and $\Vert \nabla(v+\tau w) \Vert_{L^2}$, we introduce two functionals $F_{1}$ and $F_2$ as $$\label{F_Functionals}
\begin{aligned}
F_{1}(t)=\,\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\nabla ( \psi+\tau v)\cdot \nabla (v+\tau w)\dx, \qquad
F_{2}(t)=\,-\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} \nabla v \cdot \nabla (v+\tau w) \dx,
\end{aligned}$$ everywhere in time; see also [@Racke_Said_2019]. We prove their properties in the following two lemmas.
\[Lemma\_F\_1\] Let $(\psi, v, w, \eta)$ be a smooth solution of the system with initial data . For any $\epsilon _{0},\epsilon _{1}>0,$ it holds $$\label{F_1_Estimate}
\begin{aligned}
&\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}F_{1}(t)+(c^2_g -\epsilon _{0}-(c^2 -c^2_g )\epsilon
_{1})\Vert \Delta (\psi+\tau v)\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2} \\
\leq&\, \begin{multlined}[t] \Vert \nabla (v+\tau w)\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2}+C(\epsilon
_{0})\Vert \Delta v\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2}
+C(\epsilon _{1})\Vert \Delta \eta\Vert _{L^{2},g}^{2}+|R^{(2)}(\psi + \tau v)|.\end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$
We first compute the derivative of the functional $F_1$ as $$\label{dF_1}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}F_{1}(t)
=&\,\begin{multlined}[t] -\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\Delta ( \psi+\tau v) (v+\tau w)_t\dx-\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} (\psi+\tau v)_t \Delta (v+\tau w)\dx.\end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$ We clearly have to further transform the two terms on the right-hand side. Recall that $$(v+\tau w)_{t}=b \Delta v+c^2_g \Delta \psi+\displaystyle%
\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta \eta(s)\ds+2k vw.$$Multiplying this equation by $-\Delta \left(
\psi+\tau v\right) $ and integrating over $\R^n$ leads to $$\label{Lemma_identity1}
\begin{aligned}
&-\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} \Delta (\psi+\tau v)\, (v+\tau w)_{t} \dx \\
=&\, \begin{multlined}[t]- \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}(c^2_g \Delta \psi+b \Delta v)( \Delta
\psi+\tau \Delta v)\dx \\
- \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\,\Delta \eta
(s)\,( \Delta \psi+\tau \Delta v)\ds\dx
+R^{(2)}(\psi + \tau v). \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$We can conveniently rearrange the first term on the right as $$\begin{aligned}
&-\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}(c^2_g \Delta \psi+b \Delta v)( \Delta
\psi+\tau \Delta v)\dx \\
=&\,-c^2_g \|\Delta ( \psi+\tau v)\|^2_{L^2}+(b -\tau c^2_g
)\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\Delta v \Delta ( \psi+\tau v)\dx .
\end{aligned}$$ The second term on the right in can be written as $$\begin{aligned}
- \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}( \psi+\tau v)_{t}\Delta ( v+\tau
w)\dx=\,- \int_{\mathbb{R}^n}(v+\tau w)\Delta (v+\tau w)\dx
=\, \|\nabla (v+\tau w)\|^2_{L^2} .
\end{aligned}$$By adding together and the above identity, and then integrating by parts in space, we obtain $$\label{F_1_terms}
\begin{aligned}
& \begin{multlined}[t] \frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}F_{1}(t)+c^2_g \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}|\Delta ( \psi+\tau
v)|^{2}\dx \end{multlined}\\
=&\,\begin{multlined}[t] \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}|\nabla (v+\tau w)|^{2}\dx-(b-\tau c^2_g)\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\Delta v \, (\Delta
\psi+\tau \Delta v)\dx\\+ R^{(2)}(\psi + \tau v)
-\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\, \Delta \eta
(s)\,\Delta( \psi+\tau v)\ds\dx .\end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$Applying Young’s inequality results in for any $\epsilon _{0},\epsilon _{1}>0$.
We next prove an important energy property of the functional $F_2$.
\[Lemma\_F\_2\] Let $(\psi, v, w, \eta)$ be a smooth solution of the system with initial data . For any $\epsilon_{2},\epsilon_{3}>0,$ we have $$\label{F_2_Estimate}
\begin{aligned}
&\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}F_{2}(t)+(1-\epsilon_{3})\Vert\nabla(v+\tau w)\Vert^{2}_{L^2} \\
\leq&\, \begin{multlined}[t]\epsilon_{2}\Vert\Delta(\psi +\tau v)\Vert^{2}_{L^2} +C(\epsilon_{3},\epsilon_{2})(\Vert \Delta v\Vert^{2}_{L^2}+\Vert \nabla v\Vert^{2}_{L^2})
+\frac{1}{2}\Vert \nabla\eta\Vert^{2}_{L^2, g}+|R^{(2)}(\tau v)|,\end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$ where the functional $R^{(2)}$ is defined in .
We can express the derivative of the functional $F_2$ as $$\label{dF_2}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}F_{2}(t)=&\, \begin{multlined}[t] \tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} v_t \, \Delta (v+\tau w)\dx+ \tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} \Delta v \, (v+\tau w)_{t}\dx \end{multlined}\\
=&\,
\tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}w\Delta (v+\tau w)\dx+ \tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} \Delta v \, (v+\tau w)_{t}\dx ,
\end{aligned}$$where the second line follows from $v_t=w$. To further transform the second term on the right, we multiply equation by $ \tau \Delta v$. This action leads to $$\begin{aligned}
& \tau \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}(v+\tau w)_{t}\, \Delta v\dx \\
=&\, \begin{multlined}[t]\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\left(\tau c^2_g \Delta( \psi+\tau v) +\tau(b-\tau c^2_g)
\Delta v+(
v+\tau w)\right. \\ \left.-(v+\tau w)\right)\Delta v\dx
+ \tau\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta \eta(s)\Delta
v\ds\dx+R^{(2)}(\tau v).\end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$By plugging this identity into , we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
&\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}F_{2}(t)+ \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}|\nabla ( v+\tau
w)|^{2}\dx\\
=&\, \begin{multlined}[t]\tau c^2_g \int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\Delta (\psi+\tau v)\Delta v\dx+\tau (b -\tau c^2_g )\int_{\R^{}}|\Delta
v|^{2}\dx \\
+\int_{%
\mathbb{R}^{n}}\nabla (v+\tau w)\cdot \nabla v\dx + \tau \int_{\mathbb{R%
}^{n}}\int_{0}^{\infty}g(s)\Delta \eta(s)\Delta v\ds\dx+ R^{(2)}(\tau v). \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$By additionally applying Young’s inequality with $\epsilon _{2},\epsilon _{3}>0$, we arrive at the final estimate .
The Lyapunov functional
-----------------------
We are now ready to introduce the Lyapunov functional $\mathcal{L}$ as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Lyapunov}
\mathcal{L}(t)=L_1 (E_1(t)+E_2(t)+\varepsilon\tau \Vert w\Vert^2 _{L^{2}})+F_1(t)+L_2F_2(t), \end{aligned}$$ for $t \geq 0$. The positive constants $L_{1}$ and $L_{2}$ should be sufficiently large and the constant $\varepsilon>0$ small enough; we will make them more precise below.\
This Lyapunov functional can be made equivalent to $\mathscr{E}_1+\mathscr{E}_2+\Vert w\Vert_{L^2}^2$, where the energies $\mathscr{E}_1$ and $\mathscr{E}_2$ are defined in and , respectively. We prove this statement next.
\[Lemma\_Equivl\] Let $b\geq \tau c^2>\tau c^2_g$. There exist positive constants $C_{1}$ and $C_{2}$, such that $$\label{Eq_L_E}
C_{1}(\mathscr{E}_1(t)+\mathscr{E}_2(t)+\Vert w\Vert_{L^2}^2)\leq \mathcal{L}(t)\leq C_{2}(\mathscr{E}_1(t)+\mathscr{E}_2(t)+\Vert
w\Vert_{L^2}^2),$$ for all $t\geq 0$, provided that the constant $L_1$ in the Lyapunov functional is chosen large enough.
To derive , we are missing the bounds on $F_1$ and $F_2$. We can estimate these terms in the Lyapunov functional as follows: $$\label{est_1}
\begin{aligned}
|F_1(t)| \leq \, \Vert \nabla( \psi+\tau v)(t)\Vert _{L^2}\Vert \nabla( v +\tau w)(t) \Vert_{L^2}
\lesssim\, E_1(t)+E_2(t),
\end{aligned}$$ and $$\label{est_2}
\begin{aligned}
|F_2(t)| \leq \, \tau \Vert \nabla v(t) \Vert _{L^2}\Vert \nabla( v +\tau w)(t) \Vert_{L^2}
\lesssim E_1(t)+E_2(t)
\end{aligned}$$ for all $t \geq 0$. Hence, there exists $C^\star=C^\star(\tau, c^2_g, b, L_2)>0$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
|\mathcal{L}(t)-L_1 (E_1(t)+E_2(t)+\varepsilon\tau \Vert w\Vert^2 _{L^{2}})|
\leq\, C^\star (E_1(t)+E_2(t)+\varepsilon \tau \Vert w\Vert^2 _{L^{2}}).
\end{aligned}$$ Choosing $L_1$ large enough so that $$\label{L1_large}
L_1>C^\star=C^\star(\tau, c^2_g, b, L_2)$$ leads to the estimates given in .
We next derive an energy bound for the Lyapunov functional.
Let $b>\tau c^2>\tau c^2_g$. There exist a constant $L_1>0$ large enough and a constant $\varepsilon>0$ small enough such that the Lyapunov functional, defined in , satisfies $$\label{Lyap_Main}
\begin{aligned}
&\begin{multlined}[t]\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\mathcal{L}(t)+ \Vert \nabla
v(t)\Vert _{L^2}^{2}+\Vert \nabla \eta \Vert _{L^2, -g'}^{2}+\mathscr{E}_2[\Psi](t)
+\Vert w(t)\Vert
_{L^{2}}^{2} \end{multlined}\\[1mm]
\lesssim&\,\begin{multlined}[t] |R^{(1)}(v+\tau w)|+|R^{(2)}(v+\tau w)|
+|R^{(1)}(w)|
+|R^{(2)}(\psi+\tau v)| +|R^{(2)}(\tau v)|,\end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$ for all $t\in [0,T]$, where the functionals $R^{(1)}$ and $R^{(2)}$ are defined in , and the energy $\mathscr{E}_2$ in .
To derive the desired estimate, we have to get a bound on $\tfrac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\Vert w\Vert
_{L^{2}}^{2}$ first. By multiplying the third equation in the system by $w$ and integrating over $\mathbb{R}^{n}$, we infer $$\label{w_Energy}
\begin{aligned}
&\frac{1}{2}\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\tau \left\vert w\right\vert
^{2}\dx+\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} |w|^2 \dx \\
\leq&\, C\left(\left\Vert \Delta \psi\Vert _{L^{2}}+\Vert \Delta v\right\Vert
_{L^{2}}+\Vert\Delta\eta\Vert_{L^2, g}\right)\Vert w\Vert_{L^2}+|R^{(1)}(w)|.
\end{aligned}$$ By applying Young’s inequality to the first term on the right, we obtain $$\label{E_0_Energy}
\begin{aligned}
&\frac{1}{2}\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\|w(t)\|^2_{L^2}+\frac{1}{2}\|w\|^2_{L^2}\\
\leq&\,
C\left(\Vert
\Delta (\psi+\tau v)\Vert_{L^2}^2+\Vert \Delta v\Vert _{L^{2}}^2+\Vert\Delta\eta\Vert^{2}_{L^2, g}\right)+|R^{(1)}(w)| .
\end{aligned}$$ Collecting previously derived bounds in the form of $ \eqref{Energy_Indentity}+\eqref{dE_1_Dt}+2\varepsilon \eqref{E_0_Energy}$, we get $$\label{E_Wieghted_2}
\begin{aligned}
&\begin{multlined}[t]\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\left(E_1(t)+E_2(t)+\varepsilon\tau \Vert w\Vert ^2_{L^{2}}\right)+(b
-\tau c^2 ) (\left\Vert \nabla v\right\Vert
_{L^{2}}^{2}+\Vert \Delta v\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2})\\
+\varepsilon
\Vert w\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2} +\frac{1}{2}\Vert \nabla \eta\Vert _{L^2,-g'
}^{2}+\frac12 \Vert \Delta \eta\Vert _{L^2,-g'}^{2} \end{multlined} \\
\leq& \,\begin{multlined}[t] 2C\varepsilon(\Vert \Delta (\psi+\tau v)\Vert_{L^{2}}^{2}+\Vert \Delta
v\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2})+\Vert\Delta\eta\Vert^{2}_{L^2, g} \\[1mm]
+|R^{(1)}(v+\tau w)|+|R^{(2)}(v+\tau w)|+2\varepsilon|R^{(1)}(w)|. \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$ Note that the first term on the left in the brackets is equal to $L_1^{-1}(\mathcal{L}(t)-F_1(t)-L_2F_2(t))$. Taking into account Lemmas \[Lemma\_F\_1\] and \[Lemma\_F\_1\] as well as assumption (G3) on the memory kernel, we obtain $$\label{L_dt_Functional}
\begin{aligned}
&\begin{multlined}[t]\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\mathcal{L}(t)+L_1\varepsilon \Vert w\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2}+\left[
L_1/2-\Lambda_0/\zeta-2CL_1\varepsilon\right]\left( \Vert \nabla \eta\Vert _{L^2, -g'}^{2}+\Vert \Delta
\eta\Vert _{L^2, -g'}^{2}\right) \\
+\left[ L_1\left( b -\tau
c^2 \right) -2L_1C\varepsilon-C(\epsilon _{0})-C(\epsilon
_{3},\epsilon _{2})L_2\right] (\left\Vert \nabla v\right\Vert
_{L^{2}}^{2}+\left\Vert \Delta v\right\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2}) \\[2mm]
+\left[ c^2_g -\epsilon _{0}-(c^2 -c^2_g )\epsilon _{1}-2C\varepsilon
L_1-\epsilon _{2}L_2\right] \Vert \Delta ( \psi+\tau v)\Vert
_{L^{2}}^{2}\\
+\left[ L_2(1 -\epsilon _{3})-1 \right] \Vert \nabla (
v+\tau w)\Vert _{L^{2}}^{2}
\end{multlined} \\
\leq& \, \begin{multlined}[t] \Lambda_1 \left\{ |R^{(1)}(v+\tau w)|+|R^{(2)}(v+\tau w)|
+|R^{(1)}(w)|
+|R^{(2)}(\psi+\tau v)| +|R^{(2)}(\tau v)|\right\},\end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$ where $\Lambda_0$ and $\Lambda_1$ are generic positive constants that depend on $L_1$, $L_2$, $\epsilon_0,\dots$, but $\Lambda_0$ is independent of $\varepsilon$.\
In the above estimate, we can fix our constants in such a way that the coefficients are positive. This outcome can be achieved as follows: we pick $\epsilon_{3}>0$ small enough such that $\epsilon_{3}<1$. Then we can select $\epsilon_1=\epsilon_{0}>0$ and $\varepsilon>0$ small enough such that $$\epsilon_{0}<\dfrac{c^2_g}{1+(c^2-c^2_g)},\qquad \text{and}\qquad \varepsilon<\frac{b-\tau c^2}{2C}.$$ Afterwards, we take $L_2$ large enough such that $$L_2>\frac{1}{1-\epsilon_{3}}.$$ Once $L_2$ and $\epsilon_{0}$ are fixed, we select $\epsilon_{2}>0$ small enough such that $$\epsilon_{2}<\dfrac{c^2_g-\epsilon_{0}(1+(c^2-c^2_g))}{L_2}.$$ Keeping in mind the assumption $b>\tau c^2,$ we take $L_1$ large enough such that condition holds together with $$\begin{aligned}
\label{N_0_1}
L_1\geq \max\left\lbrace \dfrac{C(\epsilon_{0})+L_2C(\epsilon_{2},\epsilon_{3})}{b-\tau c^2},\dfrac{2\Lambda_0}{\zeta}\right\rbrace.\end{aligned}$$ Finally, we decrease $\varepsilon>0$ additionally so that $$\varepsilon<\min \left( \frac{L_1\left( b -\tau c^2
\right) -C(\epsilon _{0})-C(\epsilon _{3},\epsilon _{2})L_1}{2CL_1},%
\frac{L_1/2- \Lambda _{0}/\zeta}{2CL_1}\right) .$$ Consequently, we obtain the desired estimate .
Now, by integrating estimate over the time interval $(0, \sigma)$ for $\sigma \in (0,t)$ and then taking the supremum over time, we obtain $$\label{energy_est_1}
\begin{aligned}
|\Psi|^2_{\mathcal{E}(t)}+|\Psi|^2_{\mathcal{D}(t)}
\lesssim&\, \begin{multlined}[t] |\Psi|^2_{\mathcal{E}(0)}
+ \int_0^t \left\{ |R^{(1)}(v+\tau w)|+|R^{(2)}(v+\tau w)|
+|R^{(1)}(w)|\right.\\ \left.
+|R^{(2)}(\psi+\tau v)| +|R^{(2)}(\tau v)| \right\} \, \textup{d} \sigma, \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$ where we have additionally exploited the equivalence of the Lyapunov functional and $\mathscr{E}_1+\mathscr{E}_2+\|w\|^2_{L^2}$ given in .
Estimates of the right-hand side terms
--------------------------------------
To finalize the energy bound, we have to estimate the remaining $R^{(1)}$ and $R^{(2)}$ terms. We wish to bound each of these terms by $|\Psi|_{\mathcal{E}(t)} |\Psi|^2_{\mathcal{D}(t)}$ multiplied by some positive constant $C$ that is independent of $t$. The estimates are split into two lemmas.
\[Lemma:R\_a\] Let $\Psi=(\psi, v, w, \eta)$ be a smooth solution of the system with initial data . For all $t \in [0,T]$, it holds $$\label{I_1_Estimate_N_2}
\begin{aligned}
&\int_0^t |R^{(1)}(v+\tau w) (\sigma)|\,\textup{d} \sigma+\int_0^t |R^{(1)}(w)(\sigma)|\, \textup{d}\sigma\lesssim |\Psi|_{\mathcal{E}(t)} |\Psi|^2_{\mathcal{D}(t)},
\end{aligned}$$ where the functional $R^{(1)}$ is defined in and the energy semi-norms $|\cdot|_{\mathcal{E}(t)}$ and $|\cdot|_{\mathcal{D}(t)}$ in and , respectively.
By employing Hölder’s inquality, we can proceed as follows: $$\label{I_1_Main}
\begin{aligned}
|R^{(1)}(v+\tau w)|=& \, \left \vert 2k \int_{\mathbb{R}^n} vw(v+\tau w)\dx\right\vert\notag\\
\leq& \, 2 |k| \Vert w\Vert_{L^2}\Vert v\Vert_{L^4}^2+2 \tau |k|\Vert v\Vert_{L^2}\Vert
w\Vert_{L^4}^2.
\end{aligned}$$ We can then rely on the Ladyzhenskaya interpolation inequality . We thus have for the first term on the right $$\begin{aligned}
2 |k| \Vert w\Vert_{L^2}\Vert v\Vert_{L^4}^2\lesssim &\, \Vert w\Vert_{L^2}\Vert
v\Vert^{2(1-n/4)}_{L^2}\Vert \nabla v\Vert^{n/2}_{L^2} \\
\lesssim&\, \|w\|_{L^2}(\|v\|^2_{L^2}+\|\nabla v\|^2_{L^2}),
\end{aligned}$$ where we have also employed Young’s inequality in the second line. Similarly, the second term can be estimated as $$\label{J_2_N_2}
\begin{aligned}
2 \tau |k| \Vert v\Vert_{L^2}\Vert w\Vert_{L^4}^2\lesssim& \, \Vert v\Vert_{L^2}\Vert
w\Vert^{2(1-n/4)}_{L^2}\Vert \nabla w\Vert^{n/2}_{L^2}\\
\lesssim&\, \|v\|_{L^2}(\|w\|^2_{L^2}+\|\nabla v\|^2_{L^2}).
\end{aligned}$$ Altogether, this strategy yields $$\begin{aligned}
\int_0^t |R^{(1)}(v+\tau w)(\sigma)|\, \textup{d} \sigma \lesssim & \, \begin{multlined}[t] \sup_{0\leq \sigma\leq t} \Vert w(\sigma)\Vert_{L^2}
\int_0^t (\Vert w(\sigma)\Vert_{L^2}^2+\Vert \nabla v(\sigma)\Vert_{L^2}^2) \, \textup{d}\sigma \\
+ \sup_{0\leq \sigma \leq t} \Vert v(\sigma)\Vert_{L^2}\int_0^t(\Vert
w(\sigma)\Vert_{L^2}^2 \, \textup{d}\sigma+\Vert \nabla w(\sigma)\Vert_{L^2}^2) \, \textup{d}\sigma.\end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$ By additionally using the fact that $$\label{v,Nabla_w}
\begin{aligned}
&\Vert v(t)\Vert_{L^2}\leq \tau \Vert w(t)\Vert_{L^2}+ \Vert
\nabla (v+\tau w)(t)\Vert_{L^2}, \\
&\Vert \nabla w(t)\Vert_{L^2}\leq \frac{1}{\tau}\Vert \nabla v(t)\Vert_{L^2}+ \frac{1}{\tau}\Vert
\nabla (v+\tau w)(t)\Vert_{L^2},
\end{aligned}$$ for all $t$, we find that the first term on the left in can be bounded by $|\Psi|_{\mathcal{E}(t)} |\Psi|^2_{\mathcal{D}(t)}$ up to a constant. The second term can be estimated directly by noting that $$\begin{aligned}
|R^{(1)}(w)|\leq&\, 2|k|\Vert v\Vert_{L^4}\Vert w\Vert_{L^4}\Vert w\Vert_{L^2}\\
\lesssim& \, \Vert v\Vert_{L^2}^{1-n/4}\Vert \nabla v\Vert_{L^2}^{n/4}\Vert w\Vert_{L^2}^{1-n/4}\Vert \nabla w\Vert_{L^2}^{n/4}\Vert w\Vert_{L^2}\\
\lesssim& \, (\Vert v\Vert_{L^2}+\Vert \nabla v\Vert_{L^2})(\Vert w\Vert_{L^2}^2+\Vert \nabla w\Vert_{L^2}^2)
\end{aligned}$$ and recalling the above bounds on $\|v(t)\|_{L^2}$ and $\|\nabla w(t)\|_{L^2}$.
\[Lemma:R\_b\] Let $\Psi=(\psi, v, w, \eta)$ be a smooth solution of the system with initial data . Then it holds $$\label{R_1_Estimate_N_2}
\begin{aligned}
\begin{multlined}[t]\int_0^t |R^{(2)}(v+\tau w)(\sigma)|\, \textup{d}\sigma+\int_0^t |R^{(2)}(\psi+\tau v)(\sigma)|\, \textup{d}\sigma\\
+\int_0^t |R^{(2)}( \tau v)(\sigma)|\, \textup{d}\sigma
\lesssim |\Psi|_{\mathcal{E}(t)}|\Psi|^2_{\mathcal{D}(t)},\end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$ for all $t \geq 0$, where the functional $R^{(2)}$ is defined in and the energy semi-norms $|\cdot|_{\mathcal{E}(t)}$ and $|\cdot|_{\mathcal{D}(t)}$ in and , respectively.
We only estimate the first term on the left in , the second and third one can be bounded analogously. By applying Hölder’s inequality, we obtain $$\label{est_R_last}
\begin{aligned}
& |R^{(2)}( v +\tau w)|\\
\leq&\, 2|k|\Vert w\Vert_{L^4}\Vert \nabla v \Vert_{L^4}\Vert \nabla ( v +\tau w)\Vert _{L^2}+2|k| \Vert v \Vert_{L^\infty}\Vert \nabla w \Vert_{L^2}\Vert \nabla ( v +\tau w)\Vert_{L^2}
\end{aligned}$$ for all times. For the first term on the right, we can then use the the Ladyzhenskaya interpolation inequality in two- and three-dimensions to obtain $$\begin{aligned}
&2|k| \Vert w\Vert_{L^4}\Vert \nabla v \Vert_{L^4}\Vert \nabla ( v +\tau w)\Vert _{L^2}\\
\lesssim& \, \|w\|^{1-n/4}_{L^2}\|\nabla w\|^{n/4}_{L^2}\|\nabla v\|^{1-n/4}_{L^2}\|\nabla^2 v\Vert^{n/4}_{L^2}\Vert \nabla ( v +\tau w)\Vert _{L^2} .
\end{aligned}$$ From here, by employing Young’s inequality and the bound for $\|\nabla w\|_{L^2}$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
&2|k| \Vert w\Vert_{L^4}\Vert \nabla v \Vert_{L^4}\Vert \nabla ( v +\tau w)\Vert _{L^2}\\
\lesssim&\, (\|w\|_{L^2}+\|\nabla w\|_{L^2})(\Vert \nabla ( v +\tau w)\Vert^2 _{L^2}+\|\nabla v\|^2_{L^2}+\|\Delta v\|^2_{L^2})\\
\lesssim&\, (\|w\|_{L^2}+\|\nabla v\|_{L^2}+\nabla ( v +\tau w)\Vert _{L^2})(\Vert \nabla ( v +\tau w)\Vert^2 _{L^2}+\|\nabla v\|^2_{L^2}+\|\Delta v\|^2_{L^2}).
\end{aligned}$$ The second term on the right in we can estimate as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
& 2|k|\Vert v \Vert_{L^\infty}\Vert \nabla w \Vert_{L^2}\Vert \nabla ( v +\tau w)\Vert_{L^2}\\
\lesssim& \,(\|v\|_{L^2}+\|\nabla v\|_{L^2}+\|\Delta v\|_{L^2})\Vert \nabla w \Vert_{L^2}\Vert \nabla ( v +\tau w)\Vert_{L^2} \\
\lesssim&\, (\|v+\tau w\|_{L^2}+\|w\|_{L^2}+\|\nabla v\|_{L^2}+\|\Delta v\|_{L^2})\Vert \nabla w \Vert_{L^2}\Vert \nabla ( v +\tau w)\Vert_{L^2} .
\end{aligned}$$ Consequently, we can deduce that $$\label{R_1_1_Est}
\begin{aligned}
\int_0^t|R^{(2)}( v +\tau w)(\sigma)| \, \textup{d} \sigma
\lesssim&\,\begin{multlined}[t] \sup_{\sigma \in [0,t]}(\|v+\tau w\|_{H^1}+\|w\|_{L^2}+\|\nabla v\|_{L^2}+\|\Delta v\|_{L^2})\\
\times \int_0^t(\Vert \nabla ( v +\tau w)\Vert^2 _{L^2}+\|\nabla v\|^2_{L^2}+\|\Delta v\|^2_{L^2}) \, \textup{d} \sigma, \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$ from which the first estimate in follows.
Altogether, our previous considerations allow us to conclude that if a smooth solutions of the system with initial data exists on $[0,T]$, it must satisfy the estimate $$\begin{aligned}
|\Psi|_{\mathcal{E}(t)}+|\Psi|_{\mathcal{D}(t)} \lesssim |\Psi|_{\mathcal{E}(0)}+ |\Psi|_{\mathcal{E}(t)}|\Psi|^2_{\mathcal{D}(t)}, \quad t \in [0,T]. \end{aligned}$$ We next deal with the issue of existence of such a solution.
Local solvability of the JMGT equation with memory {#Sec:LocalExistence}
==================================================
Global solvability in $\R^3$ {#Sec:GlobalExistence}
============================
Decay rates for the JMGT equation in three-dimensional domains {#Sec:DecayRates}
==============================================================
We next wish to see if and how the solution of decays with time. To answer these questions, we first need to derive new decay estimates for $v=\psi_t$ in the linearized model.
Decay estimates for the linearized system
-----------------------------------------
The corresponding linear problem is given by the system $$\label{Main_System_linear}
\begin{cases}
\psi_{t}=v, \\
v_{t}=w, \\
\tau w_{t}=- w+c^2_g\Delta \psi+b\Delta v + \displaystyle%
\int_{0}^\infty g(s)\Delta\eta(s)\ds,
\\
\eta_{t}=v-\eta_{s},%
\end{cases}%$$ supplemented with the same initial data . To formulate the result, we introduce the vector $$\mathbf{U}=(v+\tau w,\nabla( \psi+\tau v),\nabla v),$$ and the corresponding initial vector $\mathbf{U}_0=(\psi_1+\tau \psi_2, \nabla(\psi_0+ \tau \psi_1), \nabla \psi_1)$. The decay rates for $\mathbf{U}$ are given by the following two results.
\[Lemma\_Decay\_Linear\] Let $s\geq 0$ be an integer and assume that $\mathbf{U}_0\in L^1(\R^n) \cap H^s(\R^n)$, where $n \in \N$. Moreover, assume that $b>\tau c^2$. Then, for any $0 \leq j\leq s$, it holds that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Decay_Linearized}
\Vert\nabla^{j}\mathbf{U}(t)\Vert _{L^{2}}\lesssim (1+t)^{-{n}/{4-{j}/{2}}}\Vert \mathbf{U}_{0}\Vert _{L^{1}} +e^{-\frac{\lambda}{2} t} \Vert\nabla^{j}\mathbf{U}_{0}\Vert _{L^{2}},
\end{aligned}$$ where $\lambda$ is a positive constant, independent of $t$.
The estimate above does not directly yield a decay rate for $\Vert \nabla^j \psi_t\Vert_{L^2}=\Vert \nabla^j v\Vert_{L^2}$, which we need to prove the decay rate of the nonlinear equation. However, we can obtain it through the bound $$\label{Ineq_L_2}
\Vert \nabla ^j v\Vert_{L^2}\lesssim \Vert \nabla^j(v+\tau w)\Vert_{L^2}+\Vert \nabla^j w\Vert_{L^2}$$ and if we have a decay rate for $\Vert w\Vert_{L^2}$. This rate is the result of the next proposition. Note that for the nonlinear problem we actually only need $j \in \{0,1\}$.
\[Decay\_w\_New\] Let the assumptions of Lemma \[Lemma\_Decay\_Linear\] hold with $s \geq 1$ and let $w_0 \in H^s(\R^n)$. Then, for any $n\in \N$ and any $0 \leq j\leq s-1$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Decay_estimate_W}
\Vert\nabla^{j}w(t)\Vert_{L^{2}}\lesssim (\Vert \nabla^j w_0\Vert_{L^2}+\Vert \mathbf{U}_{0}\Vert_{L^{1}}+\Vert\nabla^{j+1}\mathbf{U}_{0}\Vert_{L^{2}})(1+t)^{-\frac{n}{4}-\frac{j}{2}-\frac{1}{2}},\end{aligned}$$ provided that the thermal relaxation $\tau>0$ is sufficiently small.
For proving the above estimate, we need to employ the decay rates of the Fourier transform of the solution; cf. [@Bounadja_Said_2019]. Recall how the low-order energy $E_1$ is defined in . We then define $$\hat{E}_1(\xi,t)=\mathscr{F}(E_1(x,t)),$$ where $``\mathscr{F}"$ stands for the Fourier transform and we denote the variable dual to $x$ by $\xi$. Then the following estimate holds: $$\label{Eexp}
\hat{E}_1(\xi,t)\lesssim \hat{E}_1(\xi,0)\exp{(-\lambda \tfrac{|\xi|^2}{1+|\xi|^2}t)}$$ for all $t \geq 0$; cf. [@Bounadja_Said_2019 Proposition 4.1]. The constant $\lambda$ is positive and independent of $t$ and $\xi$. For the linearized problem, it is clear that estimate holds with $R^{(1)}$ set to zero; in other words, it holds $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{2}\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\tau \left\vert
w\right\vert ^{2}\dx+\frac{1}{2}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}} |w|^2 \dx
\lesssim \,
\Vert
\Delta (\psi+\tau v)\Vert_{L^2}^2+\Vert \Delta v\Vert _{L^{2}}^2+\Vert\Delta\eta\Vert^{2}_{L^2, g}.
\end{aligned}$$ Thus we know that $$\label{w_Energy_Fourier}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{2}\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt}\tau \left\vert \hat{w}\right\vert
^{2}+ \frac{1}{2}|\hat{w}|^2 \lesssim \, |\xi|^2 \hat{E}_1(\xi,t).
\end{aligned}$$ By plugging in estimate for $\hat{E}_1(\xi,t)$ in the above inequality, we obtain $$\frac{\textup{d}}{\dt} \left\vert \hat{w}\right\vert
^{2}\leq -\frac{1}{\tau} \left\vert \hat{w}\right\vert
^{2}+C|\xi|^2 \hat{E}_1(\xi,0)\exp{(-\lambda \tfrac{|\xi|^2}{1+|\xi|^2}t)}.$$ We can then apply the differential version of Gronwall’s inequality to arrive at $$\label{w_Estimate_main}
\begin{aligned}
\left\vert \hat{w}\right\vert
^{2} \leq&\, |\hat{w}_0|^2 \exp{(-\tfrac{1}{\tau} t)} +C|\xi|^2\hat{E}_1(\xi,0)\int_0^t \exp{(-\lambda \tfrac{|\xi|^2}{1+|\xi|^2} s)}\, \exp{(-\tfrac{1}{\tau}(t-s))}\ds ,
\end{aligned}$$ which directly leads to $$\label{w_Estimate_main}
\begin{aligned}
\left\vert \hat{w}\right\vert
^{2} \leq& \begin{multlined}[t]
\, |\hat{w}_0|^2 \exp{(-\tfrac{1}{\tau} t)}\\ +C|\xi|^2\hat{E}_1(\xi,0)\exp{(-\tfrac{1}{\tau} t)}(\tfrac{1}{\tau}-\lambda \tfrac{|\xi^2|}{1+|\xi|^2})^{-1} [\exp{(-(\lambda \tfrac{|\xi|^2}{1+|\xi|^2}-\tfrac{1}{\tau})t)} -1]. \end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$ To further bound the right side, we can use the fact that $$\frac{1}{\frac{1}{\tau}-\lambda \frac{|\xi^2|}{1+|\xi|^2}}=
\frac{\tau \left(|\xi|^2+1\right)}{|\xi|^2 (1-\lambda \tau )+1}.$$ So, assuming that the thermal relaxation is small enough in the sense of $\tau< \frac{1}{\lambda}$, it holds $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{\frac{1}{\tau}-\lambda \frac{|\xi^2|}{1+|\xi|^2}}\leq \frac{\tau}{1-\lambda \tau}.\end{aligned}$$ Altogether for small $\tau>0$, we obtain $$\label{w_Fourier_Estimate}
\left\vert \hat{w}\right\vert
^{2}\leq |\hat{w}_0|^2 \exp{(-\tfrac{1}{\tau} t)}+C|\xi|^2 \hat{E}_1(\xi,0)\exp{(-\lambda \tfrac{|\xi|^2}{1+|\xi|^2}t)}.$$ We can use the fact that $$\label{ineq_U_E_1}
\hat{E}_1(\xi,t) \lesssim |\hat{\mathbf{U}}(\xi,t)|^2, \quad t \geq 0,$$ where $\hat{\mathbf{U}}(\xi,t)=\mathcal{F}(\mathbf{U}(x,t))$; see [@Bounadja_Said_2019 Lemma 4.3]. By applying Plancherel’s theorem and at $t=0$, we find $$\label{Plancherel}
\begin{aligned}
\Vert\nabla^{j}w(t)\Vert_{L^{2}}^{2}=& \, \int_{\R^{n}}|\xi|^{2j}|\hat{w}(\xi,t)|^{2}\, \textup{d}\xi\\
\lesssim& \,\Vert \nabla^j w_0\Vert_{L^2}^2\exp{(-\tfrac{1}{\tau} t)}+ \int_{\R^{n}}|\xi|^{2(j+1)} \exp{(-\lambda \tfrac{|\xi|^2}{1+|\xi|^2}t)}|\hat{\mathbf{U}}(\xi,0)|^{2}\, \textup{d}\xi
\end{aligned}$$ for any $j\geq 0$. The second term on the right-hand side of estimate can be split into $$\label{split Intg}
\begin{aligned}
&\int_{\R^{n}}|\xi|^{2(j+1)} \exp{(-\lambda \tfrac{|\xi|^2}{1+|\xi|^2}t)}|\hat{\mathbf{U}}(\xi,0)|^{2}\textup{d} \xi\\
=& \, \begin{multlined}[t]\int_{|\xi|\leq 1}|\xi|^{2(j+1)} \exp{(-\lambda \tfrac{|\xi|^2}{1+|\xi|^2}t)}|\hat{\mathbf{U}}(\xi,0)|^{2}\textup{d} \xi \\
+ \int_{|\xi|\geq 1}|\xi|^{2(j+1)} \exp{(-\lambda \tfrac{|\xi|^2}{1+|\xi|^2}t)}|\hat{\mathbf{U}}(\xi,0)|^{2}\textup{d}\xi.\end{multlined}
\end{aligned}$$ We can then use the fact that $$\label{rho*}
\frac{|\xi|^2}{1+|\xi|^2}\geq
\begin{cases}
\frac{1}{2}|\xi|^{2}, & \text{if }\quad |\xi|\leq 1, \vspace{0.2cm}\\
\frac{1}{2}, & \text{if} \quad|\xi|\geq 1.
\end{cases}$$ Concerning the first integral on the right in , by exploiting the inequality $$\int_{0}^{1}r^{n-1}e^{-r^{2}t}\textup{d}r \leq C(n)(1+t)^{-{n}/{2}},$$ given in Lemma \[Lemma:Ineq\] together with , we find that $$\label{I1}
\begin{aligned}
\int_{|\xi|\leq 1}|\xi|^{2j} \exp{(-\lambda \tfrac{|\xi|^2}{1+|\xi|^2}t)}|\hat{\mathbf{U}}(\xi,0)|^{2}\textup{d} \xi\leq& \, \Vert\hat{\mathbf{U}}_{0}\Vert_{L^{\infty}}^{2}\int_{|\xi|\leq 1}|\xi|^{2(j+1)} \exp{(-\tfrac{\lambda}{2} \tfrac{|\xi|^2}{1+|\xi|^2}t)}\, \textup{d}\xi\\
\lesssim& \, (1+t)^{-\frac{n}{2}-1-j}\Vert \mathbf{U}_{0}\Vert_{L^{1}}^{2}.
\end{aligned}$$ On the other hand, in the high-frequency region where $|\xi|\geq 1$, we have $$\label{I2}
\begin{aligned}
\int_{|\xi|\geq 1}|\xi|^{2j} \exp{(-\lambda \tfrac{|\xi|^2}{1+|\xi|^2}t)}|\hat{\mathbf{U}}(\xi,0)|^{2}\textup{d}\xi
\leq&\, e^{-\frac{\lambda}{2}t}\int_{|\xi|\geq 1}|\xi|^{2(j+1)} |\hat{\mathbf{U}}(\xi,0)|^{2}d\xi \\
\leq& \, e^{-\frac{\lambda}{2}t}\Vert\nabla^{j+1}\mathbf{U}_{0}\Vert_{L^{2}}^{2}.
\end{aligned}$$ By plugging the above two estimates into inequality , we finally obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\Vert\nabla^{j}w(t)\Vert_{L^{2}}\lesssim e^{-\frac{1}{2\tau} t}\Vert \nabla^j w_0\Vert_{L^2}+C(1+t)^{-\frac{n}{4}-\frac{j}{2}-\frac{1}{2}}\Vert \mathbf{U}_{0}\Vert_{L^{1}(\R^{n})}+ e^{-\frac{\lambda}{4}t}\Vert\nabla^{j+1}\mathbf{U}_{0}\Vert_{L^{2}}. \end{aligned}$$ This implies estimate holds for large $t$, thus completing the proof of Proposition \[Decay\_w\_New\].
Now we are ready to prove the decay rate for $v=\psi_t$.
Let the assumptions of Proposition \[Decay\_w\_New\] hold. Then, for any $n\in \N$ and any $0 \leq j\leq s-1$, we have $$\label{v_L_2_Estimate}
\Vert\nabla^{j}v(t)\Vert_{L^{2}}\lesssim (\Vert \nabla^j w_0\Vert_{L^2}+\Vert \mathbf{U}_{0}\Vert_{L^{1}}+\Vert\nabla^{j}\mathbf{U}_{0}\Vert_{H^{1}})(1+t)^{-\frac{n}{4}-\frac{j}{2}}.$$ Moreover, assuming $\mathbf{U}_0 \in L^1(\R^3) \cap H^3(\R^3)$ and $w_0 \in H^2(\R^3)$, it holds $$\label{v_L_infty_Estimate}
\Vert v(t) \Vert_{L^\infty}\lesssim (\Vert w_0\Vert_{H^2}+\Vert \mathbf{U}_0\Vert_{L^1}+\Vert \mathbf{U}_0\Vert_{H^3})(1+t)^{-\frac{n}{2}}.$$
The estimate is a result of combining the bounds , , and estimate . To prove the second estimate, we use the the Gagliardo–Nirenberg interpolation inequality in the form of $$\label{L_infty_Interp}
\left\Vert v\right\Vert _{L^{\infty }}\leq C\left\Vert \nabla ^{2}%
v\right\Vert _{L^{2}}^{\frac{n}{4}}\left\Vert v%
\right\Vert _{L^{2}}^{1-\frac{n}{4}}.$$ Taking into account estimate then immediately yields .
To prove the decay rate for the nonlinear problem, we have to use the bound in the $L^\infty$ norm. This means that we need the initial data to be more regular than what we had for the global solvability.
Decay estimates for the nonlinear problem
-----------------------------------------
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
[ ]{}
[**R. D’Auria$^\bigstar$, S. Ferrara$^\dag$ and M. Trigiante$^\bigstar $**]{}
$^\bigstar$[*Dipartimento di Fisica, Politecnico di Torino\
C.so Duca degli Abruzzi, 24, I-10129 Torino, and\
Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare,\
Sezione di Torino, Italy*]{}\
[E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]]{}
$^\dag$ [*CERN, Physics Department, CH 1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland\
and\
INFN, Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Italy\
and\
Department of Physics & Astronomy, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA*]{}\
[E-mail: [email protected]]{}
[ABSTRACT]{}
We report on some recent investigations of the structure of the four dimensional gauged supergravity Lagrangian which emerges from flux and Scherk–Schwarz compactifications in higher dimensions. Special attention is given to the gauge structure of M–theory compactified on a seven torus with 4–form and geometrical (spin connection) fluxes turned on. A class of vacua, with flat space–time and described by “no–scale” supergravity models, is analyzed.
Introduction
============
New massive deformations of “extended” supergravity theories have recently been investigated in the context of flux compactifications from higher dimensional theories. The latter correspond to superstring or M–theory vacua with some p–form field strength turned on along the compactified directions [@ps]-[@h]. In a more sophisticated mathematical language they correspond to fluxes when the p-form is integrated on a p-cycle in the internal manifold.
The presence of fluxes determines indeed a non–trivial scalar potential [@ps] in the effective low–energy supergravity, which defines in some cases vacua with vanishing cosmological constant (at tree level), in which spontaneous (partial) supersymmetry breaking may occur and (some of) the moduli of the internal manifold are fixed. In fact theories with vanishing cosmological constant are generalized no–scale models, which were studied long ago in the pure supergravity context [@noscale1; @noscale2]. The presence of fluxes also gives rise in the low–energy supergravity to local symmetries gauged by vector fields [^1]. Supergravity models with such gauge symmetries (gauged supergravities) have been extensively studied in the literature [@dwn]-[@dwst1], also in connection to flux compactifications or Scherk–Schwarz dimensional reduction [@ss],[@css]-[@vz]. Actually in extended supergravities (${ N}\ge 2$) the *gauging* procedure, which consists in promoting a global symmetry group of the Lagrangian to local invariance, is the only way for introducing a non–trivial scalar potential without explicitly breaking supersymmetry. The global symmetry group of extended supergravities is the isometry group $G$ of the scalar manifold, whose non–linear action on the scalar fields is associated with an electric/magnetic duality action on the $n_v$ vector field strengths and their duals [@gz]. This duality transformation is required in four dimensions to be symplectic and thus is defined by the embedding of $G$ inside ${\rm Sp}(2n_v,\mathbb{R})$. Gauge symmetries deriving from flux compactifications typically are related to non–semisimple Lie groups ${\Scr G}$ containing abelian translational isometries acting on axionic fields which originate from ten dimensional R–R forms $C_{(p)}$ ($p=0,2,4$ for Type IIB) or the NS 2–form $B_{(2)}$. The embedding of ${\Scr G}$ inside $G$ is defined at the level of the corresponding Lie algebras by the flux tensors themselves, which play the mathematical role of an *embedding matrix* [@dwst1].
No–scale models arising from flux compactifications or Scherk–Schwarz dimensional reduction give rise to a semi–positive definite scalar potential which has an interpretation in terms of an ${ N}$–extended gauged supergravity in four dimensions. Let us recall the general form of such scalar potential $V(\Phi)$, $\Phi$ denoting collectively the scalar fields, [@fm; @cgp; @df]: $$\begin{aligned}
\delta_B^A V(\Phi)=-3 S^{AC}S_{BC}+N^{IA} N_{IB}\,,\label{potential}\end{aligned}$$ where $S_{AB}=S_{BA}$, and $N^{IA}$ appear in the gravitino and spin $1/2$ supersymmetry transformations $$\begin{aligned}
\delta\psi_{A\mu}&=&\frac 1 2
S_{AB}\gamma_\mu\epsilon^B+\cdots\noindent\\
\delta\lambda^I&=&
N^{IA}\epsilon_A+\cdots\,,\label{varfer}\end{aligned}$$ and give rise in the supergravity Lagrangian to the following terms: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{-g}}\mathcal{L}&=&\cdots
+S_{AB}\bar\psi_\mu^A\sigma^{\mu\nu}\psi_\nu^B+iN^{IA}\bar\lambda_I\gamma^\mu\psi_{\mu
A} -\!V(\Phi)\,.\end{aligned}$$ Flat space demands that on the extremes ${\partial V}/{\partial\Phi}=0$ the potential vanishes, so $$\begin{aligned}
3\sum_CS^{AC}S_{CA}&=&\sum_IN^{IA} N_{IA},\qquad \forall A\,,\end{aligned}$$ The first term in the potential (\[potential\]) is the square of the gravitino mass matrix. It is hermitian, so it can be diagonalized by a unitary transformation. Assume that it is already diagonal, then the eigenvalue in the entry $(A_0,A_0)$ is non zero if and only if $N^{IA_0}\neq 0$ for some $I$. On the other hand, if the gravitino mass matrix vanishes then $N^{IA}$ must be zero.
For no-scale models [@noscale1; @noscale2], there is a subset of fields $\lambda^{I'}$ for which $$\begin{aligned}
3\sum_CS^{AC}S_{CA}&=&\sum_{I'}N^{I'A} N_{I'A},\qquad \forall
A\label{cancel}\end{aligned}$$ at any point in the scalar manifold ${\Scr M}_{scal}$. This implies that the potential is given by $$\begin{aligned}
V(\Phi)&=&\sum_{I\neq I'}N^{IA} N_{IA}\,,\end{aligned}$$ and it is manifestly positive definite. Zero vacuum energy on a point of ${\Scr M}_{scal}$ implies that $N^{IA}=0$, $I\neq I'$ at that point. This happens independently of the number of unbroken supersymmetries, which is controlled by $N^{I'A}$.
In the sequel we shall discuss no–scale models as they originate from M–theory compactifications on a twisted seven–torus with 4–form flux, 7–form flux and geometrical flux [@km]-[@h],[@ddf]-[@dft4].
A twisted torus corresponds, in this framework, to the so called Scherk–Schwarz compactification, i.e. to the replacement of a flat torus $T^7$ with a seven–dimensional group–manifold whose structure constants $\tau_{IJ}{}^K$ (from now on the capital latin indices label the seven directions of the internal torus: $I,J,M,N...=1,\dots, 7$) determine the Lie algebra of the “graviphoton fields” $A^I_\mu$ associated with the Kaluza–Klein mixed components of the metric $g_{I\mu}$. The corresponding four dimensional curvatures are therefore: $$\begin{aligned}
F^I&=&dA^I+\frac{1}{2}\,\tau_{KL}{}^I\, A^K\wedge A^L\,.\end{aligned}$$ The internal curvature of the eleven dimensional 3–form field $C^{(3)}$ is given by: $$\begin{aligned}
F^{(0)}_{IJKL}&=&-g_{IJKL}-\frac{3}{2}\tau_{[IJ}{}^M\,C_{KL]M}\,,\label{eq15}\end{aligned}$$ while the external (space–time) components of the same field strength read: $$\begin{aligned}
F^{(4)}&=&d{\cal A}^{(3)}- g_{IJKL}\,A^I\wedge A^J\wedge A^K\wedge
A^L- B_I\wedge F^I\,,\label{eq6}\end{aligned}$$ where ${\cal A}^{(3)}$ denote the (non–propagating) four dimensional 3–form field and $B_{\mu\nu I}$ are the seven antisymmetric tensor fields originating from the dimensional reduction of $C^{(3)}$. The constants $g_{IJKL},\, \tau_{IJ}{}^K$ are bounded to satisfy the following relations: $$\begin{aligned}
\tau_{IJ}{}^J&=&0\,\,;\,\,\,\tau_{[IJ}{}^M\,\tau_{K]M}{}^L=0\,\,;\,\,\,\,\tau_{[IJ}{}^P\,g_{KLM]P}=0\,.\end{aligned}$$ These constraints ensure that, when massive antisymmetric tensors are suitably dualized to massive vector fields, so that the M–theory in $D=4$ admits a global (on-shell) ${\mathrm{E}}_{7(7)}$ symmetry, a 28–dimensional Lie algebra is gauged, whose structure constants are given in terms of $g_{IJKL},\, \tau_{IJ}{}^K$ and $\tilde{g}$ (where $\tilde{g}$ is the flux associated with the space-time components of the 4–form: $F^{(4)}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}\propto
\tilde{g}\,\epsilon_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}$). In section 2 we discuss the equations of motion and the potential of M–theory compactification on a twisted torus with internal fluxes turned on. In section 3 we discuss flat vacua and the correspondence to the Scherk–Schwarz breaking. In section 4 we discuss these results in terms of the gauging of a subalgebra of ${\mathrm{E}}_{7(7)}$. We refer the reader to the appendix for a description of the dual gauge algebra as a subalgebra of ${\mathrm{E}}_{7(7)}$.
The equations of motion and the potential
=========================================
The bosonic equations of motion of M–theory can be obtained by varying the Lagrangian with respect to the vielbein 1–form $V^a$ and the 3–form $C^{(3)}$.
The $g_{\mu\nu}$, $G_{IJ}$ and $A^I$ field equations come from the eleven dimensional Einstein equations: where $g_{\mu I}=G_{IJ}\,A^J_\mu$ and $G_{IJ}$ are the coordinates of ${{\mathrm{GL}}}(7)/{{\mathrm{SO}}(7)}$[^2]. The tensor $T$ is the energy momentum tensor of the 4–form. Incidentally we remark that in this formulation the $R$–symmetry of the corresponding $N=8$ supergravity is $Spin(7)$, the eleven dimensional gravitino gives rise to eight gravitinos which are in the eight–dimensional spinorial representation and to spin $1/2$ which transform in the ${\bf 8}+{\bf 48}$ of the same group.
The 3–form field equations read as follows:[^3] [$$\begin{aligned}
d \star F^{(4)}&=& \frac{1}{4}\,
F^{(4)}\wedge F^{(4)}\,.\label{gff}\end{aligned}$$]{} Since in this paper we are mainly concerned with the general form of the scalar potential coming from the twist and the fluxes, we will carefully analyze this equation only for those entries which receive contributions from the scalar potential [@dft3]. Let us write the dual of the field equations originating from the Euler–Lagrange equations for $\mathcal{A}_{\mu\nu\rho}$ and $C_{IJK}$. The first equation allows us to integrate out the $\mathcal{A}_{\mu\nu\rho}$ field in a manner which we shall explain in a moment. This integration gives an extra contribution to the scalar potential coming from the Chern–Simons term. The second equation contains the derivative of the vacuum energy with respect to $C_{IJK}$ and contributes to the equation of motion of the $C_{IJK}$ scalar.
Let us define the following 4–D scalar quantity: [$$\begin{aligned}
P&=& \frac{1}{\sqrt{-g}}\,\epsilon^{\mu_1\dots \mu_4}\, F^{(4)}_{\mu_1\dots \mu_4}\,,\label{P}\end{aligned}$$]{} where $F^{(4)}_{\mu_1\dots \mu_4}$ was defined in eq. (\[eq6\]). For the purpose of computing the scalar potential, only the $d {\cal A}^{(3)}$ part of $F^{(4)}$ will be relevant. The $\mathcal{A}_{\mu\nu\rho}$ field equation then reads: [$$\begin{aligned}
d (V_7\,P)&=&-\frac{1}{4}\, F^{(1)}_{IJK}\, F^{(0)}_{PQRS}\,\epsilon^{IJKPQRS}\,,\label{dP}\end{aligned}$$]{} where the field strength $F^{(1)}_{IJK}$ is defined as follows [@dft3]: $$\begin{aligned}
F^{(1)}_{IJK}&\equiv&{\Scr
D}^{(\tau)}C_{IJK}-\tau_{[IJ}{}^L\,A_{K]L}+4\,g_{IJKL} \,A^L\,,\end{aligned}$$ the covariant derivative ${\Scr D}^{(\tau)}$ corresponding to the gauge connection defined by $\tau_{IJ}{}^K$ and $A_{IJ}$ being the 21 vector fields originating from $C^{(3)}$. For our purposes we shall also restrict ourselves to the ${\Scr D}^{(\tau)}C_{IJK}$ term in $F^{(1)}_{IJK}$. Equation (\[dP\]) implies that its right hand side is a closed form. In fact the crucial ingredient is that the term $F^{(1)}_{IJK}\,
F^{(0)}_{PQRS}\,\epsilon^{IJKPQRS}$ is an exact form on the twisted torus with fluxes, and it can be written as [$$\begin{aligned}
F^{(1)}_{IJK}\, F^{(0)}_{PQRS}\,\epsilon^{IJKPQRS}&=&-d\left(C_{IJK}\,
(g_{PQRS}+\frac{3}{4}\,\tau_{[PQ}^N\,C_{RS]N})\epsilon^{IJKPQRS}+\tilde{g}\right)\,,\end{aligned}$$]{} where the integration constant $\tilde{g}$ [@d] is actually related to the dual gauge algebra in the ${\mathrm{E}}_{7(7)}$ covariant formulation described in [@dft2]. From this we get the value of $V_7\, P$ to be: [$$\begin{aligned}
V_7\,
P&=&\frac{1}{4}\,\left(
C_{IJK}\,(g_{LPQR}+\frac{3}{4}\,\tau_{[LP}^N\,C_{QR]N})\,\epsilon^{IJKLPQR}+\tilde{g}\right)\,.\label{dP1}\end{aligned}$$]{} Note the important identity: [$$\begin{aligned}
V_7\,\frac{\delta P}{\delta
C_{IJK}}&=&-\frac{1}{4}\,\epsilon^{IJKLPQR}\,
F^{(0)}_{LPQR}\,.\label{dP2}\end{aligned}$$]{} Let us now turn to considering the equation of motion for the $C_{IJK}$ fields. They read: [$$\begin{aligned}
\partial_\mu\left(V_7\,\sqrt{-g} G^{I_1 J_1}G^{I_2 J_2}G^{I_3 J_3}\,
g^{\mu\nu}\, \partial_\nu
C_{J_1J_2J_3}\right)&=&-\frac{3}{2}\,\frac{1}{7!}\,\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho\lambda}\,
F_{IJKP}\, F_{\mu\nu\rho\lambda}\, \epsilon^{I_1I_2I_3
IJKP}+\nonumber\\&&-\frac{1}{2}\,V_7\,\sqrt{-g}\,
\tau_{PQ}{}^{[I_1}\, F^{I_2I_3]PQ}\,.\label{dC}\end{aligned}$$]{} By using equations (\[dP1\]) and (\[dP2\]) and the fact that: [$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\delta (
F^{(0)}_{IJKL}\,F^{(0)\,IJKL})}{\delta C_{PQR}}&=&-3\,
\tau_{IJ}^{[P}\, F^{(0)QR]IJ}\,,\label{delta2}\end{aligned}$$]{} equation (\[dC\]) can be rewritten in the form: [$$\begin{aligned}
\partial_\mu\left(V_7\,\sqrt{-g} G^{I_1 J_1}G^{I_2 J_2}G^{I_3 J_3}\,
g^{\mu\nu}\, \partial_\nu
C_{J_1J_2J_3}\right)&=&\sqrt{-g}\,\frac{\delta V}{\delta
C_{I_1I_2I_3}}\,,\end{aligned}$$]{} where the $C_{IJK}$–dependent part of the potential is: [$$\begin{aligned}
V_C &=& \frac{3}{16}\,\frac{1}{7!}\,\frac{1}{V_7}\, \left( C_{IJK}\,(g_{LPQR}+\frac{3}{4}\,\tau_{[LP}^N\,C_{QR]N})\,\epsilon^{IJKLPQR}+\tilde{g}\right)^2+\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{1}{6}\,V_7\,F^{(0)}_{IJKL}\,F^{(0)}_{MNPQ}\, G^{IM}\,
G^{JN}\, G^{KP}\, G^{LQ}\,,\label{vc}\end{aligned}$$]{} where $F^{(0)}_{IJKL}$ is given in eq. (\[eq15\]). One can easily compute the scalar potential in the Einstein frame by noting that [$$\begin{aligned}
g_{\mu\nu}&=&\frac{1}{V_7^2}\,
g_{\mu\nu}^{E}\,.\end{aligned}$$]{} Therefore in this frame, the potential becomes multiplied by an overall $(V_7)^{-2}$.
The full scalar potential in the Einstein frame is thus obtained by adding to $V_C$ the Scherk–Schwarz purely $G$–dependent part originating from the eleven–dimensional Einstein term. It is useful to write the entire potential as the following sum: [$$\begin{aligned}
V&=&V_E+V_K+V_{C-S}\,,\label{v}\end{aligned}$$]{} where the three terms on the right hand side originate from the eleven dimensional Einsten, kinetic and Chern–Simons terms respectively, and are found to have the following expression: [$$\begin{aligned}
V_E&=&\frac{1}{V_7}\,\left(2\, G^{KL}\, \tau_{KJ}{}^I\, \tau_{LI}{}^J+G_{II'}\,G^{JJ'}\, G^{KK'}\,\tau_{JK}{}^I\,\tau_{J'K'}{}^{I'}\right)\,,\nonumber\\
V_K&=&\frac{3}{16}\,\frac{1}{7!}\,\frac{1}{V_7}\,(g_{IJKL}+\frac{3}{2}\,\tau_{[IJ}^R\,C_{KL]R})(g_{MNPQ}+
\frac{3}{2}\,\tau_{[MN}^R\,C_{PQ]R})\, G^{IM}\, G^{JN}\, G^{KP}\, G^{LQ}\,,\nonumber\\
V_{C-S}&=& \frac{1}{6}\,\frac{1}{V_7^3}\, \left(
C_{IJK}\,(g_{LPQR}+\frac{3}{4}\,\tau_{[LP}^N\,C_{QR]N})\,\epsilon^{IJKLPQR}+\tilde{g}\right)^2\,.\label{vekcs}\end{aligned}$$]{} Recall that in our conventions $G_{IJ}$ is a positive definite matrix. Note that for $\tau=g=0$ we just get a positive cosmological constant, as noted in [@d].
Flat group vacua of the potential
==================================
The scalar potential in (\[v\]) and (\[vekcs\]) has the property that $V_K\ge 0$, $V_{C-S}\ge 0$ while $V_E$ has no definite sign [@ss]. Therefore in general we may have vacua with different signs of the cosmological constant.
From inspection of the scalar potential, let us make some general comments on the possible vacua of this class of models. We start analyzing the equation $\delta V/\delta C_{IJK}=0$, necessary in order to have a bosonic background with $C_{IJK}\equiv
C^{0}_{IJK}=constant$. Because of the properties (\[dP2\]) and (\[delta2\]) this is ensured by setting $F_{IJKL}^{(0)}=0$ or equivalently: [$$\begin{aligned}
g_{IJKL}+\frac{3}{2}\,
\tau_{[IJ}{}^P\, C_{KL]P}&=&0\,.\label{f40}\end{aligned}$$]{} As a consequence of equation (\[f40\]), *the 4–form flux has always a vanishing contribution ($V_K=0$) to the vacuum energy*. Next we extremize the potential with respect to the volume of the torus $V_7$. Taking into account the dependence of the internal metric $G_{IJ}$ on $V_7$, given by: $$\begin{aligned}
G_{IJ}&=& (V_7)^{\frac{2}{7}}\,
\hat{G}_{IJ}\,\,\,\,;\,\,\,\,\,\,{\rm det}(\hat{G})=1\,.\end{aligned}$$ and using the following short-hand notation: $$\begin{aligned}
b&=&2\, G^{KL}\, \tau_{KJ}{}^I\, \tau_{LI}{}^J+G_{II'}\,G^{JJ'}\,
G^{KK'}\,\tau_{JK}{}^I\,\tau_{J'K'}{}^{I'}\,,\nonumber\\
a&=&
C_{IJK}\,(g_{LPQR}+\frac{3}{4}\,\tau_{[LP}^N\,C_{QR]N})\,\epsilon^{IJKLPQR}+\tilde{g}\,,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ the two conditions $\delta V/\delta C_{IJK}=0=\delta V/\delta V_7$ will reduce the expression of the potential at the minimum $V_0$ to: $$\begin{aligned}
V_0&=& -\frac{4}{3}\,\frac{a^2}{(V_7^0)^3}\le
0\,\,\,\mbox{where}\,\,\,\,\,b\,(V_7^0)^{\frac{12}{7}}=-\frac{7}{3}\,a^2\,.\label{vo}\end{aligned}$$ From the above equations we conclude that a necessary condition for a vacuum to exist is $V_E\le 0$ and that at the minimum $V\le
0$. This excludes the existence of a de Sitter vacuum (i.e. maximally symmetric space-time geometry with positive cosmological constant).
A particular appealing class of models, which correspond to “no–scale” supergravities [@noscale1; @noscale2], are obtained for those gaugings for which $V=0$. This defines a “flat group” [@ss]. From equations (\[vo\]) this implies that $a=b=0$, namely that $V_E=V_{C-S}=0$, and that $V_7$ is an unfixed modulus. Condition $V_{C-S}=0$ in turn implies: [$$\begin{aligned}
P&=&0\,\,\,\,\Leftrightarrow\,\,\,\,\,C_{MNR}\,\left(g_{IJKL}+\frac{3}{4}\,
\tau_{[IJ}{}^P\,
C_{KL]P}\right)\,\epsilon^{MNRIJKL}+\tilde{g}=0\,.\label{P0}\end{aligned}$$]{} The second equation can also be written as the following condition on $\tilde{g}$: [$$\begin{aligned}
\tilde{g}&=&\frac{3}{4}\,
C^0_{MNR}\,\tau_{[IJ}{}^P\,
C^0_{KL]P}\,\epsilon^{MNRIJKL}\,,\label{tildeg}\end{aligned}$$]{} where $C^0_{IJK}$ is a solution of equation (\[f40\]) and thus depends on $g_{IJKL}$. This equation ensures that the $G_{IJ}$ moduli equations are the same as in the $g=\tilde{g}=0$ case, because the $F$–contribution to the energy–momentum tensor vanishes in these vacua. Condition $V_E=0$ on the other hand implies restrictions of the $\tau$ matrices. These were described in the pioneering paper of ref. [@ss] for $g_{IJKL}=\tilde{g}=0$.
Summarizing, a necessary condition for our models to admit Minkowski vacua is that the form-fluxes $g_{IJKL}$ and $\tilde{g}$ satisfy, besides $V_K=0$ also $V_{C-S}=0$. If we associate the background quantities $\tau_{IJ}{}^K,\,g_{IJKL}$ and $\tilde{g}$ with components of a larger representation of the group ${\mathrm{E}}_{7(7)}$, it can be shown that conditions $V_K=0=V_{C-S}$ amounts to stating that $g_{IJKL}$ and $\tilde{g}$ can be generated by acting on $\tau_{IJ}{}^K$ by means of an ${\mathrm{E}}_{7(7)}$ transformation or, equivalently, that all the models admitting Minkowski vacua belong to the same ${\mathrm{E}}_{7(7)}$–orbit as the model with $g_{IJKL}=\tilde{g}=0$ originally considered by Scherk and Schwarz, and thus share with it the same physics (mass spectrum etc...). Therefore there is an underlying hidden ${\mathrm{E}}_{7(7)}$ symmetry which is not manifest in the formulation of these models with tensor fields, but which is apparent at the level of equations of motion and Bianchi identities in the dual description of this compactification in which the antisymmetric tensor fields are replaced by scalar fields. This global symmetry however holds only if, besides the fields, the background quantities are transformed as well, and thus should not be regarded as a symmetry of the theory, but rather as a mapping between two different theories (a proper duality). This justifies *a posteriori* the aforementioned identification of the background quantities $\tau_{IJ}{}^K,\,g_{IJKL}$ and $\tilde{g}$ with parts of an ${\mathrm{E}}_{7(7)}$ representation.
To make a concrete example, let us consider the case in which $I=0,i$, $i=1,\dots, 6 $ with $\tau_{IJ}{}^K=\tau_{0i}{}^j$, zero otherwise, and $g_{IJKL}=g_{0ijk}$, zero otherwise. In this case $\tau_{0i}{}^j=T_j{}^i$ is chosen to be an antisymmetric matrix of rank 3 which can be set in the form: [$$\begin{aligned}
T_i{}^j&=&\left(\begin{matrix}m_1\,\epsilon &0&0\cr
0&m_2\,\epsilon &0\cr 0&0&m_3\,
\epsilon\end{matrix}\right)\,\,\,;\,\,\,\,\epsilon=\left(\begin{matrix}0&1\cr
-1&0\end{matrix}\right)\,.\end{aligned}$$]{} In this context the equation (\[f40\]) becomes $F^{(0)}_{0ijk}=0$ which fixes all $C_{ijk}$ fields but not the $C_{0ij}$ scalars. The $C_{0ij}$ fields give masses to the $A_{ij}$ vector fields with the exception of the three entries $(ij)=(1,2),(3,4),(5,6)$. Therefore three of the $C_{0ij}$ scalar remain massless moduli. The $G_{IJ}$–sector gives, as discussed in reference [@ss], four additional massless scalars, of which two are the volume $V_7$ and $G_{00}$ and two other come from internal components of the metric.
If one further discusses the spectrum of the remaining fields, the six vectors $A_{i0}$ are eaten by the six antisymmetric tensors $B_i$ because of the magnetic mass term in the free differential algebra [@dft3]. An additional massless scalar comes from the massless 2–form $B_0$ and finally an additional massless vector comes from the $A^0$ Kaluza–Klein vector. The other six $A^i$ vectors become massive because of the twisting of the torus. We conclude that in this theory there are always eight massless scalars and four massless vectors, in agreement with [@ss]. The effect of turning on $g$ and $\tilde{g}$ is not of giving extra masses, but of shifting the v.e.v. of the $C_{IJK}$ fields. This can be understood by an extension of the flat group where $g$ and $\tilde{g}$ play the role of additional structure constants. In the next section we will recover this result as well as the form of the potential, from the underlying duality symmetry of the dual formulation of the theory, in which all antisymmetric tensors $B_I$ are dualized into scalars $\tilde{B}^I$ and the ${\mathrm{E}}_{7(7)}$ symmetry is recovered.
The dual gauge algebra and its scalar potential
===============================================
We now interpret the above result in the usual formulation of the four dimensional theory based on the flat gauging [@ss; @css; @svn; @adfl0]. From the results of [@dft2] this amounts to dualizing those vector fields which participate to the anti–Higgs mechanism, in our case they are the $A_{0i}$ 1–forms, which are therefore replaced by their $A^{0i}$ magnetic duals. The dual gauge algebra therefore contains the following 28 generators: [$$\begin{aligned}
W^{ij},\, W_{i},\,Z_i,\,Z_0\,.\end{aligned}$$]{} with structure constants obtained from eq. (2.13) of [@dft2]. The first 27 generators form an abelian algebra, and the only non vanishing commutators are those involving $Z_0$ and given by: [$$\begin{aligned}
\left[Z_0,\,Z_i\right]&=&T_j{}^j\,Z_j-12\,g_{0ijk}\, W^{jk}+\tilde{g}\, W_i\,\nonumber\\
\left[Z_0,\,W^{pq}\right]&=&2\, T_i{}^{[p}\,W^{q]i}-12\,g_{0ijk}\, \epsilon^{ijkpql}\, W_l\,\nonumber\\
\left[Z_0,\,W_i\right]&=& T_j{}^j\,W_j\,,\label{gaugealg}\end{aligned}$$]{} where with respect to [@dft2] the redefinition $g\rightarrow
-12\,g$ was made. This algebra defines a flat subalgebra of ${\mathrm{E}}_{7(7)}$ which fits the class of models discussed by Cremmer, Scherk and Schwarz in [@css] and in [@svn], as it was shown in [@alt] and in [@dft2]. The gauged supergravity interpretation was given in [@adfl] and the corresponding gauge algebra is the semidirect product of a ${\mathrm{U}}(1)$ by a 27–dimensional abelian algebra and is contained in the branching of ${\mathrm{E}}_{7(7)}$ with respect to ${\mathrm{E}}_{6(6)}\times {\mathrm{O}}(1,1)$: [$$\begin{aligned}
{\bf 133}&\rightarrow & {\bf 1}_0+{\bf
78}_0+{\bf 27'}_{+2}+{\bf 27}_{-2}\,.\end{aligned}$$]{} To compare with the geometrical twist we further branch ${\mathrm{E}}_{6(6)}$ with respect to ${\mathrm{SL}}(6)\times {\mathrm{SL}}(2)$: [$$\begin{aligned}
{\bf 78}&\rightarrow & ({\bf 35},{\bf 1})+({\bf 1},{\bf 3})+({\bf 20},{\bf 2})\,,\label{branch78}\\
{\bf 27}&\rightarrow & ({\bf 15}',{\bf 1})+({\bf 6},{\bf 2})\,.\end{aligned}$$]{} Our gauging corresponds to the following choice of the “twist matrix” (see [@alt] and equation (2.9) of [@dft2]): [$$\begin{aligned}
Z_0&=&-\frac{2}{3}\,T_i{}^j\,
t_j{}^i+\,g_{0ijk}\, t^{ijk}+\frac{1}{9}\,\tilde{g}\, t_0\,,\end{aligned}$$]{} where we have used the notations introduced in [@dft2]. Here $t_i{}^j$ are the generators of the maximal compact subgroup of ${\mathrm{SL}}(6)$, namely ${\mathrm{SO}}(6)$, while $t^{ijk}$ and $t_0$ are nilpotent generators: the former belong to the $({\bf 20},{\bf
2})$ representation in (\[branch78\]) with positive grading with respect to the $\mathfrak{o}(1,1)$ generator of ${\mathrm{SL}}(2)$ and the latter is the nilpotent generator of ${\mathrm{SL}}(2)$ with positive grading with respect to the same generator. In the same framework we now discuss the form of the scalar potential, which is expected not to depend on the dualization procedure. In the dual formulation this potential is given by [@svn; @adfl; @dgftv]: [$$\begin{aligned}
V&=&e^{-6\,\phi}\,\left(
\frac{1}{2}\,(P_{0\,\hat{i}}{}^{\hat{j}})+\frac{1}{6}\,(P_{0\,\hat{i}\hat{j}\hat{k}})^2+(P_0{}^0)^2\right)=V_E+V_K+V_{C-S}\,,\end{aligned}$$]{} where $\phi$ is the modulus associated with the $0^{th}$ internal dimension of compactification, the hatted indices are rigid ${\mathrm{SO}}(6)$ indices, while the quantity $P_0$ has value in the 42–dimensional non–compact part of the $\mathfrak{e}_{6(6)}$ Lie algebra and represents the vielbein of the five–dimensional $\sigma$–model ${\mathrm{E}}_{6(6)}/{\mathrm{USp}}(8)$. It is defined as follows: [$$\begin{aligned}
P_0=(L^{-1}\, Z_0\,
L)_{|\mbox{non--compact}}\,,\end{aligned}$$]{} where $L$ is the five–dimensional coset representative which, using the solvable Lie algebra parametrization of ${\mathrm{E}}_{6(6)}/{\mathrm{USp}}(8)$, can be directly written in terms of our scalar fields as follows: [$$\begin{aligned}
L&=&
e^{\tilde{B}^0\, t_0}\, e^{\frac{1}{6}\,C_{ijk}\, t^{ijk}}\,
\mathbb{E}\,\,\,;\,\,\,\,\mathbb{E}\in \frac{{\mathrm{GL}}(6)}{{\mathrm{SO}}(6)}\,.\end{aligned}$$]{} Direct computation shows that: [$$\begin{aligned}
P_{0\,\hat{i}\hat{j}}&=&T_i{}^j\, \mathbb{E}^{-1}_{(\hat{i}}{}^i\, \mathbb{E}_{j|\hat{j})}\,,\nonumber\\
P_{0\,\hat{i}\hat{j}\hat{k}}&\propto &(g_{0ijk}+\frac{3}{4}\,T_{[i}{}^n\,C_{jk]n})\,\mathbb{E}^{-1}_{\hat{i}}{}^i\,\mathbb{E}^{-1}_{\hat{j}}{}^j\,\mathbb{E}^{-1}_{\hat{k}}{}^k\,,\nonumber\\
P_{0}{}^0&\propto & \epsilon^{lmnijk}\,
C_{lmn}\,(g_{0ijk}+\frac{3}{8}\,T_{[i}{}^n\,C_{jk]n})+ \tilde{g}
\,.\label{ps}\end{aligned}$$]{} In this language the eight massless modes come from $\tilde{B}^0$, three from $C_{0ij}$, one from $\phi$ and three from the metric $G_{ij}$. The latter can be understood from the fact that under ${\mathrm{SO}}(6)$ these moduli transform in the ${\bf 1}+{\bf 20}^\prime$ and the ${\bf 20}^\prime$ has two vanishing weights.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
Work supported in part by the European Community’s Human Potential Program under contract MRTN-CT-2004-005104 ‘Constituents, fundamental forces and symmetries of the universe’, in which R. D’A. and M.T. are associated to Torino University. The work of S.F. has been supported in part by European Community’s Human Potential Program under contract MRTN-CT-2004-005104 ‘Constituents, fundamental forces and symmetries of the universe’, in association with INFN Frascati National Laboratories and by D.O.E. grant DE-FG03-91ER40662, Task C.
Appendix {#appendix .unnumbered}
========
We can consider the ${\mathrm{E}}_{7(7)}$ generators in the ${\mathrm{GL}}(7,\mathbb{R})$–basis. This corresponds to the branching: $$\begin{aligned}
{\bf 133}&\rightarrow & {\bf 48}_0+{\bf 1}_0+{\bf
35}_{+2}+\overline{{\bf 35}}_{-2}+{\bf 7 }_{-4}+\overline{{\bf
7}}_{+4}\,.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ The coset ${\mathrm{E}}_{7(7)}/{\mathrm{SU}}(8)$ can be parametrized as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{{\mathrm{E}}_{7(7)}}{{\mathrm{SU}}(8)}&\equiv &
\frac{{\mathrm{GL}}(7,\mathbb{R})}{{\mathrm{SO}}(7)}\ltimes\,\mbox{Span}({\bf
35}_{+2}+\overline{{\bf 7}}_{+4})\,.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ In this basis the ${\mathrm{E}}_{7(7)}$ generators are: $$\begin{aligned}
t_M{}^N&\in& \mathfrak{gl}(7)\,,\nonumber\\
t^{MNP},\,t_{MNP},\,t_P,\,t^P&\in &{\bf 35}_{+2}+\overline{{\bf
35}}_{-2}+\overline{{\bf 7}}_{+4}+{\bf 7 }_{-4}\,.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
\left[t_M{}^N,\,t_P{}^Q\right]&=&\delta_{P}^N\,t_{M}{}^Q-\delta_{M}^Q\,t_{P}{}^N\,,\nonumber\\
\left[t_M{}^N,\,t^{P_1P_2P_3}\right]&=&-3\,\delta_M^{[P_1}\,t^{P_2P_3]N}+\frac{5}{7}\,\delta_{M}^N\,t^{P_1P_2P_3}\,,\nonumber\\
\left[t_M{}^N,\,t_{P}\right]&=&\delta_P^{N}\,t_{M}+\frac{3}{7}\,\delta_{M}^N\,t_{P}\,,\nonumber\\
\left[t^{N_1N_2N_3},\,t^{P_1P_2P_3}\right]&=&\epsilon^{N_1N_2N_3P_1P_2P_3
Q }\,t_Q\,,\nonumber\\
\left[t_M{}^N,\,t_{P_1P_2P_3}\right]&=&3\,\delta_{[P_1}^{N}\,t_{P_2P_3]M}-\frac{5}{7}\,\delta_{M}^N\,t_{P_1P_2P_3}\,,\nonumber\\
\left[t_M{}^N,\,t^{P}\right]&=&-\delta_M^{P}\,t^{N}-\frac{3}{7}\,\delta_{M}^N\,t^{P}\,,\nonumber\\
\left[t_{N_1N_2N_3},\,t_{P_1P_2P_3}\right]&=&\epsilon_{N_1N_2N_3P_1P_2P_3
Q }\,t^Q\,,\nonumber\\
\left[t^N,\,t_{M}\right]&=&t_M{}^N+\frac{1}{7}\,\delta_M^N\,t\,,\nonumber\\
\left[t^M,\,t^{N_1N_2N_3}\right]&=&-\frac{1}{6}\,\epsilon^{M
N_1N_2N_3 P_1P_2P_3}\,t_{P_1P_2P_3}\,,\nonumber\\
\left[t_M,\,t_{N_1N_2N_3}\right]&=&-\frac{1}{6}\,\epsilon_{M
N_1N_2N_3 P_1P_2P_3}\,t^{P_1P_2P_3}\,\nonumber\\
\left[t_{M_1M_2M_3},\,t^{N_1N_2N_3}\right]&=&18\,\delta^{[N_1N_2}_{[M_1M_2}\,t_{M_3]}{}^{N_3]}-\frac{24}{7}\,\delta^{N_1N_2
N_3 }_{M_1M_2 M_3}\,t\,,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where $t\equiv t_M{}^M$.
The flux algebra on a twisted torus is given by a 28–dimensional Lie algebra obtained as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
\left[Z_M,\,Z_N\right]&=&\alpha\,\tau_{MN}{}^P\,Z_P+\beta\,g_{MNPQ}\,W^{PQ}+\rho\, \tilde{g}\,W_{MN}\,,\nonumber\\
\left[Z_M,\,W^{PQ}\right]&=&\gamma\,\tau_{MR}{}^{[P}\,W^{Q]R}+\sigma\,g_{MM_1M_2M_3}\,\epsilon^{M_1M_2M_3PQRS}\,W_{RS}\,,\nonumber\\
\left[Z_M,\,W_{PQ}\right]&=&
\delta\,\tau_{PQ}{}^L\,W_{ML}\,\nonumber\\
\left[W^{IJ},\,W^{KL}\right]&=&-\frac{\lambda}{2}\,
\tau_{I_1I_2}{}^{[K}\,W_{I_3I_4}\epsilon^{L]IJI_1\dots
I_4}\,,\nonumber\\
\left[W^{IJ},\,W_{KL}\right]&=&\left[W_{IJ},\,W_{KL}\right]=0\,,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where $g_{IJKL},\,\tau_{IJ}{}^K$ satisfy the constraints discussed in the introduction and the gauge generators read: $$\begin{aligned}
Z_M&=&
\theta_{M,\,M_1M_2M_3}\,t^{M_1M_2M_3}+\theta_{M,\,N}{}^P\,t_{P}{}^N+\theta_{M,}{}^N\,t_N=
a_1\,g_{M M_1M_2M_3}\,t^{M_1M_2M_3}+\nonumber\\&&a_2
\tau_{MN}{}^P\,t_{P}{}^N+a_3\,\tilde{g}\,t_M\,,\nonumber\\
W^{MN}&=&\theta^{MN,}{}_{PQR}\,t^{PQR}+
\theta^{MN,\,P}\,t_P=\,b_1\,
\tau_{PQ}^{[M}\,t^{N]PQ}+b_2\,\epsilon^{MNM_1\dots M_4
P}\,g_{M_1\dots M_4 }\,t_P\,,\nonumber\\
W_{MN}&=&\theta_{MN,}{}^P\,t_P=c_1\,\tau_{MN}{}^P\,t_P\,.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ The various coefficients entering the above formulas are bound to satisfy the following relations: $$\begin{aligned}
a_2&=&\alpha=\frac{\gamma}{2}\,\,\,;\,\,\,a_1=\frac{\beta\,b_1}{3\,a_2}\,\,\,;\,\,\,\,\frac{b_2}{b_1}=\frac{1}{4}\,\frac{a_1}{a_2}
\,,\nonumber\\
c_1\,\sigma
&=&-2\,a_2\,b_2\,\,\,;\,\,\,\frac{\lambda}{\sigma}=\frac{6\alpha}{\beta}\,\,\,;\,\,\,
\delta=\alpha\,\,\,;\,\,\,a_3=\frac{c_1}{a_2}\,\rho\,.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ Note that the gauge generators $W^{MN},\,W_{MN}$, as combinations of ${\mathrm{E}}_{7(7)}$ generators, are not linearly independent, but satisfy the following constraints [@dft2]: $$\begin{aligned}
\tau_{[PQ}}{}^N\,W_{R]N&=&0\,\nonumber\\
b_2\,\epsilon^{M_1M_2M_3M_4PQR}\,g_{M_1M_2M_3M_4}W_{QR}&=&c_1\,\tau_{ST}{}^PW^{ST}\,,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ which ensures that at most 21 of them are independent, and thus that at most 28 vector fields (including the seven vectors $A^I_\mu$) are involved in the minimal couplings.
[10]{}
J. Polchinski and A. Strominger, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} B [**388**]{}, 736 (1996) \[arXiv:hep-th/9510227\]. S. Gukov, C. Vafa and E. Witten, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} B [**584**]{}, 69 (2000) \[Erratum-ibid. B [**608**]{}, 477 (2001)\] \[arXiv:hep-th/9906070\]. K. Dasgupta, G. Rajesh and S. Sethi, [*JHEP*]{} [**9908**]{}, 023 (1999) \[arXiv:hep-th/9908088\]. K. Becker and M. Becker, [*JHEP*]{} [**0107**]{}, 038 (2001) \[arXiv:hep-th/0107044\]; K. Becker and M. Becker, [*JHEP*]{} [**0011**]{}, 029 (2000) \[arXiv:hep-th/0010282\]. S. B. Giddings, S. Kachru and J. Polchinski, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} D [**66**]{}, 106006 (2002) \[arXiv:hep-th/0105097\]. G. Curio and A. Krause, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} B [**602**]{}, 172 (2001) \[arXiv:hep-th/0012152\]. S. Kachru, M. B. Schulz and S. Trivedi, [*JHEP*]{} [**0310**]{}, 007 (2003) \[arXiv:hep-th/0201028\]. A. R. Frey and J. Polchinski, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} D [**65**]{}, 126009 (2002) \[arXiv:hep-th/0201029\].
S. Gurrieri, J. Louis, A. Micu and D. Waldram, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} B [**654**]{}, 61 (2003) \[arXiv:hep-th/0211102\]. G. L. Cardoso, G. Curio, G. Dall’Agata, D. Lust, P. Manousselis and G. Zoupanos, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} B [**652**]{}, 5 (2003) \[arXiv:hep-th/0211118\]. J. P. Gauntlett, D. Martelli and D. Waldram, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} D [**69**]{}, 086002 (2004) \[arXiv:hep-th/0302158\]. K. Becker, M. Becker, K. Dasgupta and S. Prokushkin, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} B [**666**]{}, 144 (2003) \[arXiv:hep-th/0304001\]. K. Behrndt and C. Jeschek, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} B [**694**]{}, 99 (2004) \[arXiv:hep-th/0311119\]. S. Fidanza, R. Minasian and A. Tomasiello, [*Commun. Math. Phys.*]{} [**254**]{}, 401 (2005), arXiv:hep-th/0311122. M. B. Schulz, [*Fortsch. Phys.*]{} [**52**]{}, 963 (2004) \[arXiv:hep-th/0406001\]. M. Grana, R. Minasian, M. Petrini and A. Tomasiello, [*JHEP*]{} [**0408**]{}, 046 (2004) \[arXiv:hep-th/0406137\]. I. Antoniadis and T. Maillard, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} B [**716**]{}, 3 (2005) \[arXiv:hep-th/0412008\]. M. Bianchi and E. Trevigne, [*JHEP*]{} [**0508**]{}, 034 (2005) arXiv:hep-th/0502147. O. DeWolfe, A. Giryavets, S. Kachru and W. Taylor, [*JHEP*]{} [**0507**]{}, 066 (2005) arXiv:hep-th/0505160. M. Grana, J. Louis and D. Waldram, arXiv:hep-th/0505264. A. Franzen, P. Kaura, A. Misra and R. Ray, arXiv:hep-th/0506224. M. Grana, arXiv:hep-th/0509003. G. Dall’Agata and N. Prezas, [*JHEP*]{} [**0510**]{}, 103 (2005) \[arXiv:hep-th/0509052\]. K. Behrndt, M. Cvetic and T. Liu, arXiv:hep-th/0512032. J. Scherk and J. H. Schwarz, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} B [**153**]{}, 61 (1979). S. Sethi, C. Vafa and E. Witten, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} B [**480**]{}, 213 (1996) \[arXiv:hep-th/9606122\]. N. Kaloper and R. C. Myers, [*[*JHEP*]{}*]{} [**9905**]{}, 010 (1999) \[arXiv:hep-th/9901045\]. S. Kachru, M. B. Schulz, P. K. Tripathy and S. P. Trivedi, [*JHEP*]{} [**0303**]{}, 061 (2003), \[arXiv:hep-th/0211182\]. G. Dall’Agata and S. Ferrara, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} B [**717**]{}, 223 (2005) \[arXiv:hep-th/0502066\]. L. Andrianopoli, M. A. Lledo and M. Trigiante, [*[*JHEP*]{}*]{} [**0505**]{}, 051 (2005) \[arXiv:hep-th/0502083\]. C. M. Hull and R. A. Reid-Edwards, [*J. Sci. Eng.*]{} [**1**]{}, 411 (2004) \[arXiv:hep-th/0503114\]. E. Cremmer, S. Ferrara, C. Kounnas and D. V. Nanopoulos, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B133**]{}, 61 (1983). J. R. Ellis, A. B. Lahanas, D. V. Nanopoulos and K. Tamvakis, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B134**]{}, 429 (1984); J. R. Ellis, C. Kounnas and D. V. Nanopoulos, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} [**B247**]{}, 373 (1984); A. B. Lahanas and D. V. Nanopoulos, [*Phys. Rept.*]{} [**145**]{}, 1 (1987); R. Barbieri, E. Cremmer and S. Ferrara, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} B [**163**]{}, 143 (1985). B. de Wit and H. Nicolai, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} B [**108**]{}, 285 (1982); C. M. Hull, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} B [**148**]{}, 297 (1984). B. de Wit, H. Samtleben and M. Trigiante, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} B [**655**]{}, 93 (2003) \[arXiv:hep-th/0212239\]; B. de Wit, H. Samtleben and M. Trigiante, [*Fortsch. Phys.*]{} [**52**]{}, 489 (2004) \[arXiv:hep-th/0311225\]; B. de Wit, H. Nicolai and H. Samtleben, arXiv:hep-th/0403014; B. de Wit, H. Samtleben and M. Trigiante, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} B [**716**]{}, 215 (2005) \[arXiv:hep-th/0412173\]; B. de Wit, H. Samtleben and M. Trigiante, [*[*JHEP*]{}*]{} [**0509**]{}, 016 (2005) \[arXiv:hep-th/0507289\]. E. Cremmer, J. Scherk and J. H. Schwarz, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} B [**84**]{}, 83 (1979). E. Sezgin and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} B [**195**]{}, 325 (1982). L. Andrianopoli, R. D’Auria, S. Ferrara and M. A. Lledo, [*[*JHEP*]{}*]{} [**0207**]{}, 010 (2002) \[arXiv:hep-th/0203206\]; L. Andrianopoli, S. Ferrara and M. A. Lledo, [*[*JHEP*]{}*]{} [**0406**]{}, 018 (2004) \[arXiv:hep-th/0406018\]; L. Andrianopoli, S. Ferrara and M. A. Lledo, arXiv:hep-th/0405164. L. Andrianopoli, R. D’Auria, S. Ferrara and M. A. Lledo, [*[*[*JHEP*]{}*]{}*]{} [**0303**]{}, 044 (2003). R. D’Auria, S. Ferrara and S. Vaula’, [*New J. Phys.*]{} [**4**]{}, 71 (2002); R. D’Auria, S. Ferrara, F. Gargiulo, M. Trigiante and S. Vaula, [*[*JHEP*]{}*]{} [**0306**]{}, 045 (2003) \[arXiv:hep-th/0303049\]. L. Andrianopoli, R. D’Auria, S. Ferrara and M. A. Lledo, [*[*JHEP*]{}*]{} [**0301**]{}, 045 (2003) \[arXiv:hep-th/0212236\]. R. D’Auria, S. Ferrara and S. Vaula, New J. Phys. [**4**]{}, 71 (2002) \[arXiv:hep-th/0206241\]; R. D’Auria, S. Ferrara, M. A. Lledo and S. Vaula, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} B [**557**]{}, 278 (2003) \[arXiv:hep-th/0211027\].
R. D’Auria, S. Ferrara, F. Gargiulo, M. Trigiante and S. Vaula, [*[*[*JHEP*]{}*]{}*]{} [**0306**]{}, 045 (2003).
C. Angelantonj, S. Ferrara and M. Trigiante, [*[*[*JHEP*]{}*]{}*]{} [**0310**]{}, 015 (2003); [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B582**]{}, 263 (2004). B. de Wit, H. Samtleben and M. Trigiante, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} B [**583**]{}, 338 (2004) \[arXiv:hep-th/0311224\].
C. Angelantonj, R. D’Auria, S. Ferrara and M. Trigiante, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B 583**]{}, 331 (2004). E. Bergshoeff, U. Gran, R. Linares, M. Nielsen, T. Ortin and D. Roest, [*Fortsch. Phys.*]{} [**52**]{}, 472 (2004); E. Bergshoeff, U. Gran, R. Linares, M. Nielsen, T. Ortin and D. Roest, [*Class. Quant. Grav.*]{} [**21**]{}, S1501 (2004).
R. D’Auria, S. Ferrara and M. Trigiante, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} B [**693**]{}, 261 (2004) \[arXiv:hep-th/0403204\]. J. P. Derendinger, C. Kounnas, P. M. Petropoulos and F. Zwirner, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} B [**715**]{} (2005) 211 \[arXiv:hep-th/0411276\]; J. P. Derendinger, C. Kounnas, P. M. Petropoulos and F. Zwirner, [*Fortsch. Phys.*]{} [**53**]{} (2005) 926 \[arXiv:hep-th/0503229\]. G. Villadoro and F. Zwirner, [*[*JHEP*]{}*]{} [**0407**]{}, 055 (2004) \[arXiv:hep-th/0406185\]; G. Villadoro, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} B [**602**]{}, 123 (2004) arXiv:hep-th/0407105; G. Villadoro and F. Zwirner, [*JHEP*]{} [**0506**]{}, 047 (2005) \[arXiv:hep-th/0503169\].
M. K. Gaillard and B. Zumino, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} [**B193**]{}, 221 (1981). S. Ferrara and L. Maiani, [*Based on lectures given at SILARG V, 5th Latin American Symp. on Relativity and Gravitation, Bariloche, Argentina, Jan 1985*]{} S. Cecotti, L. Girardello and M. Porrati, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} B [**268**]{}, 295 (1986). R. D’Auria and S. Ferrara, [*[*JHEP*]{}*]{} [**0105**]{}, 034 (2001). G. Dall’Agata, R. D’Auria and S. Ferrara, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} B [**619**]{}, 149 (2005) \[arXiv:hep-th/0503122\]. R. D’Auria, S. Ferrara and M. Trigiante, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} B [**732**]{}, 389 (2006), arXiv:hep-th/0504108. R. D’Auria, S. Ferrara and M. Trigiante, [*[*JHEP*]{}*]{} [**0509**]{}, 035 (2005) \[arXiv:hep-th/0507225\]. R. D’Auria, S. Ferrara and M. Trigiante, arXiv:hep-th/0511158. R. D’Auria and P. Fre, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} B [**201**]{}, 101 (1982) \[Erratum-ibid. B [**206**]{}, 496 (1982)\]; M. J. Duff and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} B [**94**]{}, 179 (1980); A. Aurilia, H. Nicolai and P. K. Townsend, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} B [**176**]{}, 509 (1980); M. J. Duff, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} B [**226**]{}, 36 (1989).
[^1]: In four dimensional supergravities coupled to linear multiplets, fluxes may give rise to more general couplings.
[^2]: In our notations $G_{IJ}$ is a positive definite matrix and we adopt the “mostly minus” convention for the space–time metric.
[^3]: For the eleven dimensional equations we are using the conventions and notations of reference [@fd]
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Spontaneous symmetry breaking is an important concept in many areas of physics. A fundamentally simple symmetry breaking mechanism in electrodynamics occurs between counter-propagating electromagnetic waves in ring resonators, mediated by the Kerr nonlinearity. The interaction of counter-propagating light in bi-directionally pumped microresonators finds application in the realisation of optical non-reciprocity (for optical diodes), studies of $\mathcal{PT}$-symmetric systems, and the generation of counter-propagating solitons. Here, we present comprehensive analytical and dynamical models for the nonlinear Kerr-interaction of counter-propagating light in a dielectric ring resonator. In particular, we study discontinuous behaviour in the onset of spontaneous symmetry breaking, indicating divergent sensitivity to small external perturbations. These results can be applied to realise, for example, highly sensitive near-field or rotation sensors. We then generalise to a time-dependent model, which predicts new types of dynamical behaviour, including oscillatory regimes that could enable Kerr-nonlinearity-driven all-optical oscillators. The physics of our model can be applied to other systems featuring Kerr-type interaction between two distinct modes, such as for light of opposite circular polarisation in nonlinear resonators, which are commonly described by coupled Lugiato-Lefever equations.'
author:
- 'Michael T. M. Woodley,$^{1,2}$ Jonathan M. Silver,$^{1}$ Lewis Hill,$^{3}$ François Copie,$^{1}$ Leonardo Del Bino,$^{1,2}$ Shuangyou Zhang,$^{1}$ Gian-Luca Oppo,$^{3}$ and Pascal Del’Haye.$^{1}$'
bibliography:
- 'basename of .bib'
title: 'Universal Symmetry Breaking Dynamics for the Kerr Interaction of Counter-Propagating Light in Dielectric Ring Resonators'
---
Introduction {#sect_1}
============
Spontaneous symmetry breaking plays a critical role in the description of many phenomena in physics. In the case of continuous symmetries, it allows for the modelling of magnetism and superconductivity [@sc], as well as the generation of mass via the Higgs mechanism [@Higgs]. It also plays a prominent role in systems that exhibit discrete symmetries, which are frequently found in optics, such as time-reversal [@T-rev; @Xu2014] and parity-time symmetries [@PT], as well as the interplay between two types of symmetry breaking [@interplay]. A novel type of discrete symmetry breaking has recently been demonstrated in bi-directionally-pumped whispering-gallery microresonators [@ours; @Xiao]. In this case, the symmetry violation is caused by an instability whereby, above a threshold pump power, a difference between the intracavity powers in the two counter-propagating directions leads to a splitting between their two resonant frequencies via the Kerr nonlinearity. As a result, small differences between the intracavity circulating powers are amplified. Consequently, the (parity) symmetry of the circulating optical power in the resonator spontaneously breaks. This is due to the fact that the cross-phase-modulation-induced Kerr shift between counter-propagating light waves is different to the self-phase-modulation-induced shift in unidirectional light. Interestingly, this imposes fundamental limits on the attainable power of a standing wave in a dielectric ring resonator. Fig. 1 shows a simple experimental platform for observing this symmetry breaking in a ring resonator.
The theoretical treatment of the Kerr interaction of counter-propagating light was pioneered by Kaplan, Meystre, and collaborators in the early 1980s, in the context of nonlinear effects in Sagnac interferometers [@KM81; @KM82; @WMFK85]. A more complete theoretical basis for light-with-light interaction in ring resonators, and especially of symmetry breaking, is critically needed for a precise understanding of recent work on microresonator-based non-reciprocal devices such as isolators and circulators [@iso], as well as for the dynamics of counter-propagating solitons [@QFYang17; @ranging1; @ranging2]. Here, we present a generalised model that not only captures this symmetry breaking (see Section II), but extends to a universal sensitivity analysis, which will be crucial for future sensing devices based on this effect, such as enhanced rotation sensors and near-field detectors (see Section III). In particular, we determine minimal requirements for the input power to achieve symmetry breaking and provide optimal conditions of operation to counteract the effect of imbalanced pumping conditions in the counter-propagating optical beams. In Section IV, we generalise the model to the time domain, find analytical stability conditions and determine the onset and the frequency of nonlinear oscillations, thus facilitating the creation of an all-optical oscillator.
{width="0.9\columnwidth"}
Onset of symmetry breaking {#sect_2}
==========================
The basis of our theory of counter-propagating light in a ring resonator is the following dimensionless model, featuring two coupled Lorentzian curves, which results from considering how the Kerr effect modifies the resonant frequency of a cavity in a non-reciprocal fashion [@ours]:
$$\label{eq:dedim}
p_{1,2}=\frac{\tilde{p}_{1,2}}{1+(p_{1,2}+2p_{2,1}-\Delta_{1,2})^{2}}.$$
$\tilde{p}_{1,2}$ are the (dimensionless) powers of the pump laser, and $p_{1,2}$ are the powers coupled into the resonator. The apportionment of power coupled into the resonator is determined by the detuning parameters, $\Delta_{1,2}$, which are normalised to the half-linewidth of the resonance. The subscripts 1 and 2 denote clockwise and counterclockwise directions. See Appendix A for more information. Equations are the steady-state, homogeneous solutions to a pair of coupled Lugiato-Lefever equations (see Ref. [@bif] for the uncoupled version). Consequently, this model extends to other nonlinear systems in which Kerr coupling occurs between two distinct modes, such as for opposite circular polarisation states [@Haelt_disp; @Geddes94], thus increasing its universality of application. We now need to consider the threshold condition beyond which Eq. can describe a symmetry-broken regime.
We demonstrate here that symmetry breaking occurs only above a certain threshold pump power. We consider symmetric pumping conditions by setting $\Delta_{1}=\Delta_{2}=\Delta$ and $\tilde{p}_{1}=\overset{\sim}{p}_{2}=\tilde{p}$, and then examine the number of crossing points between the two Lorentzians, Eq. , in terms of $p_{1,2}$, to see where this number changes between one and three (two stable, one unstable - indicative of a bistable regime, and hence symmetry breaking). Combining the two Lorentzians gives the following cubic equation:
$$\label{eq:cubic}
[p_{1}-p_{2}]\left[(p_{1}^{2}+p_{2}^{2}+p_{1}p_{2})-2\Delta(p_{1}+p_{2})+\Delta^{2}+1\right]=0.$$
\
The term in the first set of square brackets is the symmetric solution, whilst the rest is the symmetry-broken solution. The abrupt onset of symmetry breaking is hence described as the discontinuous intersection of a straight line with an ellipse, as shown in Fig. 2. At the points where symmetry breaking occurs, i.e., the points of intersection, $p_{1}=p_{2}=p_{\pm}$, the quadratic part of Eq. yields
$$\label{eq:psplit}
p_{\pm}=\frac{1}{3}\left(2\Delta\pm\sqrt{\Delta^{2}-3}\right),$$
for $\Delta\geq\sqrt{3}$. The $p_{-}$ solution gives the coupled power at which the symmetry-broken region opens, and $p_{+}$ gives the coupled power at which it closes. Similar threshold powers apply to polarisation symmetry breaking in ring cavities, as shown in [@Haelt_disp]. Coincidentally, Eq. describes the limits of the region of bistability for the homogeneous, steady-state solution to a Lugiato-Lefever equation for a unidirectional beam of light in a cavity [@bif]. The threshold power (per direction) for the same bistability in the case of a standing wave is, in fact, 3 times lower than in the unidirectional case, owing to the extra contribution from cross-phase modulation [@KM82].
{width="0.8\columnwidth"}
In order to find the minimum required pump power for symmetry breaking as a function of detuning only, we first apply Eq. to Eq. for $p_{1}=p_{2}=p_{\pm}$ and $\tilde{p}_{1}=\tilde{p}_{2}=\tilde{p}$, to recover the equation found in Ref. [@KM82]:
$$\label{eq:thresh}
\tilde{p}_{\pm}=\frac{2}{3}\left[\Delta(3\Delta^{2}-5)\pm(3\Delta^{2}-1)\sqrt{\Delta^{2}-3}\right].$$
As for the coupled power, $\tilde{p}_{-}$ gives the pump power at which the symmetry-broken region opens, and $\tilde{p}_{+}$ is where it closes. The threshold pump power, which extends the analysis of Ref. [@KM82], is then found to be
$$\tilde{p}_{\mathrm{thresh.}}=\tilde{p}_{-}\left(\Delta=\frac{5}{\sqrt{3}}\right)=\frac{8}{3\sqrt{3}}\approx 1.54,$$
associated with the coupled power of $p=2/\sqrt{3}\approx 1.15$.
Nonlinear enhancement of sensitivity {#srct_3}
====================================
We have so far considered balanced pump powers and equal detunings in both directions of propagation, in order to investigate symmetry breaking. We now consider the most general case of Eq. , for $\tilde{p}_{1}\neq\tilde{p}_{2}$ and $\Delta_{1}\neq\Delta_{2}$. The latter may be caused by using the resonator as a sensor, whereby a change in the local environment around the resonator perturbs its optical modes [@sens1; @sens2], for example by inducing a small resonant frequency splitting. This can come from rotating the resonator (the Sagnac effect) or from interacting with its evanescent field. This splitting can then be magnified by the Kerr nonlinearity, allowing for enhancement of the sensitivity, theoretically down to the shot noise limit. This idea has been explored in the case of symmetric pumping in Refs. [@KM81; @WangSearch2014; @WangSearch2015].
*Divergent sensitivity.*—Sensitivity, in this context, is defined as the rate of change of the coupled power with respect to the detuning. These partial derivatives are calculated to be
$$\label{eq:x2}
\frac{\partial p_{1,2}}{\partial\Delta_{1,2}}=\frac{(1+X_{2,1})}{(1+X_{1})(1+X_{2})-4},$$
$$\label{eq:y2}
\frac{\partial p_{1}}{\partial\Delta_{2}}=\frac{\partial p_{2}}{\partial\Delta_{1}}=-\frac{2}{(1+X_{1})(1+X_{2})-4},$$
wherein
$$\label{eq:tune}
X_{1,2}=\frac{1+(p_{1,2}+2p_{2,1}-\Delta_{1,2})^{2}}{2p_{1,2}(p_{1,2}+2p_{2,1}-\Delta_{1,2})}.$$
See Appendix B for details of the derivation of these expressions. By inspection, the sensitivity diverges for
$$\label{eq:sens}
(1+X_{1})(1+X_{2})=4.$$
Eq. is the universal condition for maximally-enhanced sensitivity to a small perturbation to the resonator; it defines a closed boundary within the symmetry-broken regime, and is illustrated in Fig. 3. Unlike previous sensitivity analyses, such as in Refs. [@KM81; @WangSearch2014; @WangSearch2015], Eq. is valid for arbitrary pumping and detuning conditions, and is therefore much more general. As will be demonstrated later, Eq. defines the onset of instability in the system. For given pump and circulating powers, this condition defines the detunings for which sensitivity diverges. However, since the region enclosed by this boundary is unstable (see the stability analysis that follows), we find that only one particular point on this boundary is useful for nonlinear enhancement of a sensor, referred to as the critical point.
{width="0.7\columnwidth"}
*Critical point.*—In an experiment, it can be difficult to achieve balanced pump powers. Consequently, it is very useful to know how to achieve divergent sensitivity by compensating imbalanced pump powers with imbalanced detunings. This can be done by satisfying a particular condition that recovers the discontinuous pitchfork-like behaviour observed in symmetry breaking, despite imbalanced pumping conditions. This condition is known as the critical point, and is a more general condition than just the thresholds for symmetry breaking. The critical point sits on the unstable boundary, shown in Fig. 3, and is defined by the condition $X_{1}=X_{2}=1$. Informally, this can be thought of as the condition that causes the sensitivity of the clockwise and counterclockwise coupled powers to diverge at equal and opposite rates. In the symmetric case, i.e., for $\tilde{p}_{1}=\tilde{p}_{2}=\tilde{p}$, $\Delta_{1}=\Delta_{2}=\Delta$, and $p_{1}=p_{2}=p$, this constraint allows us to recover the original condition for symmetry breaking, Eq. . In this way, the critical point condition, as a special case of Eq. , constitutes a generalisation of the sensitivity analyses shown in Refs. [@KM81; @WangSearch2014; @WangSearch2015]. Consequently, divergent sensitivity to perturbations can be accessed even in the case of imbalanced pump powers and unequal detunings. We have numerically verified this condition for the critical point. We note that the sensitivity to changes in the pump powers also diverges for this same critical point condition.
Time-dependent model {#sect_4}
====================
We observe that the coupled Lorentzians in Eq. are, in fact, the steady-state solutions to a pair of time-dependent coupled mode equations. By introducing normalised electric fields $p_{1}=|e_{1}|^{2}$, $p_{2}=|e_{2}|^{2}$, $\tilde{p}_{1}=|\tilde{e}_{1}|^{2}$, $\tilde{p}_{2}=|\tilde{e}_{2}|^{2}$, the resulting equations take the form
$$\label{eq:LLE}
\dot{e}_{1,2}=\tilde{e}_{1,2}-[1+i(|e_{1,2}|^{2}+2|e_{2,1}|^{2}-\Delta_{1,2})]e_{1,2},$$
\
where the dot signifies the time derivative, and the time has been normalised by the photon lifetime in the cavity. Consequently, the theory shown in the first part of the paper – symmetry breaking and the sensitivity analysis – can be subsumed as the steady state properties of a time-dependent theory.
{width="0.96\columnwidth"}
*Stability analysis and oscillations.*— Small perturbations of the electric field may grow or shrink with time. We investigate this by defining $e_{1}=e_{\mathrm{s}1}+\epsilon_{1}$ and $e_{2}=e_{\mathrm{s}2}+\epsilon_{2}$, where $\epsilon_{1,2}$ are small perturbations on the steady-state solutions, $e_{\mathrm{s}1,\mathrm{s}2}$. For simplicity, but without loss of generality, we adjust the phases of $\tilde{e}_{1,2}$ such that $e_{\mathrm{s}1,\mathrm{s}2}$ are real. To characterise the time evolution of the resulting system of four equations, we form a $4\times 4$ matrix, which has the following eigenvalues:
$$\label{eq:matrixev}
\lambda=-1\pm\frac{\sqrt{-A_{1}B_{1}-A_{2}B_{2}\pm S}}{\sqrt{2}},$$
$$\label{eq:S}
S=\sqrt{(A_{1}B_{1}-A_{2}B_{2})^{2}\!+4A_{1}A_{2}C^{2}},$$
in which $A_{1}=e_{\mathrm{s}1}^{2}+2e_{\mathrm{s}2}^{2}-\Delta_{1}$, $A_{2}=2e_{\mathrm{s}1}^{2}+e_{\mathrm{s}2}^{2}-\Delta_{2}$, $B_{1}=3e_{\mathrm{s}1}^{2}+2e_{\mathrm{s}2}^{2}-\Delta_{1}$, $B_{2}=2e_{\mathrm{s}1}^{2}+3e_{\mathrm{s}2}^{2}-\Delta_{2}$, and $C=4e_{\mathrm{s}1}e_{\mathrm{s}2}$. The $\pm$ signs are independent, giving four distinct eigenvalues. See Appendix C for more details. Qualitative changes in the eigenvalue describe transitions to different kinds of time-dependent behaviour: if $\lambda$ is a positive real number, the solution is a real, growing exponential, and the perturbed system will become unstable. Such unstable solutions occur for $$\label{eq:unstable}
(1+X_{1})(1+X_{2})<4,$$ i.e., within the region enclosed by each of the curves in Fig. 3.
From Eq. and the conditions of their existence, we have verified that it is not possible to have four real eigenvalues for the linear stability of the symmetry-broken solutions. This means that these solutions are strongly susceptible to either damped or sustained oscillations, since at least one stability eigenvalue is complex for experimentally relevant values of the parameters. Intuitively, oscillations are expected because of the simultaneous presence of two symmetry-broken solutions, under exchange of the indices $(1,2)$ in Eq. . In Fig. 4 (e) we show, for example, that for the chosen value of the pump $\tilde{p}=3.8$, there is always at least one eigenvalue with non-zero imaginary part. In the case of negative real parts of the stability eigenvalues (between the vertical solid and dashed lines in Fig. 4 (c)–(e)) one observes damped oscillations where nonlinear resonances can be excited by suitable modulations of the pumps. When $S$ in Eq. is purely imaginary, we have four complex eigenvalues where the angular frequency, $\Omega$, and the growth rate, $R$, are given respectively by
$$\label{eq:angfreq}
\Omega=\pm\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{A_{1}A_{2}(B_{1}B_{2}-C^{2})}+\frac{1}{4}(A_{1}B_{1}+A_{2}B_{2})},$$
$$\label{eq:growth}
R=-1\pm\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{A_{1}A_{2}(B_{1}B_{2}-C^{2})}-\frac{1}{4}(A_{1}B_{1}+A_{2}B_{2})} \; .$$
Here, again, the independent $\pm$ signs give rise to four different complex solutions. Oscillations due to the Kerr nonlinearity have been previously noted to occur in systems of microcavities, including those with multiple coupled resonators [@Maes2009; @Abdollahi2014; @Dumeige2015], and in a single resonator, in which linear coupling is achieved between the two cavity modes via Rayleigh backscattering [@Dumeige2011]. In contrast, our analysis, which uses direct bi-directional pumping of a single ring resonator, yields several new insights about these nonlinear oscillations in the presence of counter-propagation. For example, exact analytical expressions for the angular frequencies and growth rates of the oscillations, Eqs. and , are available, and our linear stability analysis is valid for arbitrary choices of pump powers and detunings. We have also demonstrated that counter-propagating light is strongly susceptible to oscillations since there can never be four real eigenvalues of the linear stability in the symmetry-broken regime. Finally, stable and chaotic oscillations are here associated with a collision of two Hopf bifurcations, as demonstrated below.
When $R$ becomes positive, two Hopf bifurcations (forward and backward, when changing $\Delta$) of the symmetry-broken solutions occur, allowing for non-decaying stable oscillations. We illustrate these oscillations as the dashed curves and shaded grey regions in Fig. 4. In frame (e) of this figure, we plot the corresponding frequencies of oscillation, $\Omega$, from Eq. when changing the detuning. We anticipate that this bifurcation will permit the construction of a microresonator-based all-optical oscillator, featuring periodic energy exchange between the two directions, in the nanosecond regime.
{width="0.96\columnwidth"}
We have verified these predictions by direct numerical integration of Eq. . For each configuration specified by $\Delta$ and $\tilde{p}$ in the oscillatory regime, we sample the trajectories of $p_{i}$, where $i=1,2$, by evaluating the Poincaré section corresponding to local maxima of $p_{i}$ where the first derivative is zero and the second derivative is negative. In this way, we can monitor the changes in the number of maxima of $p_{i}$ over successive cycles as displayed in Fig. 5. A maximum value of $p_{1}$ is specified by the following condition:
$$p_i=|e_i|^2=\tilde{e}_i \, {\rm Re}(e_i),$$
where ${\rm Re}(e_i)$ is the real part of the complex field $e_i$, and we have now adjusted the phases such that $\tilde{e_{i}}$ is real. This method allows us to generate dynamical scans of the oscillatory regime whilst varying $\Delta$. These scans are presented in Fig. 5 for $\tilde{p}=3.4$, $\tilde{p}=3.8$ while changing $\Delta$ from 5 to 11, and for $\tilde{p}=3.8$ while changing $\Delta$ in reverse from 11 to 5. Each point in Fig. 5 corresponds to a nonlinear oscillation of the symmetry-broken output. The numerically-derived oscillation frequencies are in remarkably good agreement with those predicted by Eq. .
Forward and backward Hopf bifurcations are clearly visible at the beginning and the end of the scans. For values of input pumps just above the critical value of $\tilde{p}=2.87$ where the Hopf bifurcations appear, regular oscillations occur at frequencies around four times the decay rate of the ring resonator, i.e. the inverse of the photon lifetime. We note that the point $(\tilde{p},\Delta)=(2.87,5.8)$ corresponds to a co-dimension 2 bifurcation where the forward and backward Hopf bifurcations collide. Normal forms and unfoldings of double Hopf bifurcations provide the framework to establish the full dynamical behaviour of the symmetry-broken solutions [@knobloch88]. In Fig. 5 (a) we show that forward and backward period doubling bifurcations occur close to the co-dimension 2 point ($\tilde{p}=3.4$). By increasing the pump parameter, further period doubling bifurcations, deterministic chaos, collision of Feigenbaum cascades [@oppo84], and crises emerge, as shown in Fig. 5 (b) and (c) for $\tilde{p}=3.8$. We also observe bistable behaviour between these dynamical regimes, as shown in Fig. 5 (b) and (c), where the direction of the detuning scan is reversed.
Conclusions {#sect_5}
===========
We have presented analytical and dynamical models for the interaction between counter-propagating light in a dielectric ring resonator. The mixture of self- and cross-phase modulation from the Kerr effect results in dramatic changes in behaviour: notably, spontaneous symmetry breaking and the onset of nonlinear oscillations – the latter holds promise for the development of highly controllable, on-chip, all-optical oscillators. We have also derived the universal condition for divergent sensitivity to perturbations in the cases of both balanced and imbalanced system conditions. This closed boundary of divergent sensitivity with respect to the laser detunings marks the transition between stable and unstable symmetry-broken solutions in a coupled, homogeneous system. The critical point lying on this boundary makes possible a variety of enhanced sensors for detecting rotations or near-field disturbances (e.g. biomolecules). In the dynamical regime, we have obtained analytical expressions of the stability eigenvalues of the symmetry-broken solutions, thus providing thresholds and frequencies of the oscillatory regimes. Collisions of forward and backward Hopf bifurcations when scanning the detuning have been identified as the leading mechanism for the onset of nonlinear oscillations and chaos in counter-propagating ring resonators. In order to cover a wide range of experimental configurations, the scope of our analysis can be extended to systems featuring other forms of Kerr-nonlinearity-mediated symmetry breaking such as the interaction of light states of different polarisations, which would enable the development of optically controllable polarisation filters. In addition, this model is applicable to systems with different coefficients of self- and cross-phase modulation, such as semiconductors and liquid crystals.
We acknowledge financial support from: H2020 Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA) (748519, CoLiDR); National Physical Laboratory Strategic Research; H2020 European Research Council (ERC) (756966, CounterLight); Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC). L. H. acknowledges additional support from the EPSRC DTA Grant No. EP/M506643/1. S. Z. acknowledges funding through the MULTIPLY Horizon 2020 Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant (GA-713694).
Obtaining the dimensionless model
=================================
Basic definitions:
- $\omega_{\mathrm{res}}$ is the cavity resonant frequency;
- $\gamma_{0}$ is the intrinsic half-linewidth of the cavity resonance;
- $\kappa$ is the coupling half-linewidth;
- $\Delta f_{\mathrm{FSR}}$ is the free spectral range of the optical mode family in question;
- $\delta_{1,2}$ are the differences in frequency (detunings) between the laser and the non-Kerr-shifted clockwise and counterclockwise resonance frequencies of the ring resonator;
- $A_{\mathrm{eff}}$ is the effective cross-sectional area of the optical mode;
- $n_{0,2}$ are, respectively, the linear and nonlinear refractive indices of the dielectric resonator.
The action of the Kerr effect on the resonant frequencies of counter-propagating modes in a ring resonator has been described in the SI to Ref. [@ours], in which the direction-dependent changes in refractive index induced by the Kerr effect (hereafter referred to as the ‘Kerr-shift’) are incorporated into the effective detuning of a Lorentzian intensity profile. Since the Kerr-shift generated by counter-propagating light is different to that produced by a single beam of light, a model of two coupled Lorentzian intensity profiles emerges, which takes the following form:
$$\label{eq:dim}
P_{\mathrm{1,2}}=\frac{\eta P_{\mathrm{in}\,1,2}}{1+ \left[ \dfrac{1}{P_{0}}(P_{\mathrm{1,2}}+2P_{\mathrm{2,1}})-\frac{\delta_{\mathrm{1,2}}}{\gamma} \right ]^{2}},$$
in which the $2P_{2,1}$ term is the counter-propagating contribution to the Kerr-shift (a manifestation of cross-phase modulation). The following definitions are presented in the SI to Ref. [@ours], but are repeated here for convenience: $P_{1}=2\pi P_{\mathrm{circ, CW}}/\mathcal{F}_{0}$ and $P_{2}=2\pi P_{\mathrm{circ, CCW}}/\mathcal{F}_{0}$ are the coupled powers (where $\mathcal{F}_{0}\equiv\pi\Delta f_{\mathrm{FSR}}/\gamma_{0}$ is the intrinsic finesse of the resonator, and $P_{\mathrm{circ,CW}}$ and $P_{\mathrm{circ,CCW}}$ are the clockwise and counterclockwise circulating powers), $P_{\mathrm{in,CW}}$ and $P_{\mathrm{in,CCW}}$ are the clockwise and counterclockwise incident powers, $\eta=4\kappa\gamma_{0}/\gamma^{2}$ is the coupling efficiency ($\gamma=\gamma_{0}+\kappa$ is the loaded half-linewidth), and $P_{0}=\pi n_{0}A_{\mathrm{eff}}/(Q\mathcal{F}_{0}\,n_{2})$ is the characteristic coupled power at which Kerr nonlinear effects occur (wherein $Q=\omega_{\mathrm{res}}/2\gamma$ is the loaded quality factor). Note that the above definitions for the powers are valid only in the case of critical coupling into the resonator. The subscripts 1 and 2 denote the clockwise and counterclockwise directions of propagation. For simplicity, we now cast this model into dimensionless form by defining the following new quantities: the normalised detunings, $\Delta_{1}=\delta_{\mathrm{1}}/\gamma$, $\Delta_{2}=\delta_{\mathrm{2}}/\gamma$; the clockwise and counterclockwise pump powers, $\tilde{p}_{1}=\eta P_{\mathrm{in, CW}}/P_{0}$, $\tilde{p}_{2}=\eta P_{\mathrm{in, CCW}}/P_{0}$; and the clockwise and counterclockwise coupled powers, $p_{1}=P_{\mathrm{1}}/P_{0}$, $p_{2}=P_{\mathrm{2}}/P_{0}$. In this way, we obtain the dimensionless model, Eq. .
Sensitivity analysis
====================
The two tunable parameters in this model are the normalised detunings and the pump powers; changing these will modulate the coupled powers within the cavity. In experiments that exploit symmetry breaking, the clockwise and counterclockwise pump powers are often fixed, and the detunings are varied to scan into and out of the broken symmetry state. In its current form, Eq. (\[eq:dedim\]) does not explicitly reflect this, so partial derivatives should be taken with respect to the normalised detunings, to make it clear that the pump powers are indeed constant. Taking partial derivatives of Eq. (\[eq:dedim\]) gives
$$\frac{\partial p_{x}}{\partial\Delta_{x}}=\mp\frac{2p_{x}^{2}}{\tilde{p}_{x}}\sqrt{\frac{\tilde{p}_{x}}{p_{x}}-1}(\frac{\partial p_{x}}{\partial\Delta_{x}}+2\frac{\partial p_{y}}{\partial\Delta_{x}}-1),$$
$$\frac{\partial p_{y}}{\partial\Delta_{x}}=\mp\frac{2p_{y}^{2}}{\tilde{p}_{y}}\sqrt{\frac{\tilde{p}_{y}}{p_{y}}-1}(\frac{\partial p_{y}}{\partial\Delta_{x}}+2\frac{\partial p_{x}}{\partial\Delta_{x}}),$$
in which we have also used Eq. (\[eq:dedim\]) to simplify the expressions. Rearranging for the rate of change of the (clockwise or counterclockwise) coupled power with respect to the (clockwise or counterclockwise) normalised detuning results in
$$\frac{\partial p_{x}}{\partial\Delta_{x}}=\frac{1-2\dfrac{\partial p_{y}}{\partial \Delta_{x}}}{1\pm\dfrac{\tilde{p}_{x}}{2p_{x}^{3/2}\sqrt{\tilde{p}_{x}-p_{x}}}},$$
$$\frac{\partial p_{y}}{\partial\Delta_{x}}=-\frac{2\dfrac{\partial p_{x}}{\partial\Delta_{x}}}{1\pm\dfrac{\tilde{p}_{y}}{2p_{y}^{3/2}\sqrt{\tilde{p}_{y}-p_{y}}}}.$$
Substituting one equation into the other, and writing the expressions in terms of subscripts (1,2), results in Eqs. and . It is worth noting that Eq. may also be expressed as
$$X_{1,2}=\pm\frac{\tilde{p}_{1,2}}{2p_{1,2}^{3/2}\sqrt{\tilde{p}_{1,2}-p_{1,2}}}.$$
The critical point condition, $X_{1,2}=1$, hence gives us the following quadratic in $\tilde{p}_{1,2}$:
$$\tilde{p}_{1,2}^{2}-4p_{1,2}^{3}\tilde{p}_{1,2}+4p_{1,2}^{4}=0,$$
which solves as:
$$\tilde{p}_{1,2\,\pm}=2p_{1,2}^{2}\left(p_{1,2}\pm\sqrt{p_{1,2}^{2}-1}\right),$$
with $\tilde{p}_{1,2\,-}$ having a local minimum of $8/(3\sqrt{3})$ at $p_{1,2}=2/\sqrt{3}$, as presented earlier in the article.
By setting $X_{1,2}=1$, and then restoring symmetry by imposing $\tilde{p}_{1}=\tilde{p}_{2}=\tilde{p}$, $\Delta_{1}=\Delta_{2}=\Delta$, and $p_{1}=p_{2}=p$, we obtain
$$3p^{2}-4\Delta p+\Delta^{2}+1=0,$$
which has, as its solution, the threshold coupled powers for spontaneous symmetry breaking given by Eq. .
Stability analysis
==================
Defining $e_{1}=e_{\mathrm{s}1}+\epsilon_{1}$ and $e_{2}=e_{\mathrm{s}2}+\epsilon_{2}$, where $\epsilon_{1}$ and $\epsilon_{2}$ are infinitesimal perturbations on the steady-state solutions $e_{\mathrm{s}1}$ and $e_{\mathrm{s}2}$, we obtain the following coupled mode equations for $\epsilon_{1}$ and $\epsilon_{2}$:
$$\begin{aligned}
\dot{\epsilon}_{1}=-[1+i(2|e_{\mathrm{s}1}|^{2}+2|e_{\mathrm{s}2}|^{2}-\Delta_{1})]\epsilon_{1} \nonumber \\ -i(e_{\mathrm{s}1}\epsilon_{1}^{*}+2e_{\mathrm{s}2}\epsilon_{2}^{*}+2e_{\mathrm{s2}}^{*}\epsilon_{2})e_{\mathrm{s}1},\end{aligned}$$
$$\begin{aligned}
\dot{\epsilon}_{2}=-[1+i(2|e_{\mathrm{s}1}|^{2}+2|e_{\mathrm{s}2}|^{2}-\Delta_{2})]\epsilon_{2} \nonumber \\ -i(e_{\mathrm{s}2}\epsilon_{2}^{*}+2e_{\mathrm{s}1}\epsilon_{1}^{*}+2e_{\mathrm{s1}}^{*}\epsilon_{1})e_{\mathrm{s}2}.\end{aligned}$$
Here, without loss of generality, we adjust the phases of $\tilde{e}_{1}$ and $\tilde{e}_{2}$ so that $e_{s1}$ and $e_{s2}$ are real. Letting $x_{1,2}$ and $y_{1,2}$ be the real and imaginary parts, respectively, of $\epsilon_{1,2}$, we obtain
$$\begin{pmatrix}
\dot{x}_{1} \\
\dot{y}_{1} \\
\dot{x}_{2} \\
\dot{y}_{2}
\end{pmatrix}
=
\begin{pmatrix}\label{eq:thematrix}
-1 & A_{1} & 0 & 0 \\
-B_{1} & -1 & -C & 0 \\
0 & 0 & -1 & A_{2} \\
-C & 0 & -B_{2} & -1
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
x_{1} \\
y_{1} \\
x_{2} \\
y_{2}
\end{pmatrix}.$$
$A_{1,2}$, $B_{1,2}$, and $C$ are defined in Section IV, and the eigenvalues of Eq. (\[eq:thematrix\]) are given as Eq. . Any eigenvalue with a positive real part corresponds to a perturbation that grows with time, i.e., an instability. Examining Eq. (\[eq:matrixev\]), we find that there are two conditions under which such instabilities exist, which we detail below.
[*Positive Real Eigenvalue.*]{} A positive real eigenvalue corresponds to a pure growing exponential in the neighbourhood of the equilibrium, so the system will immediately leave the state. As such, we term such solutions ‘unstable’. They occur when the contents of the outer square root in Eq. (\[eq:matrixev\]) are real and greater than 2, which happens when
$$(1+A_{1}B_{1})(1+A_{2}B_{2})<A_{1}A_{2}C^{2},$$
which is equivalent to Eq. .
[*Complex Eigenvalue with Positive Real Part.*]{} If the contents of the inner square root in Eq. (\[eq:matrixev\]) are negative, the eigenvalues will be complex, corresponding to perturbations that oscillate, as well as grow or decay exponentially, with time. In this case, their real and imaginary parts, i.e., the exponential growth rate and angular frequency of the perturbations, take the form of Eqs. and , respectively. We can see that the two eigenvalues for which $R$ takes the + sign will satisfy $R>0$, and so correspond to growing oscillations, when
$$A_{1}A_{2}(B_{1}B_{2}-C^{2})>[2+\frac{1}{2}(A_{1}B_{1}+A_{2}B_{2})]^{2},$$
Applying this to our expression for $\Omega$, we find that, for all growing oscillations,
$$|\Omega|>\sqrt{1+\frac{1}{2}(A_{1}B_{1}+A_{2}B_{2})},$$
with equality when the oscillations are marginal, i.e., when $R=0$.
[9]{} G. Baskaran & P. W. Anderson, ‘Gauge theory of high-temperature superconductors and strongly correlated Fermi systems’, Phys. Rev. B, **37**, 580-583 (R) (1988). J. Bernstein, ‘Spontaneous symmetry breaking, gauge theories, the Higgs mechanism and all that’, Rev. Mod. Phys. **46**, 7-48 (1974). J. Rossi, R. Carretero-González, P. G. Kevrekidis & M. Haragus, ‘On the spontaneous time-reversal symmetry breaking in synchronously-pumped passive Kerr resonators’, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. **49**, 455201 (2016). Yiqing Xu & Stéphane Coen, ‘Experimental observation of the spontaneous breaking of the time-reversal symmetry in a synchronously pumped passive Kerr resonator’, Opt. Lett. **39**, 3492-3495 (2014). B. Peng, Ş. K. Özdemir, F. Lei, F. Monifi, M. Gianfreda, G. L. Long, S. Fan, F. Nori, C. M. Bender & L. Yang, ‘Nonreciprocal light transmission in parity-time-symmetric whispering-gallery microcavities’, Nat. Phys. **10**, 394-398 (2014). F. Copie, M. T. M. Woodley, L. Del Bino, J. M. Silver, S. Zhang & P. Del’Haye, ‘Interplay of Polarization and Time-Reversal Symmetry Breaking in Synchronously Pumped Ring Resonators’, arXiv:1807.02347 (2018). L. Del Bino, J. M. Silver, S. L. Stebbings & P. Del’Haye, ‘Symmetry Breaking of Counter-Propagating Light in a Nonlinear Microresonator’, Sci. Rep. **7**, 43142 (2017). Q.-T. Cao, H. Wang, C.-H. Dong, H. Jing, R.-S. Liu, X. Chen, L. Ge, Q. Gong & Y.-F. Xiao, ‘Experimental demonstration of spontaneous chirality in a nonlinear microresonator’, Phys. Rev. Lett. **118**, 033901 (2017). A. E. Kaplan & P. Meystre, ‘Enhancement of the Sagnac Effect due to nonlinearly induced nonreciprocity’, Opt. Lett. **6**, 590-592 (1981). A. E. Kaplan & P. Meystre, ‘Directionally asymmetrical bistability in a symmetrically pumped nonlinear ring interferometer’, Opt. Commun. **40**, 229-232 (1982). E. M. Wright, P. Meystre, W. J. Firth & A. E. Kaplan, ’Theory of the nonlinear Sagnac effect in a fiber-optic gyroscope’, Phys. Rev. A **32**, 2857-2863 (1985). L. Del Bino, J. M. Silver, M. T. M. Woodley, S. L. Stebbings, X. Zhao & P. Del’Haye, ‘Microresonator isolators and circulators based on the intrinsic nonreciprocity of the Kerr effect’, Optica **5**, 279-282 (2018). Q.-F. Yang, X. Yi & K. Vahala, ‘Counter-propagating solitons in microresonators’, Nat. Photonics **11** 560-564 (2017). M.-G. Suh & K. J. Vahala, ‘Soliton microcomb range measurement’, Science **359**, 884-887 (2018). P. Trocha, M. Karpov, D. Ganin, M. H. P. Pfeiffer, A. Kordts, S. Wolf, J. Krockenberger, P. Marin-Palomo, C. Weimann, S. Randel, W. Freude, T. J. Kippenberg & C. Koos, ‘Ultrafast optical ranging using microresonator soliton frequency combs’, Science **359**, 887-891 (2018). See the specialized issue: Y. K. Chembo, D. Gomila, M. Tlidi & C. R. Menyuk, ’Theory and applications of the Lugiato-Lefever equation’, Eur. Phys. J. D **71**, 299 (2017). M. Haelterman, S. Trillo & S. Wabnitz, ‘Polarization multistability and instability in a nonlinear dispersive ring cavity’, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B **11**, 446-456 (1994). J. B. Geddes, J. V. Moloney, E. M. Wright & W. J. Firth, ‘Polarisation patterns in a nonlinear cavity’, Opt. Commun. **111**, 623-631 (1994). X. Jiang, A. J. Qavi, S. H. Huang & L. Yang, ‘Whispering gallery microsensors: a review’, arXiv:1805.00062 (2018). M. R. Foreman, J. D. Swaim & F. Vollmer, Whispering gallery mode sensors, Adv. Opt. Photon. **7**, 168-240 (2015). C. Wang & C. P. Search, ‘Nonlinearly enhanced refractive index sensing in coupled optical microresonators’, Opt. Lett. **39**, 26-29 (2014). C. Wang & C. P. Search, ‘A Nonlinear Microresonator Refractive Index Sensor’, J. Light. Technol. **33**, 4360-4366 (2015). B. Maes, M. Fiers & P. Bienstman, ‘Self-pulsing and chaos in short chains of coupled nonlinear microcavities’, Phys. Rev. A **80**, 033805 (2009). S. Abdollahi & V. Van, ‘Analysis of optical instability in coupled microring resonators’, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B **31**, 3081-3087 (2014). Y. Dumeige & P. Féron, ‘Coupled optical microresonators for microwave all-optical generation and processing’, Opt. Lett. **40**, 3237-3240 (2015). Y. Dumeige & P. Féron, ‘Stability and time-domain analysis of the dispersive tristability in microresonators under modal coupling’, Phys. Rev. A **84**, 043847 (2011). E. Knobloch & M. R. E. Proctor, ‘The double Hopf bifurcation with 2:1 resonance’, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A [**415**]{}, 61-90 (1988). G.-L. Oppo & A. Politi, ‘Collision of Feigenbaum cascades’, Phys. Rev. A [**30**]{}, 435-441 (1984).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We prove that all immersions of a genus one surface into $ G/T $ possessing a Toda frame can be constructed by integrating a pair of commuting vector fields on a finite dimensional Lie algebra. Here $ G $ is any simple real Lie group (not necessarily compact), $ T $ is a Cartan subgroup and the $k$-symmetric space structure on $ G/T $ is induced from the Coxeter automorphism. We provide necessary and sufficient conditions for the existence of a Toda frame for a harmonic map into $G/T$ and describe those $G/T$ to which the theory applies in terms of involutions of extended Dynkin diagrams.'
author:
- 'Emma Carberry, Katharine Turner'
title: 'Toda Frames, Harmonic maps and extended Dynkin diagrams'
---
Introduction
============
The last few decades have seen significant progress in the understanding and classification of harmonic maps from surfaces into compact real Lie groups and symmetric spaces. An important class of harmonic maps are those of *finite type*, which are obtained as the solutions to a pair of ordinary differential equations on a finite dimensional loop algebra. This is a far simpler process than attempting to solve the Laplace-Beltrami equation directly, and so motivates us to determine circumstances under which harmonic maps are of finite type. Similarly, when the target manifold is a $ k $-symmetric space, $ k >2 $, it is natural to restrict our attention to those harmonic maps which are cyclic primitive and ask when these maps are of finite type. Many papers (e.g. [@Hitchin:90; @PS:89; @Bobenko:91; @FPPS:92; @BFPP:93; @BPW:95; @Burstall:95]) have addressed these questions when the target Lie group or ($ k $)-symmetric space is [*compact*]{}. We remove the need for this compactness assumption and in Theorem \[thm:finite\] show that all maps from a genus one surface into a $ k $-symmetric space $ G/T $ possessing a Toda frame are of finite type, where $ G $ is any simple real Lie group preserved by a Coxeter automorphism and $ T $ is the corresponding Cartan subgroup. A natural generalisation of the usual 2-dimensional affine Toda field equations provides the integrability condition for the existence of a Toda frame, and so we make contact with classical integrable systems theory. To determine the spaces $ G/T $ and the harmonic maps into them to which this theory applies we address the following two questions, each of independent interest:
1. [*When does a map from a surface into $ G/T $ possess a Toda frame?*]{} and
2. [*When is $ G $ preserved by a Coxeter automorphism?*]{}
The first of these is answered in Theorem \[theorem:Toda\], where it is proven that a map from a surface into $ G/T $ locally has a Toda frame precisely when it is cyclic primitive and a certain function is constant. Cyclic primitive maps are in particular harmonic and play an analogous role for $ k $-symmetric spaces as harmonic maps do for symmetric spaces. This and our finite-type result are the natural extensions of results obtained in [@BPW:95] in the case when $ G $ is compact. The second question does not arise in the compact situation, since a Coxeter automorphism for a complex simple Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ automatically preserves a compact real form ${\mathfrak{g}}$. We characterise when a Coxeter automorphism preserves a real form of a complex simple Lie algebra, which is equivalent to the corresponding real Lie group $ G $ being preserved whenever $ G $ simply connected or adjoint. Given simple roots for ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ spanning a Cartan subalgebra ${\mathfrak{t}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$, let $\sigma $ be the associated Coxeter automorphism and $\Theta $ a Cartan involution with respect to ${\mathfrak{g}}$ that preserves ${\mathfrak{t}}={\mathfrak{g}}\cap{\mathfrak{t}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$. Then $\sigma $ preserves ${\mathfrak{g}}$ if and only if $\Theta $ defines a permutation of the extended Dynkin diagram, so in particular whenever ${\mathfrak{t}}$ is a maximally compact Cartan subalgebra (Proposition \[prop:Coxeter\]). In Theorem \[thm:3.2\] we prove that all involutions of the extended Dynkin diagram for a simple complex Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ arise from a Cartan involution for some real form ${\mathfrak{g}}$.
Harmonic maps from surfaces into Lie groups and symmetric spaces arise naturally in many geometric and physical problems. On the geometric side, strong motivation comes from the study of surfaces with particular curvature properties. For example, minimal surfaces are described by conformal harmonic maps and both constant mean curvature and Willmore surfaces are characterised by having harmonic Gauss maps into particular symmetric spaces. From the physics viewpoint, these harmonic maps are interesting because of their relationship with the appropriate Yang-Mills equations and non-linear sigma-models. Indeed the harmonic map equations on a Riemann surface are precisely the reduction of the Yang-Mills equations on ${\mathbb{ R}}^ {2, 2} $ obtained by considering solutions invariant under translation in the directions of negative signature. Classical solutions of sigma-models are given by harmonic maps into (non-compact) as pseudo-Riemannian manifolds. In [@CT:12] we study an explicit example, namely harmonic tori in de Sitter spaces $ S ^ {m}_1 $. In particular we apply the theory of this paper to the superconformal such maps with globally defined harmonic sequence to see that they may all be obtained by integrating a pair of commuting vector fields on a finite-dimensional vector space. It follows that all Willmore tori in $ S ^ 3 $ without umbilic points may be obtained in this simple way.
The structure of this paper is as follows. In section \[symmetric\] we give the general theory for harmonic maps of surfaces into symmetric spaces and for primitive maps into $ k $-symmetric spaces when the relevant Lie group $ G $ is equipped with a bi-invariant pseudo-metric. The question of when a Coxeter automorphism preserves the real form of the complex simple Lie algebra is addressed in section \[dynkin\] in terms of Cartan involutions and extended Dynkin diagrams. Section \[Toda\] contains the relationship with the affine Toda field equations and the finite type result is proven in section \[finite\].
It is a pleasure to thank Anthony Henderson for helpful conversations regarding the Lie-theoretic results of section \[dynkin\].
Finite type maps into symmetric spaces {#symmetric}
======================================
The fact that a harmonic map from a surface to a Lie group corresponds to a loop of flat connections [@Pohlmeyer:76; @Uhlenbeck:89] is the fundamental observation that enables one to apply integrable systems techniques to the study of these maps. The Cartan map $ G/H\rightarrow G $ from a symmetric space to the relevant Lie group is well-known to be a totally geodesic immersion when $ G $ is compact and equipped with a bi-invariant Riemannian metric. The composition of a harmonic map with a totally geodesic one is again harmonic, so this enables harmonic maps into symmetric spaces to be studied using the same tools as those into Lie groups, and in particular in terms of a loop of flat connections. We show in Theorem \[thm2.1\] that when $ G $ has merely a bi-invariant pseudo-metric that the Cartan map is again a totally geodesic immersion. In particular all reductive Lie groups possess a bi-invariant pseudo-metric. We can hence study harmonic maps into $ G/H $ using integrable systems methods regardless of whether $ G $ is compact.
Let $ G $ be a semisimple Lie group. Recall that a homogeneous space $ G/H $ is a [*$ k $-symmetric space*]{} ($ k >1 $) if there is an automorphism $\tau: G\rightarrow G $ of order $ k $ such that $$(G ^\tau)_0\subset H\subset G ^\tau$$ where $ G ^\tau $ denotes the fixed point set of $\tau $, and $ (G ^\tau)_0 $ the identity component of $ G ^\tau $. When $ k = 2 $, we say that $ G/H $ is a [*symmetric space*]{}. We have the induced action $$\begin{aligned}
\tau: G/H &\rightarrow G/H\\
gH &\mapsto\tau (g) H.\end{aligned}$$ We write $\tau $ also for the induced automorphism of ${\mathfrak{g}}$ and note the ${\mathbb{ Z}}_k $-grading $${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}=\bigoplus_{j = 0} ^ {k -1}{\mathfrak{g}}^\tau_j,\; [{\mathfrak{g}}^\tau_j,{\mathfrak{g}}^\tau_l ]\subset{\mathfrak{g}}^\tau_{j + l},$$ where ${\mathfrak{g}}^\tau_j $ denotes the $ e ^ {j\frac {2\pi i} {k} } $-eigenspace of $\tau $.
We shall be interested in harmonic maps from a Riemann surface $\Sigma $ into a symmetric space $ G/H $. When $ G $ is compact, the Killing form on ${\mathfrak{g}}$ induces a bi-invariant metric on $ G/H $ and the harmonic map equations for $ f:\Sigma\rightarrow G/H $ may either be calculated directly [@Wood:94], using Noether’s Theorem [@Rawnsley:84], or by composing $ f $ with the Cartan map $ G/H\rightarrow G $, which is well-known in this case to be a totally geodesic immersion [@CE:75]. Recall here that the Cartan map of a symmetric space is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\iota:\;\; & G/H\rightarrow G\\
& gH\mapsto \tau (g ) g^{-1}.\end{aligned}$$ We suppose merely that $ G $ has a bi-invariant pseudo-metric. Then analogous computations hold; in particular we can reduce the problem to studying harmonic maps into the Lie group $ G $ due to the following result.
\[thm2.1\] Let $ G $ be a semisimple Lie group with bi-invariant pseudo-metric $\langle \cdot,\cdot \rangle $ and $ G/H $ a symmetric space with respect to the involution $\tau: G\rightarrow G $. Then $\iota: gH\mapsto \tau (g)g ^ {- 1} $ is a totally geodesic immersion $ G/H\rightarrow G $ . If $ H = G ^\tau $, then $\iota$ is additionally an embedding.
Let us call a Lie group $ G $ [*reductive*]{} if its Lie algebra $\mathfrak g $ is reductive, that is has radical equal to its centre. Then $\mathfrak g $ may be written as the direct sum of a semisimple Lie algebra and an abelian one. On the semisimple Lie algebra the Cartan-Killing form is non-degenerate, whilst on the abelian algebra any bilinear form is invariant under the adjoint action of the group. Combining these we obtain the existence of a bi-invariant pseudometric on any reductive Lie group, and hence the above theorem in particular applies when $ G $ is reductive.
[*$\iota$ is an immersion:*]{} Suppose $d\iota_{gH} (\gamma' (0)) = 0 $ for some smooth path $\gamma $ in $ G/H $ with $\gamma (0) = gH $. Take a lift $\tilde\gamma $ of $\gamma $ to $ G $ with $\tilde\gamma (0) = g $ and write $\pi: G\rightarrow G/H $ for the projection. Then $$0 = \left.\dfrac{d}{dt}\right|_{t=0}\left (\tau\left(\tilde\gamma(t)\right)\left(\tilde\gamma(t)\right)^{-1}\right) = d\tau_g (\tilde\gamma' (0)) g^ {- 1} -\tau (g) g^ {- 1}\tilde\gamma' (0) g^ {- 1},$$ so $$d\tau_e (g^ {- 1}\tilde\gamma' (0)) =\tau (g^ {- 1}) d\tau_g (\tilde\gamma' (0)) = g^ {- 1}\tilde\gamma' (0)$$ and $\gamma'(0)$ is zero in $T_{g H}(G/H)$ so $d\iota_{g H}$ is injective.
[*$\iota$ is totally geodesic:*]{} Let $\nabla ^l $ denote the connection on $ G $ obtained by trivialising $ TG $ by left translation, and similarly $\nabla ^ r $ that induced from trivialising by right translation. A computation shows that $\nabla ^ r =\nabla ^ l +\mathrm{ad}_{g^ {- 1} dg} $ and hence $$\nabla =\frac 12 (\nabla ^ l +\nabla ^ r)$$ is the Levi-Civita connection of the pseudo-metric $\langle \cdot ,\cdot \rangle $.
Denote by $\exp:\mathfrak g\rightarrow G $ the Lie-theoretic exponential map, and by $e $ the differential-geometric exponential map associated to the Levi-Civita connection $\nabla $. Note that as in the definite case, for each $ X\in\mathfrak g $ the map $$\begin{aligned}
\gamma_X: {\mathfrak{g}}&\rightarrow G\\
t&\mapsto e ^ {tX}\end{aligned}$$ is a geodesic, i.e. $\nabla_{\gamma'_X}\gamma'_X = 0 $, so $ \exp $ and $e $ agree on the domain of $e $. Since the pseudo-metric is bi-invariant, we conclude that the geodesics through $ g\in G $ are locally of the form $\gamma (t) = g e ^ {tX} $. Denote by $\mathfrak{m} $ the $(-1)$-eigenspace of $\tau:{\mathfrak{g}}\rightarrow{\mathfrak{g}}$, and note that ${\mathfrak{g}}={\mathfrak{h}}\oplus \mathfrak{m} $, where ${\mathfrak{h}}$ is the Lie algebra of $ H $. The lift $\tilde\gamma (t) = g e ^ {tX} H $ is horizontal, in the sense that $\tilde\gamma' (t)\in g e ^ {tX}\mathfrak{m} $. Thus the geodesics in $ G/H$ through $ g H $ are locally of the form $\tilde\gamma (t) = g e ^ {tX} H $. Since $$\iota(g e ^ {tX} H) = g e ^ {tX}\tau (e ^ {- tX})\tau (g^ {- 1}) = g e ^ {2 tX}\tau (g^ {- 1}) = g\tau (g^ {- 1}) e ^ {t\tau (g) X\tau (g^ {- 1})}$$ is again a geodesic, we conclude that $\iota$ is totally geodesic.
[*If $ H = G ^\tau $, then $\iota$ is an embedding:*]{} In this case if $\iota(g_1H) =\iota(g_2H) $, then $ g_1 ^ {- 1} g_2 =\tau (g_1 ^ {- 1} g_2) $, and so $ g_1 ^ {- 1} g_2\in H $, and thus $\iota$ is injective.
Let $ F:U\rightarrow G $ be a smooth lift of $ f:U\rightarrow G/H $ on some simply connected $ U\subset\Sigma $, where we assume henceforth that $ G $ is semisimple and has a bi-invariant pseudo-metric (we will later restrict our attention to simple such $ G $.). By the above theorem, $ f $ is harmonic if and only if $\iota\circ f $ is. The Maurer-Cartan form on $ G $ is the unique left-invariant ${\mathfrak{g}}$-valued 1-form which acts as the identity on ${\mathfrak{g}}$. We denote it by $\omega $, and note that if $ G $ is a linear group, then $\omega= g ^ {- 1} dg $. We will use this notation throughout even in the non-linear case. Write $ \tilde {f} = \iota\circ f $ and $\Phi = \tilde {f} ^*(\omega) = \tilde {f} ^ {- 1} d\tilde {f} $. For any smooth $ \tilde {f} $, the form $\Phi $ satisfies the zero-curvature condition $$d\Phi +\frac 12 [\Phi\wedge\Phi ] = 0,\label {eq:MC}$$ known as the Maurer-Cartan equation. Recall that for vector fields $ X, Y $, $$[\Phi\wedge\Phi] (X, Y) = 2 [\Phi,\Phi] (X, Y) = [\Phi (X),\Phi (Y)].$$ The condition that the map $ \tilde {f}:\Sigma\rightarrow G $ is harmonic can be written as $$d*\Phi = 0.\label {eq:harmonic}$$ Noting that $ \tilde {f} =\tau (F) F^ {- 1} $, we have $$\label {eq:composesymmetric}
\Phi = F\left (\tau (F)^ {- 1} d (\tau (F)) - F^{-1}d F \right) F^ {- 1} = -2\mathrm{Ad}_F (\varphi_{\mathfrak{m}}),$$ where $\varphi =\varphi _{\mathfrak{h}} +\varphi _{\mathfrak{m}}$ is the decomposition of $\varphi : = F^ {- 1} d F $ into the eigenspaces of $\tau $. Then becomes $$\label {eq:harmonic1st}
0 = d (\mathrm{Ad}_F (*\varphi _{\mathfrak{m}})) =\mathrm{Ad}_F (d*\varphi _{\mathfrak{m}} + [\varphi \wedge*\varphi_{\mathfrak{m}} ])$$ or equivalently, $$d*\varphi_{\mathfrak{m}} + [\varphi\wedge*\varphi_{\mathfrak{m}} ] = 0.\label{eq:harmonicsymmetric}$$ One can also compute the harmonic map equations directly for $ f $. Writing $ [\mathfrak{m}] $ for the subbundle of $ G/H\times\mathfrak{g} $ whose fibre at $ g\cdot x $ is $\mathrm{Ad}_g (\mathfrak{m}) $, we have an isomorphism $ [\mathfrak{m}]\cong {T (G/H)}] $ given by $$\begin{aligned}
[\mathfrak{m} ]_y &\rightarrow T_y G/H\\
Y &\mapsto\left.\frac {d} {dt}\right|_{t = 0} e ^ {tY}\cdot y.\end{aligned}$$
The inverse of this isomorphism defines a ${\mathfrak{g}}$-valued 1-form $\theta $ on the symmetric space $ G/H $, which we term its Maurer-Cartan form. Then [@Rawnsley:84] $ f $ is harmonic if and only if $$d*(f ^*\theta) = 0$$ and using that $$f ^*\theta =\mathrm{Ad}_F (\varphi_{\mathfrak{m}})$$ we recover . Write $\varphi'_\mathfrak{m} +\varphi_\mathfrak{m}'' $ for the decomposition of $\varphi_\mathfrak{m} $ into $ dz $ and $ d\bar z $ parts. Since $ [\mathfrak{m},\mathfrak{m} ]\subset{\mathfrak{h}}$, a straightforward computation shows and are equivalent to the requirement that for each $\lambda\in S ^ 1 $, the form $$\label {eq:form}
\varphi _\lambda =\lambda\varphi'_\mathfrak{m} +\varphi_{\mathfrak{h}}+\lambda^ {- 1}\varphi''_\mathfrak{m}$$ satisfies the Maurer-Cartan equation $$d\varphi_\lambda +\frac 12 [\varphi_\lambda\wedge\varphi_\lambda ] = 0.\label {eq:flat}$$ Some solutions to can be obtained simply by solving a pair of commuting ordinary differential equations on a finite-dimensional loop algebra. These unusually simple solutions are said to be of finite type.
Let $ G/K $ be a $ k $-symmetric space for $ k >2 $ and $\tau $ the corresponding $ k $th order involution. As we shall now explain when mapping into a $ k $-symmetric space for $ k >2 $ it is natural to restrict our attention to a subclass of harmonic maps consisting of those which are primitive, a notion that we now define. Again we have the reductive splitting $${\mathfrak{g}}=\mathfrak{k}\oplus{\mathfrak{p}}$$ with $${\mathfrak{p}}^{\mathbb{ C}}=\bigoplus_{j = 1} ^ {k -1}{\mathfrak{g}}_j ^\tau,\qquad \mathfrak {k} ^{\mathbb{ C}}={\mathfrak{g}}_0 ^\tau.$$ Similarly to before we may define the Maurer-Cartan form $\theta $ of the $ k $-symmetric space $ G/K $ when $ k >2 $. For any smooth lift $ F: U\rightarrow G $ of $ \psi: U\rightarrow G/K $, writing $\varphi = F ^*\omega $ we have $$\psi ^*\theta =\mathrm{Ad}_F\varphi_{{\mathfrak{p}}}.$$ We say that a smooth map $ \psi$ of a surface $\Sigma $ into $ G/K $ is [*primitive*]{} if the image of $ \psi ^*\theta' $ is contained in $ [ {\mathfrak{g}}_1 ] $. Equivalently, it is primitive precisely when $\varphi ' = F ^ {- 1}\partial F $ takes values in ${\mathfrak{g}}_0 ^\tau\oplus{\mathfrak{g}}_1^\tau $. Using that $ [{\mathfrak{g}}_1^\tau,{\mathfrak{g}}_{-1} ^\tau]\subset{\mathfrak{g}}_0^\tau $, the Maurer-Cartan equation for $\varphi $ decomposes into ${\mathfrak{g}}_1^\tau $, ${\mathfrak{g}}_0^\tau $ and ${\mathfrak{g}}_{-1} ^\tau $ components as $$\begin{aligned}
d\varphi'_{\mathfrak{p}}+ [\varphi _{\mathfrak {k}}\wedge\varphi '_{\mathfrak{p}}] & = 0\label {eq:MCg1}\\
d\varphi_{\mathfrak {k}} + \frac 12 [\varphi _{\mathfrak {k}}\wedge\varphi_{\mathfrak {k}}] + [\varphi '_{\mathfrak{p}}\wedge\varphi''_{\mathfrak{p}}] & = 0\nonumber\\
d\varphi''_{\mathfrak{p}}+ [\varphi _{\mathfrak {k}}\wedge\varphi ''_{\mathfrak{p}}] & = 0.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ From these equations one easily verifies that primitive maps are in particular harmonic. Moreover [@BP:94] if $ G/H $ is a symmetric space with $ K\subset H $ and the corresponding reductive splitting preserved under $\tau $, then the projection of $ \psi:\Sigma\rightarrow G/K $ into $ G/H $ is harmonic. An analogous calculation to that above shows that on simply connected subsets $ U\subset\Sigma $, a primitive map $ \psi: U\rightarrow G/K $ is equivalent to a loop $$\label {eq:primitiveflat}
\varphi_\lambda =\lambda \varphi '_{\mathfrak{p}}+\varphi_{\mathfrak{k}} +\lambda^ {- 1}\varphi''_{\mathfrak{p}},\quad\lambda\in S ^ 1$$ of ${\mathfrak{g}}$-valued 1-forms each satisfying the Maurer-Cartan equation. We see then that both harmonic maps into symmetric spaces and primitive maps into $ k $-symmetric spaces are governed by the same equation so we turn now to the question of constructing solutions to this equation.
Let $\Omega G $ be the loop group $
\Omega G =\{\gamma: S ^ 1\rightarrow G \}
$ with corresponding loop algebra $
\Omega{\mathfrak{g}}: =\{\xi: S ^ 1\rightarrow{\mathfrak{g}}\} $ , where the loops are assumed real analytic without further comment. We use $\Omega{\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ to denote loops in the complexified Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$. For studying maps into $ k $-symmetric spaces it is helpful to consider the twisted loop group $$\Omega ^\tau G =\{\gamma: S ^ 1\rightarrow G:\gamma (e ^{\frac {2\pi i} {k}\lambda}) =\tau (\gamma (\lambda))\}$$ and corresponding twisted loop algebra $\Omega ^\tau{\mathfrak{g}}$ along with its complexification $\Omega ^\tau{\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$. The (possibly doubly infinite) Laurent expansion $$\xi(\lambda) =\sum_{j} \xi_j \lambda ^ j,\quad\xi_j\in{\mathfrak{g}}^\tau_j\subset{\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}},\quad\Phi_{- j} =\bar\Phi_j$$ allows us to filtrate $\Omega ^\tau{\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ by finite-dimensional subspaces $$\Omega ^\tau_d =\{\xi\in\Omega{\mathfrak{g}}\mid \xi_j = 0\text { whenever }\left|j\right| >d\}.$$
Fix a Cartan subalgebra $\mathfrak t$ of ${\mathfrak{g}}$ such that $\mathfrak t\subset\mathfrak k $ and recall that a non-zero $\alpha \in (\mathfrak{t}^{\mathbb{ C}})^*$ is a [*root*]{} with corresponding [*root space*]{} $\mathcal{G}^{\alpha}\subset{\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ if $[X_1, X_2 ]=\alpha(X_1) X_2 $ for all $X_1\in \mathfrak{t}$ and $ X_2\in \mathcal{G}^{\alpha}$. We denote the set of roots by $\Delta$ and employ the same notation for the root system formed by considering $\Delta $ as a subset of $ (\mathfrak {t} ^{\mathbb{ C}}) ^*$. Choose a set of [*simple roots*]{}, that is a subset $\{ \alpha_1, \ldots, \alpha_N \}$ of $\Delta$ such that every root $\alpha\in \Delta$ can be written uniquely as $$\alpha=\sum_{j=1}^{N} m_j \alpha_j,$$ where the $m_j$ are either all positive integers or all negative integers. The [*height* ]{} of $\alpha$ is $h(\alpha) =\sum_{j = 1} ^ N m_j$ and the root(s) of maximal height are called [*highest root(s)*]{} whilst those of minimal height are termed [*lowest root(s)*]{}.
We similarly define the root spaces of $\mathfrak k ^{\mathbb{ C}}$. Let $\mathfrak n $ be the nilpotent algebra consisting of the positive root spaces of $\mathfrak k ^{\mathbb{ C}}$ with respect to a choice of simple roots and consider the resulting Iwasawa decomposition $$\label {eq:Iwasawa}
\mathfrak{k}^{\mathbb{ C}}=\mathfrak{n}\oplus\mathfrak{t}^{\mathbb{ C}}\oplus\bar{\mathfrak {n}}$$ of $\mathfrak {k} ^{\mathbb{ C}}$. Then for $\eta\in\mathfrak k ^{\mathbb{ C}}$ and a local coordinate $ z $ on $\Sigma $, decomposing according to we have $$(\eta dz)_{\mathfrak h} = r (\eta) dz +\overline {r (\eta)} d\bar z$$ where $r:\mathfrak{k}^{\mathbb{ C}}\rightarrow\mathfrak{k}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ is defined by $$\label {eq:r}
r (\eta) =\eta_{\bar{\mathfrak{n}}} +\frac 12\eta_{\mathfrak k}.$$
The key observation here is that for simply-connected coordinate neighbourhood $ U\subset\Sigma $, if $\xi: U\rightarrow\Omega ^\tau_d $ satisfies $$\label{eq:flows}
\dfrac {\partial\xi} {\partial z} = [\xi,\lambda\xi_d + r (\xi_{d -1})]$$ then $$\varphi_\lambda = (\lambda\xi_d + r (\xi_{d -1})) d z + (\lambda^ {- 1}\xi_{- d} +\overline {r (\xi_{d -1})}) d\bar z$$ satisfies the Maurer-Cartan equation (c.f. [@BP:94], Theorem 2.5). The equation $$\frac 12 ( X (\xi) - iY (\xi)) = (\lambda\xi_d + r (\xi_{d -1}))$$ defines vector fields $ X, Y $ on $\Omega_d $. A straightforward computation shows that these vector fields commute and so finding solutions to is merely a matter of solving a pair of commuting ordinary differential equations. This yields a rather special class of solutions to the Maurer-Cartan equations and hence of harmonic maps to symmetric spaces and primitive maps to $ k $-symmetric spaces, $ k >2 $. The flows of $ X, Y $ are easily seen to evolve on spheres in $\Omega_d $. When $ G $ is compact, so are these spheres and hence $ X, Y $ are complete and for any initial condition the differential equation has a unique solution on $ U $. However when $ G $ is non-compact the completeness of $ X, Y $ is not guaranteed.
A harmonic map $ f:\Sigma\rightarrow G/H $ to a symmetric space or a primitive map $ \psi:\Sigma\rightarrow G/K $ to a $ k $-symmetric space, $ k >2 $ is said to be of [*finite type*]{} if it has a lift $ F:\Sigma\rightarrow G $ for which there exists a smooth map $\xi: {\mathbb{ R}}\to\Omega_d ^\tau{\mathfrak{g}}$ satisfying $$\label {eq:lax}
d\xi = [\xi,\varphi _\lambda ]$$ and $$\label {eq:adapted}
\varphi_\lambda = (\lambda\xi_d + r (\xi_{d -1})) d z + (\lambda^ {- 1}\xi_{- d} +\overline {r (\xi_{d -1})}) d\bar z.$$ Here $\varphi_\lambda $ and $ r $ are defined in and for the primitive case and in and the obvious analogue to for the harmonic case.
We introduce some terminology for later use. A [*formal Killing field*]{} for $ f $ or $ \psi $ is a smooth map $\xi:\Sigma\rightarrow\Omega ^\tau\mathfrak g $ satisfying the Lax equation . When $\xi $ takes values in some $\Omega_d$ it is termed a [*polynomial Killing field*]{} of degree $ d $ and when it additionally satisfies it is an [*adapted polynomial Killing field*]{}.
When the automorphism $\tau: {\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}\rightarrow {\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ is of the form $\tau =\mathrm{Ad}_{\exp M}$ for some $ M\in\mathfrak t ^{\mathbb{ C}}$ where $\mathfrak t $ is a Cartan subalgebra of $\mathfrak g $, then we can express the eigenspaces $\mathfrak{g} ^\tau_j $ of $\tau $ in terms of root spaces. Given our chosen set of simple roots $\alpha _j $, denote by $ \eta_j$ the corresponding dual basis of $\mathfrak{t} ^{\mathbb{ C}}$. For any root $\alpha=m_1\alpha_1 + \ldots m_N \alpha_N$, smooth map $s_j:\Sigma \to {\mathbb{ C}}$ and root vector $R_\alpha\in\mathcal{G} ^\alpha $, a straightforward computation shows that $${\operatorname{Ad}}_{ \exp(s_1 \eta_1+\ldots s_N \eta_N)} R_\alpha = \exp(m_1 s_1+\ldots m_Ns_N)R_\alpha.\label {eq:roots}$$ Note that $ \exp(m_1 s_1+\ldots m_Ns_N)$ is a scalar function. Given $\tau = {\operatorname{Ad}}_{ \exp (\frac{2\pi i}{k}(\sum s_j \eta_j))} $ we have $$\mathfrak{g}^\tau_l = \operatorname{span}\{R_\alpha| \alpha=\sum_{j = 1} ^ N m_j\alpha_j, \sum_{j = 1} ^ N s_jm_j=l\bmod(k)\}.$$ In particular if we let $k-1$ denote the maximal height of a root of ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ and suppose $$\label {eq:Coxeterdefinition}\sigma:={\operatorname{Ad}}_{ \exp ( \frac {2\pi i } {k}\sum_{j = 1} ^ N \eta_j)}\,,$$ then $\sigma$ is of order $k$ and from it acts on the root spaces by $$\label {eq:Coxeter}
\sigma(R_\alpha) = \exp\left(\frac{2\pi i h(\alpha)}{k}\right)R_\alpha.$$ We recognise the inner automorphism $\sigma$ as the Coxeter automorphism associated to the identity transformation of the simple roots [@BD:81]. It plays an important role here because when it preserves the real Lie group $ G $, it allows us to view $G/T$ as a $k$-symmetric space for which ${\mathfrak{g}}^\sigma_1 $ is the sum of the simple and lowest root spaces. Here $ T $ is a Cartan subgroup with Lie algebra $\mathfrak t $. Furthermore since $ K = T $ in this case, the map $ r $ described in is simply multiplication by $\tfrac {1} {2} $ and so the adapted polynomial Killing field condition simplifies. Taking this $ N $-symmetric space structure on $ G/T $, we say that a smooth map $ \psi:\Sigma\rightarrow G/T $ is *cyclic primitive* if it is primitive and satisfies the condition that the image of $ \psi ^*\theta' $ contains a cyclic element. Writing $\alpha_0 $ for the lowest root, an element in $\left (\bigoplus_{j = 0} ^ N \mathcal G ^{\alpha_j}\right) $ is *cyclic* if its projection to each of the root spaces $ \mathcal G ^{\alpha_0}, \mathcal G ^{\alpha_1},\ldots , \mathcal G ^{\alpha _N} $ is non-zero. We henceforth assume that $ G $ is simple in order to guarantee the uniqueness of the lowest root (that is, we assume that $ G $ is connected and ${\mathfrak{g}}$ is simple).
Extended Dynkin diagrams and Cartan involutions {#dynkin}
===============================================
We now ascertain the $ k $-symmetric spaces to which our theory will apply. That is, we give conditions under which a choice of real form ${\mathfrak{g}}$ of a simple complex Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$, Cartan subalgebra $\mathfrak t ^{\mathbb{ C}}$ and simple roots $\alpha_j $ yield a Coxeter automorphism $\sigma $ which preserves the real Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}$. When $ G ^{\mathbb{ C}}$ is a simply connected or adjoint simple Lie group with Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$, this ensures that the Coxeter automorphism preserves the real group $ G $.
Let $\;\bar{}\;$ denote the complex conjugation of ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ corresponding to the real form ${\mathfrak{g}}$. Define the conjugate of a root $\alpha $ by $$\bar\alpha (X) =\overline {\alpha (\bar X)}.$$ Then from we see that the condition for the Coxeter automorphism $\sigma $ to preserve ${\mathfrak{g}}$ is that for all roots $\alpha $, the height $ h (\alpha $) satisfies $$h (\bar\alpha) = - h (\alpha)\bmod k,$$ or equivalently that for $ j = 1,\ldots, N $ we have $$\label {eq:simplereality}
\bar\alpha_j\in\{-\alpha_0,\ldots, -\alpha_N\}.$$ We will now use a Cartan involution to express this reality condition in terms of the extended Dynkin diagram for $\alpha_0,\ldots,\alpha_N $. A Cartan involution is an involution $\Theta $ of ${\mathfrak{g}}$ such that $$\langle X, Y \rangle _{\Theta} = - \langle X,\Theta (Y) \rangle$$ is positive definite, where $ \langle \cdot ,\cdot \rangle $ denotes the Killing form. Using complex-linearity, $\Theta $ extends to an involution of ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$. We may [@Knapp:02 Prop. 6.59] choose a Cartan involution $\Theta $ which preserves the Cartan subalgebra $\mathfrak t $.
\[prop:Coxeter\] Let ${\mathfrak{g}}$ be a real simple Lie algebra, ${\mathfrak{t}}$ a Cartan subalgebra and $\Theta $ be a Cartan involution preserving $\mathfrak t $. Choose simple roots $\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_N $ for the root system $\Delta ({\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}},{\mathfrak{t}}^{\mathbb{ C}}) $ and let $\sigma $ be the corresponding Coxeter automorphism of ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ defined in . Then the following are equivalent:
1. $\sigma $ preserves the real form ${\mathfrak{g}}$,
2. $\sigma $ commutes with $\Theta $,
3. $\Theta $ defines a permutation of the extended Dynkin diagram for ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ consisting of the usual Dynkin diagram augmented with the lowest root $\alpha_0 $.
Write $\mathfrak t =\mathfrak l\oplus \mathfrak p $, where $\mathfrak l $, $\mathfrak p $ are respectively the $ (+ 1 ) $-eigenspace and $ (- 1) $-eigenspace of the action of $\Theta $ on $\mathfrak t $. Then all roots $\alpha $ are real on $\mathfrak p $ and imaginary on $\mathfrak l $, and defining the action of $\Theta $ on roots by $\Theta (\alpha) (X) =\alpha (\Theta (X)) $ we have that $$\Theta (\alpha) = -\bar\alpha\quad\text { for all roots }\alpha.$$ If $ R_\alpha $ is a root vector for $\alpha $, then $\bar R_\alpha $ is a root vector for $\bar\alpha $ and $\Theta (R_\alpha) $ is a root vector for $\Theta (\alpha) $. We assume that our root vectors are chosen so that $$R_{\bar\alpha} =\bar R_\alpha$$ and write $ R_{\Theta (\alpha)} = c_\alpha\Theta (R_\alpha) $. Then using , a straightforward computation shows that $\sigma\circ\Theta (R_\alpha) =\Theta\circ\sigma (R_\alpha) $ if and only if $\sigma (\bar R_{-\alpha}) =\overline {\sigma (R_{-\alpha})} $, proving the equivalence of conditions (1) and (2) above.
The Cartan involution $\Theta $ commutes with $\sigma $ if and only if for all roots $\alpha $, the height function $ h $ satisfies $$h (\Theta (\alpha))\equiv h (\alpha)\bmod k,$$ or equivalently when $\Theta $ defines a permutation of $\alpha_0,\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_N $. All automorphisms of a Lie algebra preserve the Killing form and hence a Cartan involution $\Theta $ as above defines a permutation of the extended Dynkin diagram and we see the equivalence of conditions (2) and (3).
We next show that every involution of the extended Dynkin diagram for $\Delta ({\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}},{\mathfrak{t}}^{\mathbb{ C}}) $ does indeed arise from a Cartan involution for some real form ${\mathfrak{g}}$ with $\Theta $-stable Cartan subalgebra ${\mathfrak{t}}={\mathfrak{g}}\cap{\mathfrak{t}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$. A $\Theta $-stable Cartan subalgebra ${\mathfrak{t}}$ of ${\mathfrak{g}}$ is maximally compact if and only if $\Theta $ preserves a set of simple roots for the root system $\Delta ({\mathfrak{g}},{\mathfrak{t}})$ . Hence when ${\mathfrak{t}}$ is maximally compact, a Coxeter automorphism $\sigma $ must stabilise the real form ${\mathfrak{g}}$. (In particular, all Cartan subalgebras of a compact real form ${\mathfrak{g}}$ are maximally compact.) The more interesting case then is when the Cartan subalgebra ${\mathfrak{t}}$ is not maximally compact, which corresponds to the involution of the extended Dynkin diagram acting nontrivially on the lowest root $\alpha_0 $.
\[thm:3.2\] Every involution of the extended Dynkin diagram for a simple complex Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ is induced by a Cartan involution of a real form of ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$.
More precisely, let ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ be a simple complex Lie algebra with Cartan subalgebra ${\mathfrak{t}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ and choose simple roots $\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_N $ for the root system $\Delta ({\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}},{\mathfrak{t}}^{\mathbb{ C}}) $. Given an involution $\pi $ of the extended Dynkin diagram for $\Delta $, there exists a real form ${\mathfrak{g}}$ of ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ and a Cartan involution $\Theta $ of ${\mathfrak{g}}$ preserving ${\mathfrak{t}}={\mathfrak{g}}\cap{\mathfrak{t}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ such that $\Theta $ induces $\pi $ and ${\mathfrak{t}}$ is a real form of ${\mathfrak{t}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$. The Coxeter automorphism $\sigma $ determined by $\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_N $ preserves the real form ${\mathfrak{g}}$.
Let $\pi $ be an involution of the extended Dynkin diagram. Denote also by $\pi $ the corresponding involution of the set $\{0, 1,\ldots, N\} $ and the induced involution of $ ({\mathfrak{t}}^{\mathbb{ C}}) ^* $ which preserves the root system $\Delta$ and satisfies $\pi (\alpha_j) =\alpha_{\pi (j)} $.
Let $\{H_\alpha, R_\alpha\mid\alpha\in\Delta\}$ be a Chevalley basis. That is, writing $\alpha ^\# $ for the dual of the root $\alpha $ with respect to the Killing form $\kappa$ we set $ H_\alpha = (2/ \kappa(\alpha ^\#,\alpha ^\#)){\alpha ^\#} $ and we choose the root vectors $ R_\alpha $ so that $$[R_\alpha, R_{-\alpha}] = H_\alpha.$$ and such that the [*structure constants*]{} $ c_{\alpha,\beta} $ defined by $ [R_\alpha, R_\beta] = c_{\alpha,\beta} R_{\alpha +\beta} $ satisfy $ c_{-\alpha, -\beta} = - c_{\alpha,\beta} $. For any $ b_{\alpha_j}\in{\mathbb{ C}}$ for $ j = 1,\ldots, N $, we obtain an automorphism $\Theta $ of ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ compatible with $\pi $ by requiring that $\Theta (R_{\alpha_j}) = b_{\alpha_j} R_{\pi (\alpha_j)}$ for $ j = 1, \ldots, N $ and that $\{\pi (H_\alpha),\Theta (R_\alpha)\mid\alpha\in\Delta\} $ is a Chevalley basis. Our first task is to verify that for an appropriate choice of $ b_{\alpha_j} $, the resulting $\Theta $ is an involution.
Given $\pi $ and $ b_{\alpha_1}, \ldots , b_{\alpha_N} $, for any root $\alpha $ we define $ b_{\alpha}\in{\mathbb{ C}}$ by the equation $\Theta (R_{\alpha}) = b_{\alpha}R_{\pi (\alpha)} $. The automorphism $\Theta $ will be an involution precisely when $ b_{\alpha_j}b_{\alpha_{\pi (j)}} = 1 $ for $ j = 1, \ldots, N $. For the $j$ with $\pi (j)\neq 0$, we can clearly guarantee this by taking $ b_{\alpha_{\pi (j)}} = b_{\alpha_j}^ {- 1} $. We will show that $ b_{\alpha_1}, \ldots , b_{\alpha_N} $ can be chosen so that additionally $ b_{\alpha_0}b_{\alpha_{\pi (0)}} = 1 $.
We may express $R_{\alpha_0} $ as $C[R_{-\beta_1}, [R_{-\beta_2}, \ldots, [R_{-\beta_{K-1}}, R_{-\beta_K}]\ldots]]$ for some non-zero constant $C$ and simple roots $\beta_i$ such that $\sum_{i = 1} ^ K \beta_i = -\alpha_0$. Now writing $\alpha_0=-\sum_{j = 1} ^ N m_j\alpha_j$ we have $$\label{eq:involbj}
b_{\alpha_0} R_{\alpha_{\pi (0)} =\Theta (R_{\alpha_0}}) = C\prod_{j=1}^N b_{-\alpha_j}^{m_j}[R_{-\pi(\beta_1)}, [R_{-\pi(\beta_2)}, \ldots, [R_{ \pi(\beta_{K-1})}, R_{-\pi(\beta_K)}]\ldots]]$$ and $\Theta^2(R_{\alpha_0}) =\prod_{j=1}^N (b_{-\alpha_j}b_{-\alpha_{\pi (j)}})^{m_j} R_{\alpha_0}$, implying $$b_{\alpha_0} b_{\alpha_{\pi (0)}} = \prod_{j=1}^N (b_{-\alpha_j}b_{-\alpha_{\pi (j)}})^{m_j}.$$ Using that $\{\pi (H_{\alpha}),\Theta (R_{\alpha})\mid\alpha\in\Delta\} $ is again a Chevalley basis and that an automorphism of the extended Dynkin diagram must preserve the Killing form gives $$b_{\alpha_j}b_{-\alpha_j} =\frac {\kappa (\pi (\alpha_j)) , \pi (\alpha_j)) )} {\kappa (\alpha_j ,\alpha_j )}= 1.$$ Hence $$b_{\alpha_0}b_{\alpha_{\pi (0)}} =\prod_{j = 1} ^ N (b_{\alpha_j}b_{\alpha_{\pi (j)}}) ^ {- m_j} = (b_{\alpha_{\pi (0)}} b_{\alpha_0}) ^ {- 1},$$ where the last equality uses the assumption $ b_{\alpha_j}b_{\alpha_{\pi (j)}} = 1 $ for $\pi (j)\neq 0 $. We therefore automatically have $ b_{\alpha_0}b_{\alpha_{\pi (0)}} =\pm 1 $. Considering shows that if there exists $ j $ such that $\pi (j) = j $ and $ m_j $ is odd then by switching the sign of $ b_{\alpha_j} $ if necessary we may ensure that $ b_{\alpha_0}b_{\alpha_{\pi (0)}} = 1 $.
It remains to give a method of proof for when there is no $\alpha_j$ with $m_j$ odd that is fixed by $\pi $. If $\pi (0) = 0 $ then there is nothing to prove so we assume henceforth that $\pi (0)\neq 0 $. Suppose $\gamma$ is a positive root such that
(a) the expression $\gamma =\sum_{j = 1} ^ N n_j\alpha_j $ as a sum of simple roots has $ n_{ \pi(0)} = 0 $,
(b) $\pi(\gamma) + \alpha_{\pi(0)}$ is also a root, and
(c) $\gamma + \alpha_0 =- \pi(\gamma) - {\alpha_{\pi (0)}} $.
From (c) we have that $$[[R_\gamma,R_{\alpha_0}],[R_{\pi(\gamma)}, R_{\pi(0)}]] = c _{\gamma,\alpha_0}c_{\pi (\gamma),\pi (\alpha_0)} H_{\gamma + \alpha_0}.$$ Applying $\Theta$ gives $$[[b_\gamma R_{\pi(\gamma)},b_{\alpha_0}R_{\pi(0)}],[b_{\pi(\gamma)}R_\gamma, b_{\alpha_{\pi (0)}}R_{\alpha_0}]] = - c _{\gamma,\alpha_0}c_{\pi (\gamma),\pi (\alpha_0)} H_{\gamma + \alpha_0}$$ and so $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:bgamma}
b_\gamma b_{\pi(\gamma)}b_{\alpha_0}b_{\alpha_{\pi (0)}} = 1.\end{aligned}$$ We may write $R_\gamma$ as $C'[R_{\beta'_1},[R_{\beta'_2} \ldots [R_{\beta'_{K'-1}}, R_{\beta'_{K'}}]]\ldots ]$ with $C'$ a non-zero constant and $\beta'_i\neq\alpha_{\pi(0)}$ simple roots satisfying $\sum_{i = 1} ^ {K'}\beta'_i =\gamma$. Then $$b_\gamma b_{\pi (\gamma)} R_\gamma =\Theta^2(R_\gamma) =\left (\prod_{i = 1} ^ {K'} b_{\beta'_i}b_{\beta'_{\pi(i)}}\right) R_\gamma.$$ However for simple roots $\alpha_j $ with $\pi (j)\neq 0 $ we chose $b_{\alpha_j}$ so that $ b_{\alpha_j} b_{\alpha_{\pi (j)}} = 1 $ and hence $b_\gamma b_{\pi(\gamma)}=1$. Substituting this into gives that $b_{\alpha_0}b_{\alpha_{\pi (0)}} = 1$, as required.
A similar argument applies if there are positive roots $\gamma, \delta$ such that
(i) the expressions of $\gamma,\delta $ as sums of simple roots do not contain $\alpha_{\pi(0)}$,
(ii) $\pi(\gamma) + \alpha_{\pi(0)}$ and $\delta + \pi(\delta)$ are also roots, and
(iii) $\delta +\pi(\delta) + \gamma + \pi(\gamma) = - \alpha_0 - \alpha_{\pi(0)} $.
Here we know there is some non-zero constant $C'' $ such that $$[[R_\gamma,R_{\alpha_0}],[R_{\pi(\gamma)}, R_{\pi(0)}]] = C'' [R_{-\delta}, R_{-\pi(\delta)}]$$ and as above applying $\Theta$ gives $$b_\gamma b_{\pi(\gamma)}b_{\alpha_0}b_{\alpha_{\pi (0)}} = b_{-\delta} b_{-\pi(\delta)}.$$ By (i) we know $b_\gamma b_{\pi(\gamma)} = 1$ and $b_{-\delta} b_{-\pi(\delta)}=1$ so conclude that $b_{\alpha_{\pi (0)}}b_{\alpha_0}=1$.
To show that every involution of the extended Dynkin diagram extends to an involution of the Lie algebra we now consider the involutions of each of the diagrams and, for those that do not fix some $\alpha_j$ with odd $m_j$, identify a suitable root $\gamma$ or pair of roots $\gamma, \delta$.
\[figure:extended\]
(0,0) node [$E_8$]{}; (1,0) circle (3pt); (2,0) circle (3pt); (3,0) circle (3pt); (4,0) circle (3pt); (5,0) circle (3pt); (6,0) circle (3pt); (7,0) circle (3pt); (8,0) circle (3pt); (6,1) circle (3pt); (1.10,0)–(1.90,0); (2.10,0)–(2.90,0); (3.10,0)–(3.90,0); (4.10,0)–(4.90,0); (5.10,0)–(5.90,0); (6.10,0)–(6.90,0); (7.10,0)–(7.90,0); (6,0.10)–(6,0.90); (1,-0.6) node ; (2,-0.6) node ; (3,-0.6) node ; (4,-0.6) node ; (5,-0.6) node ; (6,-0.6) node ; (7,-0.6) node ; (8,-0.6) node ; (5.5,1) node ;
(0,2) node [$D_N$]{}; (1,2) circle (3pt); (2,2) circle (3pt); (4,2) circle (3pt); (5,2) circle (3pt); (2,3) circle (3pt); (4,3) circle (3pt); (1.10,2)–(1.90,2); (2.10,2)–(2.60,2); (3.40,2)–(3.90,2); (4.10,2)–(4.90,2); (3,2) node[$\ldots$]{}; (2,2.10)–(2,2.90); (4,2.10)–(4,2.90); (1,1.6) node ; (2,1.6) node ; (1.5,3) node ; (4,1.6) node ; (3.3,3) node ; (5,1.6) node ;
(0,4) node [$C_N$]{}; (1,4) circle (3pt); (2,4) circle (3pt); (3,4) circle (3pt); (5,4) circle (3pt); (6,4) circle (3pt); (1.10,4)–(1.90,4); (1.80,3.90)–(1.90,4); (1.80,4.10)–(1.90,4); (2.10,4)–(2.90,4); (3.10,4)–(3.60,4); (4.40,4)–(4.90,4); (4,4) node [$\ldots$]{}; (5.10,4)–(5.90,4); (5.20,4.10)–(5.10,4); (5.20,3.90)–(5.10,4); (1,3.6) node ; (2,3.6) node ; (3,3.6) node ; (5,3.6) node ; (6,3.6) node ;
(0,6) node [$B_N$]{}; (1,6) circle (3pt); (2,6) circle (3pt); (4,6) circle (3pt); (5,6) circle (3pt); (2,7) circle (3pt); (1.10,6)–(1.90,6); (2.10,6)–(2.60,6); (3.40,6)–(3.9,6); (4.1,6)–(4.9,6); (4.8,6.1)–(4.9,6); (4.8,5.9)–(4.9,6); (2,6.10)–(2,6.9); (3,6)node [$\ldots$]{}; (1,5.6) node ; (2,5.6) node ; (4,5.6) node ; (5,5.6) node ; (1.5,7) node ;
(2.658,8.060)arc(-110:-359:1cm); (4,9)arc(0:-70:1cm); (3,8)node[$\ldots$]{}; (0,9)node[$A_N$]{}; (1.8,9.8)node; (4.3,9.8)node; (4.8,9)node; (1.6,9)node; (3,10.4)node; (3,10)circle(3pt); (3.707,9.707)circle(3pt); (4,9)circle(3pt); (2.293,9.707)circle(3pt); (2,9)circle(3pt);
(3.707,9.707)circle(3pt); (4,9)circle(3pt); (2.293,9.707)circle(3pt); (2,9)circle(3pt);
(9,8) node [$E_7$]{}; (10,8) circle (3pt); (11,8) circle (3pt); (12,8) circle (3pt); (13,8) circle (3pt); (14,8) circle (3pt); (15,8) circle (3pt); (16,8) circle (3pt); (10.1,8)–(10.9,8); (11.1,8)–(11.9,8); (12.1,8)–(12.9,8); (13.1,8)–(13.9,8); (14.1,8)–(14.9,8); (15.1,8)–(15.9,8); (13,8.1)–(13,8.9); (13,9) circle (3pt); (10,7.6) node ; (11,7.6) node ; (12,7.6) node ; (13,7.6) node ; (14,7.6) node ; (15,7.6) node ; (16,7.6) node ; (12.5,9) node ;
(9,5) node [$E_6$]{}; (10,5) circle (3pt); (11,5) circle (3pt); (12,5) circle (3pt); (13,5) circle (3pt); (14,5) circle (3pt); (12,6) circle (3pt); (12,7) circle (3pt); (10.1,5)–(10.9,5); (11.1,5)–(11.9,5); (12.1,5)–(12.9,5); (13.1,5)–(13.9,5); (12,5.1)–(12,5.9); (12,6.1)–(12,6.9); (10,4.6) node ; (11,4.6) node ; (12,4.6) node ; (13,4.6) node ; (14,4.6) node ; (11.5,6) node ; (11.5,7) node ;
(9,3) node [$F_4$]{}; (10,3) circle (3pt); (11,3) circle (3pt); (12,3) circle (3pt); (13,3) circle (3pt); (14,3) circle (3pt); (10.1,3)–(10.9,3); (11.1,3)–(11.9,3); (12.1,3)–(12.9,3); (12.8,2.9)–(12.9,3); (12.8,3.1)–(12.9,3); (13.1,3)–(13.9,3); (10,2.6) node ; (11,2.6) node ; (12,2.6) node ; (13,2.6) node ; (14,2.6) node ;
(9,1) node [$G_2$]{}; (10,1) circle (3pt); (11,1) circle (3pt); (12,1) circle (3pt); (10.1,1)–(10.9,1); (11.1,1)–(11.9,1); (11.1,1.06)–(11.85,1.06); (11.1,0.94)–(11.85,0.94); (11.8,0.9)–(11.9,1); (11.8,1.1)–(11.9,1); (10,0.6) node ; (11,0.6) node ; (12,0.6) node ;
For a root system of type $ A_N $, the simple root coefficients $ m_j = 1 $ for all $ j = 1, \ldots , N $. Thus any diagram involution fixing some node is induced by an involution of the Lie algebra. By inspection of the extended Dynkin diagram shown in Figure \[figure:extended\], we see that when $ N $ is even, every involution of the extended Dynkin diagram fixes some $\alpha_j $. When $ N $ is odd we need to consider the rotation $\pi (j) = j + \frac {1} {2} (N + 1)\bmod(N +1) $ and reflections.
For the involution $\pi (j) = j + \frac {1} {2} (N + 1)\bmod(N +1) $, the root $\gamma=\alpha_1 + \alpha_2 +\ldots + \alpha_{\frac12(N-1)}$ satisfies conditions (a), (b), (c) above.
Consider now an involution $\pi $ coming from a reflection. Since we have automatically covered the cases when there is a fixed root we can assume that there are an even number of roots between $\alpha_0$ and $\pi(\alpha_0)$ going in each direction around the circle. Indeed the axis of reflection is between the nodes $(\pi(0)-1)/2$ and $(\pi(0)+1)/2$ and between $(N+\pi(0))/2$ and $(N+\pi(0))/2 + 1$. The roots $$\gamma = \alpha_1 + \alpha_2 + \ldots + \alpha_{(\pi(0)-1)/2}\quad \text{and} \quad \delta = \alpha_{\pi(0)+1} + \alpha_{\pi(0)+ 2} \ldots +\alpha_{(\pi(0)+N)/2}$$ satisfy conditions (i), (ii), (iii) above.
There is only one involution of the root system of type $B_N$, which sends $\alpha_0$ to $\alpha_1$ and fixes everything else. We can choose $\gamma = \alpha_2 + \ldots + \alpha_N$.
For root systems of type $C_N$ there is again only one involution; $\pi(\alpha_i) = \alpha_{N-i}$. Here choose $\gamma= \alpha_1+\ldots +\alpha_{N-1}$.
For $ D_N $, $ m_1 = m_{N -1} = m_N = 1 $, and so we need only consider involutions which do not fix any of these vertices, of which there are three. These are involutions with $\pi(0) = 1, N-1$ or $N$. If $\pi(0)=1$ then let $\gamma = \alpha_2 + \ldots +\alpha_{N-1}$, and if $\pi(0)=N-1$ or $N$, take $\gamma =\alpha_1+\alpha_2 + \ldots + \alpha_{N-2 }$.
For the root system $ E_6 $, all involutions of the diagram fix the vertex $\alpha_4 $ and $ m_4 = 3 $ is odd.
The unique involution of the extended Dynkin diagram for $ E_7 $ satisfies $\pi (\alpha_0) =\alpha_7 $. A list of all positive roots of $ E_7 $ are tabulated for example in . Let $\gamma=\alpha_1 + \alpha_2 + 2\alpha_3 + 2\alpha_4 + \alpha_5 + \alpha_6$, so $\pi(\gamma)=\alpha_1 + \alpha_2 + \alpha_3 + 2\alpha_4 + 2\alpha_5 +\alpha_6$ and $\pi(\gamma)+\alpha_{\pi(0)}=\alpha_1 + \alpha_2 + \alpha_3 + 2\alpha_4 + 2\alpha_5 +\alpha_6+\alpha_7$ is also a root. Furthermore $\gamma + \alpha_{\pi(0)} + \pi(\gamma) = 2\alpha_1 +2\alpha_2+ 3\alpha_3 + 4\alpha_4 + 3\alpha_5 +2\alpha_6 +\alpha_7$ which is the highest root.
The extended Dynkin diagrams of type $ E_8, F_4, G_2 $ do not possess any involutions. We have then shown that given any involution $\pi $ of an extended Dynkin diagram for $ ({\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}},{\mathfrak{t}}^{\mathbb{ C}})$, there exists an involution $\Theta $ of ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ preserving ${\mathfrak{t}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ and inducing $\pi $. It remains to show that there is a real form ${\mathfrak{g}}$ of ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ for which $\Theta $ is a Cartan involution and such that ${\mathfrak{g}}\cap{\mathfrak{t}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ has full rank. For any choice of simple roots we may consider the corresponding [*Borel subalgebra*]{} $\mathfrak b ^{\mathbb{ C}}= \mathfrak t ^{\mathbb{ C}}\oplus \bigoplus_{\alpha\in\Delta^ +} \mathcal G ^\alpha $ and it is easy to see that $\Theta $ preserves the set of simple roots if and only if it preserves the corresponding Cartan and Borel subalgebras. Now by there exists an automorphism $\Psi $ of ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ such that $\Psi\Theta\Psi^ {- 1} $ acts on the corresponding simple and lowest root vectors $R_{\alpha_j} $ in the Chevalley basis simply by scaling them by $\pm 1 $, and hence preserves the Cartan and Borel subalgebras ${\mathfrak{t}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ and $\mathfrak b ^{\mathbb{ C}}$. Then $\Theta $ preserves the Cartan subalgebra $\Psi^ {- 1} ({\mathfrak{t}}^{\mathbb{ C}}) $ and the Borel subalgebra $\Psi^ {- 1} (\mathfrak b ^{\mathbb{ C}}) $ and hence the set of simple roots $\Psi^ {- 1}\{\alpha_1, \ldots ,\alpha_N\} $. Then there exists a real form ${\mathfrak{g}}' $ of ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ with respect to which $\Theta $ is a Cartan involution and such that ${\mathfrak{g}}'\Psi^{-1}({\mathfrak{t}}^{\mathbb{ C}}) $ is a Cartan subalgebra of ${\mathfrak{g}}' $ [@Knapp:02 proof of Theorem 6.88].
Let $\mathfrak{l} ^{\mathbb{ C}}$ denote the $ (+1)$-eigenspace of $\Theta $ and $ L ^{\mathbb{ C}}$ a complex Lie group with Lie algebra $\mathfrak{l} ^{\mathbb{ C}}$. In (c.f. ) it was shown that for a given real form ${\mathfrak{g}}' $ and $\Theta $-stable Cartan subalgebra ${\mathfrak{t}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ of a simple complex Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$, there exists a $\Theta $-stable Cartan subalgebra ${\mathfrak{t}}' $ of ${\mathfrak{g}}' $ and $ l\in L ^{\mathbb{ C}}$ such that ${\mathfrak{t}}^{\mathbb{ C}}={\operatorname{Ad}}_l ({\mathfrak{t}}') ^{\mathbb{ C}}$. Hence ${\mathfrak{g}}={\operatorname{Ad}}_l{\mathfrak{g}}' $ is a real form of ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ for which ${\mathfrak{t}}={\mathfrak{g}}\cap{\mathfrak{t}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ is a $\Theta $-stable real form of ${\mathfrak{t}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ and $\Theta $ is a Cartan involution of ${\mathfrak{g}}$.
By Proposition \[prop:Coxeter\] the Coxeter automorphism corresponding to the choice of simple roots $\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_N $ preserves the real form ${\mathfrak{g}}$ and in particular the Cartan subalgebra $\mathfrak t $.
Toda frame {#Toda}
==========
We now explore the relationship between cyclic primitive maps and the affine Toda field equations. Henceforth $ G $ shall denote a simple real Lie group, $ T $ a Cartan subgroup and $\alpha_1, \ldots ,\alpha_N $ simple roots such that the resulting Coxeter automorphism $\sigma $ preserves the real group $ G $. This Coxeter automorphism then gives $ G/T $ the structure of a $ k $-symmetric space, where $ k -1 $ is the maximum height of a root of ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$. We shall consider cyclic primitive maps $\psi $ from the complex plane into $ G/T $ and will see that cyclic primitive maps $\psi:{\mathbb{ C}}\rightarrow G/T $ arise from and give rise to solutions of the two-dimensional affine Toda field equations for ${\mathfrak{g}}$. Our results also apply to maps from a simply-connected coordinate neighbourhood of any Riemann surface.
The famous Toda equations arose originally as a model for particle interactions within a one-dimensional crystal, with the affine model corresponding to the particles being arranged in a circle. They have been the subject of extensive study, both as a completely integrable Hamiltonian system and in the context of Toda field theories. The standard form of the affine Toda field equation for ${\mathfrak{g}}$ on the complex plane is $$\label{eq:Toda}
2\Omega_{z{{\bar{z}}}} = \sum_{j = 0}^ N m_j e^{2 \alpha_j (\Omega)}\alpha_j ^\sharp$$ Here $\Omega : {\mathbb{ C}}\rightarrow i \mathfrak{t}$ is a smooth map, the lowest root $\alpha_0 $ is given by $$\alpha_0 = -
\sum_{j = 1}^N m_j \alpha_j,$$ we set $m_0 = 1$ and $ R_{\alpha_j} $ are root vectors such that $ \alpha_j ^\sharp $ is the dual of $\alpha_j $ with respect to the Killing form. Using , since the Coxeter automorphism preserves the real form ${\mathfrak{g}}$ there exists a permutation $ \pi $ of the roots $\alpha_0,\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_N $ such that $$\label {eq:permutation}
\overline { \alpha_j} = -\alpha_{\pi (j)}.$$ We shall consider the generalisation of the affine Toda field equations obtained by allowing $m_0$, $m_1, \ldots, m_N $ to be any positive real numbers such that $ m_{\pi (j)} =\overline {m_j} $ and $ R_{\alpha_j} $ to be any root vectors satisfying $\overline {R_{\alpha_j}} = R_{-\alpha_{\pi (j)}} $.
Given a cyclic element $W = \sum_{j = 0}^N r_j R_{\alpha_j}$ of $\mathfrak{g}^{\sigma}_1$, we say that a lift $F : {\mathbb{ C}}\to G$ of $\psi : {\mathbb{ C}}\rightarrow G / T$ is a *Toda frame* with respect to $W$ if there exists a smooth map $\Omega : {\mathbb{ C}}\rightarrow i
\mathfrak{t}$ such that $$\label{eq:Todaframe} F^{- 1} F_z = \Omega_z + {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega} W.$$
We call $\Omega$ an *affine Toda field* with respect to $W$. The motivation for this nomenclature is
Fix a cyclic element $W = \sum_{j = 0}^N r_j R_{\alpha_j}$ of $\mathfrak{g}^{\sigma}_1$ such that $ m_{\pi (j)} =\overline {m_j} $ and $\overline {R_{\alpha_j}} = R_{-\alpha_{\pi (j)}} $.
The affine Toda field equation is the integrability condition for the existence of a Toda frame with respect to $ W $ where we take $m_j = r_j \overline{r_j}$ for $j
= 0, \ldots, N$.
Using $[R_{\alpha_j}, R_{- \alpha_l}] = 0$ whenever $j \neq l$, we can rewrite the Toda field equation as $$\begin{aligned}
2{\Omega}_{z\bar{z}} &
=\sum_{j,l=0}^ Nr_j\overline{r_l}e^{{\alpha}_j({\Omega})}e^{{\alpha}_j({\Omega})}[R_{{\alpha}_j},R_{-{\alpha}_l}]\\
& =[\sum_{j=0}^ N r_je^{{\alpha}_j({\Omega})}R_{{\alpha}_j},
\sum_{l=0}^ N\overline{r_l}e^{{\alpha}_l({\Omega})}R_{-{\alpha}_l}].
\end{aligned}$$
From equation we know $e^{\alpha_j (\Omega)} R_{\alpha_j} = {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp
\Omega} R_{\alpha_j}$ and also $$e^{\alpha_l (\Omega)} R_{- \alpha_l} = e^{-
\alpha_l (- \Omega)} R_{- \alpha_l} = {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp - \Omega} R_{- \alpha_l} .$$ If we set $W : = \sum_{j = 0}^ N r_j R_{\alpha_j}$ with the normalisation is described in the lemma then since $\sum_{j = 0} ^ NR_jR_{\alpha_j} =\sum_{j = 0} ^ NR_j\overline {R_{-\alpha_{j}}} $, the Toda field equation becomes $$2 \Omega_{z \bar{z}} = [ {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega} W, {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp - \Omega}
\overline{W}].$$ Now for any given $\Omega : {\mathbb{ C}}\to i\mathfrak {t} $ the integrability condition for the existence of a Toda frame with respect to $ W $ is the Maurer-Cartan equation for $$\varphi = (\Omega_z +
{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega} W) dz + (\Omega_{\bar z} +
{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp -\Omega} W) d\bar z.$$ Namely, this integrability condition is $$\begin{aligned}
0 & =(-{\Omega}_{\bar{z}}+{{\operatorname{Ad}}}_{\exp
-(\Omega)}{\overline{W}})_z-({\Omega}_z+{{\operatorname{Ad}}}_{\exp
{\Omega}}W)_{\bar{z}}\\
&\qquad +[{\Omega}_z+{{\operatorname{Ad}}}_{\exp
{\Omega}}W,-{\Omega}_{\bar{z}}+{{\operatorname{Ad}}}_{\exp -(\Omega)}{\overline{W}}]\\
& =-2{\Omega}_{z\bar{z}}+[{{\operatorname{Ad}}}_{\exp {\Omega}}W,{{\operatorname{Ad}}}_{\exp
-{\Omega}}{\overline{W}}],
\end{aligned}$$ which is precisely the Toda field equation.
Recall that we write $
\alpha_0 = - \sum_{j = 1}^ N m_j \alpha_j$ for the expression of the lowest root $\alpha_0 $ in terms of the chosen simple roots $\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_N $. Given $\tilde{F} : {\mathbb{ C}}\to G $ with $$\label {eq:rootcoefficients}
\tilde F{^{-1}}\tilde F_z|_{{\mathfrak{g}}_1 ^\sigma} = \sum_{j=0}^ N c_j R_{\alpha_j},$$ we say that a cyclic element $$\label {eq:W}
W=\sum_{j=0}^N r_j R_{\alpha_j}$$ $\mathfrak{g} ^\sigma_1 $ is *normalised with respect to* $\tilde{F} : {\mathbb{ C}}\to G $ if $$r_0 \prod_{j = 1}^ N r_j^{m_j} = c_0 \prod_{j = 1}^ N c_j^{m_j}.$$
\[theorem:Toda\] A map $\psi:{\mathbb{ C}}\rightarrow G/T $ possesses a Toda frame if and only if it is cyclic primitive Let $\psi : {\mathbb{ C}}\to G / T$ be a cyclic primitive map possessing a frame $\tilde{F} : {\mathbb{ C}}\to G$ such that $c_0 \prod_{j =
1}^ N c_j^{m_j}$ is constant, where $ c_j $ are the root coefficients defined in . Then for any cyclic element $W $ of ${\mathfrak{g}}^\sigma_1 $ which is normalised with respect to $\tilde F $ there exists a Toda frame $F : {\mathbb{ C}}\to G$ of $\psi$ with respect to $W$. Furthermore if $\psi$ and $\tilde F$ are doubly periodic with lattice $\Lambda$ then so is the Toda frame $ F $.
Conversely, if $\psi:{\mathbb{ C}}\to G/T$ has a Toda frame $ F $ with respect to cyclic $ W\in{\mathfrak{g}}_1 ^\sigma $ then $\psi$ is cyclic primitive and $ W $ is normalised with respect to $ F $. In particular then the root coefficients $c_j$ are such that $c_0 \prod_{j =
1}^ N c_j^{m_j} $ is constant.
Consider the frames $F : = \tilde{F} \exp X$ of $\psi$ where $X : {\mathbb{ C}}\to
{\mathfrak}{t}$. For such $F$ we have $F^{- 1} F_z = {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp - X} \tilde{F} {^{-1}}\tilde{F}_z + X_z$ and so $$F^{- 1} F_z |_{{\mathfrak{g}}_1 ^\sigma} = {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp - X} \tilde{F} {^{-1}}\tilde{F}_z |_{{\mathfrak{g}}_1 ^\sigma} .$$ This implies the Toda condition of ${\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega} W = F^{- 1} F_z
|_{{\mathfrak{g}}_1 ^\sigma}$ is equivalent to $$\begin{aligned}
{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp(X+{\Omega})}W=\tilde{F}^{-1}\tilde{F}_z|_{{\mathfrak{g}}_1 ^\sigma}=\sum_{j=0}^ Nc_jR_{{\alpha}_j}.\end{aligned}$$ Using equation we can rewrite this as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Omega+X}
\sum_{j=0}^ Nr_je^{{\alpha}_j(X+{\Omega})}R_{{\alpha}_j}=\sum_{j=0}^ Nc_jR_{\alpha_j}.\end{aligned}$$
Comparing root space coefficients implies that $$\label {eq:Xplus}
e^{\alpha_j (X + \Omega)} =
\frac{c_j}{r_j}\text { for $j = 1, \ldots k$}$$ and $r_0 \prod _{j = 1}^ N (e^{\alpha_j
(X + \Omega)})^{- m_j} = c_0$. Since $ W $ is normalised with respect to $\tilde F $ and ${\mathbb{ C}}$ is simply connected, we can solve for $X + \Omega$. We can then find $\Omega$ and $X$ from $X + \Omega$ by taking its ${\mathfrak}{t}$ and $i{\mathfrak}{t}$ components respectively.
It remains to show that $\Omega_z dz = F {^{-1}}\partial F |_{{\mathfrak}{t}} = \varphi'_{{\mathfrak}{t}}$. From the ${\mathfrak{g}}_1 ^\sigma$ component of the Maurer-Cartan equation for $\varphi $ we have $$\partial ( {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega} W) - [ {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega} W,
\varphi'_{{\mathfrak}{t}}] = 0$$ or equivalently $$[ {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega} W, \varphi'_{{\mathfrak}{t}} - \partial \Omega] = 0.$$ Since $W$ is cyclic so is ${\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega} W$ and thus $\varphi'_{{\mathfrak}{t}} =
\partial \Omega$.
Conversely, given $W$ and a solution $\Omega$ to the corresponding affine Toda field equation, the resulting Toda frame $F$ is primitive. Furthermore the equation $$r_0 (e^{- \sum_{j = 1 } ^ N m_j \alpha_j (X + \Omega)} R_{\alpha_0} + \sum_{j = 1}^ N r_j e^{\alpha_j
(X + \Omega)} R_{\alpha_j} = \sum_{j = 0}^ N c_j R_{\alpha_j}$$ implies that $r_0 \prod_{j = 1}^ N r_j^{m_j} = c_0 \prod_{j = 1}^ N c_j^{m_j}$ and hence $c_0 \prod_{j = 1}^ N c_j^{m_j}$ is a non-zero constant. This implies that the $c_j$ are nowhere zero and $\psi$ is cyclic primitive.
Now suppose $\tilde{F}$ is doubly periodic with respect to a lattice $\Lambda $. Then for $j=1,\ldots N$, from we see that $e^{\alpha_j(X+\Omega)}$ is doubly periodic with respect to $\Lambda$ and so $$\exp(X + \Omega) = \exp(\sum_{j=1}^ N \alpha_j(X+\Omega)\eta_j)$$ is also. Given any $\Gamma \in \Lambda$ it follows that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:conj1}
\exp(X(z+\Gamma) -X(z)) = \exp(\Omega(z)-\Omega(z+\Gamma)).\end{aligned}$$ Using the conjugation map ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}\to {\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ which fixes ${\mathfrak{g}}$, we obtain from that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:conj2}
\exp(X(z+\Gamma) -X(z)) = \exp(-\Omega(z)+\Omega(z+\Gamma).\end{aligned}$$ When combined, and imply that $\exp(X(z+\Gamma))=\exp(z))$ for all $z$ and hence $\exp X$ is doubly periodic with lattice $\Lambda$.
Since $\tilde F$ and $\exp X$ are both doubly periodic with lattice $\Lambda$ we know $F =\tilde F \exp X$ is also.
Our chief interest lies in cyclic primitive $\psi $ which are doubly periodic, as it is these we shall show are of finite type. We henceforth restrict our attention to doubly-periodic maps and denote by $ {{\mathbb{ C}}/\Lambda}$ any genus one Riemann surface. Let $W$ be a cyclic element of ${\mathfrak{g}}_1 ^\sigma $ as before. We say that a frame $F : {{\mathbb{ C}}/\Lambda}\to G$ of $\psi : {{\mathbb{ C}}/\Lambda}\rightarrow G / T$ is a Toda frame with respect to $W$ if $F$ is a Toda frame of $\psi$ when both are considered as maps from ${\mathbb{ C}}$. From the proof of Theorem \[theorem:Toda\] we make the following observation, which will prove useful in the next section.
\[lemma:periodic\] If $F:{{\mathbb{ C}}/\Lambda}\to G$ is a Toda frame of $\psi: {{\mathbb{ C}}/\Lambda}\to G/T$ then the corresponding affine Toda field $\Omega : {\mathbb{ C}}\rightarrow i\mathfrak{t}$ has the property that $\exp \Omega$ and $\Omega_z$ are doubly periodic with lattice $\Lambda$.
Finite type result {#finite}
==================
We will now show that all smooth maps $ \psi $ from a 2-torus ${{\mathbb{ C}}/\Lambda}$ into the $ k $-symmetric space $G/T$ which have a Toda frame are of finite type. Hence all such maps can be constructed from a pair of commuting ordinary differential equations on a finite-dimensional loop algebra. In [@BFPP:93] it was shown that all semisimple adapted harmonic maps of a 2-torus into a compact semisimple Lie group are of finite type. We prove our finite type result by adapting the methods of that paper. Note that the existence of a Toda frame forces $\psi $ to be cyclic primitive.
A map $Y : {{\mathbb{ C}}/\Lambda}\to {\mathfrak}{g}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ is called a *Jacobi field* if there exists $\dot\Omega: {{\mathbb{ C}}/\Lambda}\to {\mathfrak}{t}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Jacobi}
dY + [F{^{-1}}dF, Y] =
\left(\dot{\Omega}_z + [\dot\Omega, F{^{-1}}F_z ]\right)dz
+\left(-\dot\Omega_{{{\bar{z}}}} - [\dot\Omega,F{^{-1}}F_{{{\bar{z}}}}]\right)d{{\bar{z}}}.\end{aligned}$$ If $F_t$ is a family of Toda frames with corresponding $\Omega_t:{\mathbb{ C}}\to i{\mathfrak}{t}$ then $\frac{d}{dt} F_t |_{t=0}$ is a Jacobi field with $\dot{\Omega} = \frac{d}{dt}\Omega_t|_{t=0}$. Note that if $\dot{\Omega}=0$ the Jacobi equation is the Killing field equation.
Let $F$ be a Toda frame for $\psi:{\mathbb{ C}}\rightarrow G/T $. We have $$\begin{aligned}
F{^{-1}}dF =
(\Omega_z +{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega} W )dz + (-\Omega_{{{\bar{z}}}} + {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp -\Omega}\overline{W})d{{\bar{z}}}\end{aligned}$$ for some $\Omega: T ^ 2\to i{\mathfrak}{t}$ and cyclic $ W\in{\mathfrak{g}}_1 ^\sigma $. Let $Y$ be a Jacobi field with corresponding $\dot{\Omega}: T ^ 2\to i{\mathfrak}{t}$. Then $ Y $ must satisfy $$\begin{aligned}
Y_z + [\Omega_z +{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega} W, Y]&= \dot{\Omega}_z + [\dot{\Omega},{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega} W]\label {eq:Jacobi1}\\
Y_{{{\bar{z}}}} + [-\Omega_{{{\bar{z}}}} + {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp -\Omega}\overline{W}, Y]&= -\dot{\Omega}_{{{\bar{z}}}} - [\dot{\Omega},{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp -\Omega}\overline{W}].\label {eq:Jacobi2}\end{aligned}$$ Taking $_{{{\bar{z}}}} - $ $_z$ we obtain $$2\dot{\Omega}_{z\bar{z}}=-\bigl[{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega} W,[\dot{\Omega},{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp -\Omega}\overline{W}]\bigr] -\bigl[{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp -\Omega}\overline{W},[\dot{\Omega},{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega} W]\bigr].$$
Since $\Omega$ and $W$ are fixed, we see that $\dot{\Omega}$ satisfies a linear elliptic partial differential equation. As the torus is compact, the space of possible $\dot{\Omega}$ is finite dimensional.
\[lem:Jacobi\] Suppose $\psi: {{\mathbb{ C}}/\Lambda}\rightarrow G/T$ is a cyclic primitive map possessing a formal Killing field $Y=\sum_{j\leq 1} \lambda^j Y_j\in \Omega^{\sigma}{\mathfrak}{g} ^{\mathbb{ C}}$. Then $\psi$ has a (real) polynomial Killing field with highest term $Y_1$.
We will find an infinite number of linearly independent Jacobi fields for which some linear combination must be a formal Killing field. Since $Y$ is a formal Killing field, we have . $$\sum_{j\leq 1} \lambda^j dY_j
= \left[\sum_{j\leq 1} \lambda^j Y_j,\varphi_\lambda \right].$$ Comparing coefficients of $\lambda^j$ gives the equations $$\begin{aligned}
(Y_{j})_zdz + [\varphi'_{{\mathfrak}{t}} , Y_j] + [\varphi'_{{\mathfrak}{p}}, Y_{j-1}] &= 0, \\
(Y_{j})_{{{\bar{z}}}}d\bar{z} + [\varphi''_{{\mathfrak}{t}}, Y_j] + [\varphi''_{{\mathfrak}{p}}, Y_{j+1}] &= 0.\end{aligned}$$ For each $l\in {\mathbb{ Z}}^+$ set $$Y^{l} := \frac12 Y_{-kl} + \sum_{-kl <j \leq 1} \lambda^{j+kl} Y_j.$$ We will show that the $Y^l$ are all Jacobi fields. Considering the coefficients separately gives $$\begin{aligned}
(Y^l)_zdz + [ \lambda \varphi'_{{\mathfrak}{p}} + \varphi'_{{\mathfrak}{t}} , Y^l]
&= \frac12 (Y_{-kl})_{z}dz + \left[\frac12 Y_{-kl}, \lambda \varphi'_{{\mathfrak}{p}}\right]\\
(Y^l)_{{\bar{z}}}d\bar{z}+ \left[\varphi''_{{\mathfrak}{t}} + \lambda^{-1} \varphi''_{{\mathfrak}{p}}, Y^l\right]
&= -\frac12 (Y_{-kl})_{{{\bar{z}}}}d\bar{z} - \left[\frac12 Y_{-kl}, \lambda^{-1} \varphi''_{{\mathfrak}{p}}\right].\end{aligned}$$ Since $Y_{-kl} \in {\mathfrak}{g}_0 = {\mathfrak}{t}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ we can set $\dot\Omega^l := \frac12 Y_{-kl}$. With this choice of $\dot{\Omega}$, $Y$ is a solution to and hence is a Jacobi field. The space of potential $\dot\Omega$ is finite dimensional, so there must be a non-trivial finite linear combination of the $\dot\Omega^l$ which equals $0$. The corresponding finite linear combination of the $Y^l$ is a formal Killing field. Since the highest order terms of the $Y^{l}$ are each $Y_1$ we can rescale this formal Killing field to one with highest order term $Y_1$. After multiplying by an appropriate power of $\lambda^k$ we may also assume that the degree of the lowest term has smaller absolute value than the degree of the highest term. Then $ \overline{\xi} +\xi $ is a polynomial Killing field for $\xi$ and by construction has highest order term $ Y_1 $.
\[thm:finite\] Suppose $\psi: {{\mathbb{ C}}/\Lambda}\rightarrow G/T$ has a Toda frame $ F:{{\mathbb{ C}}/\Lambda}\to G$. Then $\psi $ is of finite type.
Let $F:{{\mathbb{ C}}/\Lambda}\to G$ be the Toda frame of $\psi$ with corresponding $\Omega: {{\mathbb{ C}}/\Lambda}\to i{\mathfrak}{t}$ and $ W\in{\mathfrak{g}}_1 ^\sigma $. Recall that $\psi$ is of finite type if it has an adapted polynomial Killing field $\xi$, that is a $\xi= \sum_{j=-d}^d \lambda^j \xi_j $ in the real twisted loop algebra $\Omega^\sigma {\mathfrak{g}}$ satisfying the Killing field equation and such that $$\xi_d + \lambda\frac 12 {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W.$$ Since $ G $ was assumed simple, the complexified Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ is simple and hence has a faithful linear representation so can be regarded as a subalgebra of some $\mathfrak{gl} (m,{\mathbb{ C}}) $. If we set $$D = d - {\operatorname{ad}}_{\Omega_z dz- \Omega_{\bar{z}}d\bar{z}}$$ then we can rewrite as $$D\xi_\lambda = [\xi_\lambda, (2\Omega_z + \lambda {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega} W)dz + (-2\Omega_{\bar{z}} + \lambda^{-1}{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp -\Omega} \overline{W})d\bar{z}].$$ From $d({\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega} W) = [\Omega_z, {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega} W]dz +[{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega} W, \Omega_{\bar{z}}]d\bar{z} $ we know $D{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega} W =0$.
Writing $V=\ker {\operatorname{ad}}_{{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W}$ and $V^{\perp} = \operatorname{im}{\operatorname{ad}}_{{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W}$, we have a bundle decomposition ${{\mathbb{ C}}/\Lambda}\times {\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}= V \oplus V^{\perp}$. Furthermore $$VV \subset V, \quad V^{\perp}V \subset V^{\perp}, \quad V V^{\perp} \subset V^\perp.$$
Let $X=\sum_{k\leq -1} \lambda^{k}X_k$ where the $X_k$ are sections of $V^\perp$. We seek $X$ such that $$\label{eq:Y}
Y=(1+X)^{-1}{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W(1+X)$$ is a solution of the Killing field equation. Note that $$\begin{aligned}
DY=(1+X)^{-1}[{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W, DX(1+X)^{-1}](1+X),\end{aligned}$$ and define a one-form $\kappa$ by $$\kappa =(1+X)((2\Omega_z + \lambda {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W)dz + (-2\Omega_{\bar{z}} + \lambda^{-1}{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp -\Omega}\overline{W})d\bar{z}-DX)(1+X)^ {- 1}.$$ Routine calculations show that $$\begin{aligned}
DY + [(2\Omega_z + \lambda {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W)dz &+ (-2\Omega_{\bar{z}} + \lambda^{-1}{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp -\Omega}\overline{W})d\bar{z}, Y]\\
& = (1+X){^{-1}}[{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp _\Omega} W, -\kappa](1+ X)\end{aligned}$$ and hence $Y$ satisfies the Killing field equation if and only if $\kappa$ takes values in $V$.
Our task then is to construct $X$ so that $\kappa$ takes values in $V$. We have $$\kappa'\cdot (1+X) = (1+X)(2\Omega_z + \lambda {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W) d z-\partial X$$ where $\kappa'\cdot (1+ X) $ denotes multiplication. Note that $\Omega_z $ is valued in $ V^\perp$ as it lies in ${\mathfrak{t}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$.
The splitting of $\kappa' \cdot (1+X)$ into its $V$ and $V^\perp$ components is $$\begin{aligned}
(V): & \quad \kappa' = \left (\lambda {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W + (2X\Omega_z)^V\right)dz\\
(V^\perp):& \quad \kappa' \cdot X =\left (2\Omega_z +(2X\Omega_z)^\perp + \lambda X{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W\right)dz -D'X.\end{aligned}$$ Substitution implies $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Vcomp}
\lambda[{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W,X] dz = 2 \Bigl(\Omega_z +(X\Omega_z)^\perp -(X\Omega_z)^V X\Bigr) dz -D' X.\end{aligned}$$ Conversely if holds then $\kappa' =\left ( \lambda {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W + (2X\Omega_z)^V\right) dz $ and so $\kappa' $ takes values in $V$. Comparing the $\lambda^j$ coefficients on both sides of we can solve for $X$ inductively over $j$ by at each stage requiring $X_j \in \operatorname{im}{\operatorname{ad}}_{{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W}$ and $$\begin{aligned}
[{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W,X_1] &= 2\Omega_z\\
[{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W, X_{j-1}] dz &= 2 \Bigl ((X_j \Omega_z)^\perp -\sum_{s+l=j}(X_s\Omega_z)^V X_l\Bigr) dz -D X_k.\end{aligned}$$ Define ${\nabla_\lambda}= d + {\operatorname{ad}}_{\varphi_\lambda} $ and note that says precisely that ${\nabla_\lambda}$ is a flat connection in the trivial bundle ${{\mathbb{ C}}/\Lambda}\times{\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$. With $ X $ as above we have ${\nabla_\lambda}' Y=0$. We wish to show that ${\nabla_\lambda}'' Y=0$ also, as this will imply that $Y$ satisfies the Killing field equation .
Define $B$ by $$\label{eq:B}
{\nabla_\lambda}'' Y = (1+X)^{-1}B (1+X).$$ Using ${\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W = (1+X) Y(1+X)^{-1}$ and $${\nabla_\lambda}'' {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W = [-\Omega_{\bar{z}} + \lambda{^{-1}}{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp -\Omega}\overline{W}, {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W]d\bar z$$ we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
B d\bar z &=[(-\Omega_{\bar{z}} + \lambda^{-1}{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp -\Omega}\overline{W}) d\bar z - {\nabla_\lambda}'' X (1+X)^{-1},{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W ]\end{aligned}$$ which shows that $B$ takes values in $V^\perp$.
As ${\nabla_\lambda}$ is a flat connection we have commutativity of covariant derivatives and hence ${\nabla_\lambda}'{\nabla_\lambda}''Y=0$ which we write as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:DZB1}
-{\nabla_\lambda}' X (1+X)^{-1}B + {\nabla_\lambda}' B + B {\nabla_\lambda}' X (1+X)^{-1} = 0.\end{aligned}$$ Since ${\nabla_\lambda}' B = D' B + [2\Omega_z +\lambda {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W,B] dz $, we can rewrite as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:DZB2}
D' B&=[{\nabla_\lambda}' X (1+X)^{-1} + (\lambda {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W-2\Omega_z ) dz, B].\end{aligned}$$ From its defining equation we know that $ B $ is of the form $\sum_{j\leq d}\lambda^{j} B_j$. We will show that $ B =0$. Suppose not, then there is some non-zero top coefficient $B_d$. Since $X$ has only negative powers of $\lambda$, the $\lambda^{d+1}$ term in is $$[{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W, B_d].$$ However we know that $B_d \in V^\perp$ and hence it must be zero. Thus ${\nabla_\lambda}'' Y = 0$ and $Y$ satisfies the Killing field equation. From we see that $Y$ is of the form $\sum_{j\leq 0}\lambda^{j}Y_j$ and furthermore $Y_0={\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W$.
We now need to project this $Y$ onto $\Omega^\sigma({\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}})$ to get a solution to the Killing field equation in the correct loop algebra.
Representations of simple Lie algebras are completely reducible and we have identified ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ with a subalgebra of ${\mathfrak}{gl}(m,{\mathbb{ C}})$ so it must have a complementary subspace in ${\mathfrak}{gl}(m,{\mathbb{ C}})$ which is invariant under the adjoint action of ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$. This means there exists a projection map $\pi: \Omega ({\mathfrak}{gl}(m,{\mathbb{ C}})) \to \Omega({\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}})$ such that $$d \pi(Y) = \pi(d Y) = \pi([Y, \varphi_\lambda]) = [\pi(Y), \varphi_\lambda].$$ Thus we have that $\pi(Y)\in \Omega({\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}})$ satisfies the Killing field equation. Furthermore $Y_0 = \pi({\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W) ={\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W$. Set $\tilde{Y} = \lambda Y = \sum_{j \leq 1}\lambda^j Y_{j-1}$ and note that $\tilde{Y}_1 = Y_0 = {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W$.
We want to project $\tilde Y$ onto $\Omega^\sigma({\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}})$. Consider the map $$\pi^{\sigma}_j := \frac 1 {k} (\operatorname{Id}+ \epsilon^{-j} \sigma^j + \epsilon^{-2j} \sigma^{2j} + \ldots +\epsilon^{-(k-1)j}\sigma^{(k-1)j})$$ where $\epsilon$ is the $k$-th primitive root of unity. This map $\pi_j^\sigma$ projects any element in ${\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}$ to its part in ${\mathfrak{g}}_j$. Thus we can define $\pi^\sigma : \Omega({\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}}) \to \Omega^\sigma ({\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathbb{ C}})$ by $$\pi^\sigma (\sum_j \lambda^j \xi_j) = \sum_j \lambda^j \pi_j^\sigma (\xi_j).$$ Then $\tilde{\xi} = \pi^\sigma (\tilde{Y})$ satisfies $$\begin{aligned}
d\tilde{\xi}=[\tilde{\xi},\Omega_z + \lambda {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega} W) dz + ( - \Omega_{{{\bar{z}}}} +\lambda{^{-1}}{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp -\Omega}\overline{W}) d\bar{z}]\end{aligned}$$ and $\tilde{\xi}_1=\tilde{Y}_1={\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega} W$.
Now we may apply Lemma \[lem:Jacobi\] to $\tilde{\xi}$ to conclude the existence of a (real) polynomial Killing field $\xi$ whose top term, $\xi_d$, is ${\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega} W$.
The $d-1$ coefficient of $\xi_z =[\xi, \Omega_z + \lambda{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W]$ is $$({\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W)_z= \left[{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W, \Omega_z\right] + [\xi_{d-1}, {\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W]$$ which implies $$\left[\xi_{d-1}-2\Omega_z,{\operatorname{Ad}}_{\exp \Omega}W\right]= 0.$$ Since $W$ is a cyclic element and $\xi_{d-1}-2\Omega_z\in {\mathfrak{t}}$ we conclude $\xi_{d-1}-2\Omega_z=0$ and hence $\xi$ satisfies the theorem.
[10]{}
A. A. Belavin and V. G. Drinfeld. Solutions of the classical [Y]{}ang-[B]{}axter equation for simple [L]{}ie algebras. , 16(3):1–29, 96, 1982.
A.I. Bobenko. All constant mean curvature tori in $\bf{R^3}$, ${S}^3$ and ${H}^3$ in terms of theta-functions. , 290(2):209–245, 1991.
J. Bolton, F. Pedit, and L.M. Woodward. Minimal surfaces and the affine [T]{}oda field model. , 459:119–150, 1995.
F. Burstall, D. Ferus, F. Pedit, and U. Pinkall. Harmonic tori in symmetric spaces and commuting [H]{}amiltonian systems on loop algebras. , 138:173–212, 1993.
F. E. Burstall and F. Pedit. Harmonic maps via [A]{}dler-[K]{}ostant-[S]{}ymes theory. In [*Harmonic maps and integrable systems*]{}, Aspects Math., E23, pages 221–272. Vieweg, Braunschweig, 1994.
F.E. Burstall. , 469:149–177, 1995.
E. Carberry and K. Turner. Harmonic tori in de [S]{}itter spheres. In preparation.
J. Cheeger and D.G. Ebin. . Lecture Notes in Math. American Mathematical Society, 1975.
D. Ferus, F. Pedit, U. Pinkall, and I. Sterling. Minimal tori in ${S}^4$. , 429:1–47, 1992.
N. Hitchin. Harmonic maps from a 2-torus to the 3-sphere. , 31:627–710, 1990.
V. Kac. . Cambridge University Press, 1994.
W. Knapp. . Birkhäuser, Boston, MA, 2002.
Toshihiko Matsuki. The orbits of affine symmetric spaces under the action of minimal parabolic subgroups. , 31(2):331–357, 1979.
U. Pinkall and I. Sterling. On the classification of constant mean curvature tori. , 130(2):407–451, 1989.
K. Pohlmeyer. Integrable [H]{}amiltonian systems and interactions through quadratic constraints. , 46:207–221, 1976.
John Rawnsley. Noether’s theorem for harmonic maps. In [*Differential geometric methods in mathematical physics ([J]{}erusalem, 1982)*]{}, volume 6 of [*Math. Phys. Stud.*]{}, pages 197–202. Reidel, Dordrecht, 1984.
K. Uhlenbeck. Harmonic maps into [L]{}ie groups: classical solutions of the chiral model. , 30(1):1–50, 1989.
N. A. Vavilov. Do it yourself structure constants for [L]{}ie algebras of types [$E_l$]{}. , 281(Vopr. Teor. Predst. Algebr. i Grupp. 8):60–104, 281, 2001.
David A. Vogan. Irreducible characters of semisimple [L]{}ie groups. [III]{}. [P]{}roof of [K]{}azhdan-[L]{}usztig conjecture in the integral case. , 71(2):381–417, 1983.
J.C. Wood. Harmonic maps into symmetric spaces and integrable systems. In [Fordy, A.P.]{} and [Wood, J.C.]{}, editors, [*Harmonic Maps and Integrable Systems*]{}, volume E23 of [*Aspects Math.*]{}, pages 29–55. Vieweg, Braunschweig, 1994.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- 'Jialei Wang[^1]'
- 'Scott C. Clark[^2]'
- 'Eric Liu[^3]'
- 'Peter I. Frazier[^4]'
bibliography:
- 'MOE.bib'
title: ' Parallel Bayesian Global Optimization of Expensive Functions[^5] '
---
Abstract {#abstract .unnumbered}
========
We consider parallel global optimization of derivative-free expensive-to-evaluate functions, and propose an efficient method based on stochastic approximation for implementing a conceptual Bayesian optimization algorithm proposed by [@GiLeCa08]. To accomplish this, we use infinitessimal perturbation analysis (IPA) to construct a stochastic gradient estimator and show that this estimator is unbiased. We also show that the stochastic gradient ascent algorithm using the constructed gradient estimator converges to a stationary point of the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ surface, and therefore, as the number of multiple starts of the gradient ascent algorithm and the number of steps for each start grow large, the one-step Bayes optimal set of points is recovered. We show in numerical experiments that our method for maximizing the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ is faster than methods based on closed-form evaluation using high-dimensional integration, when considering many parallel function evaluations, and is comparable in speed when considering few. We also show that the resulting one-step Bayes optimal algorithm for parallel global optimization finds high-quality solutions with fewer evaluations than a heuristic based on approximately maximizing the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$. A high-quality open source implementation of this algorithm is available in the open source Metrics Optimization Engine (MOE).
Introduction {#sec:intro}
============
We consider derivative-free global optimization of expensive functions, in which (1) our objective function is time-consuming to evaluate, limiting the number of function evaluations we can perform; (2) evaluating the objective function provides only the value of the objective, and not the gradient or Hessian; and (3) we seek a global, rather than a local, optimum. Such problems arise when the objective function is evaluated by running a complex computer code (see, e.g., @sacks1989design), performing a laboratory experiment, or building a prototype system to be evaluated in the real world. In this paper we assume our function evaluations are deterministic, i.e., free from noise.
Bayesian Global Optimization (BGO) methods are one class of methods for solving such problems. They were initially proposed by [@kushner1964new], with early work pursued in [@MoTiZi78] and [@mockus1989bayesian], and more recent work including improved algorithms [@boender1987bayesian; @JoScWe98; @HuAlNoZe06], convergence analysis [@Ca97; @CaZi02; @VaBe10], and allowing noisy function evaluations [@CaZi05; @ViVaWa08; @frazier2009knowledge; @HuAlNoZe06].
The most well-known BGO method is Efficient Global Optimization (EGO) from [@JoScWe98], which chooses each point at which to evaluate the expensive objective function in the “outer” expensive global optimization problem by solving an “inner” optimization problem: maximize the “expected improvement”. Expected improvement is the value of information [@Ho66] from a single function evaluation, and quantifies the benefit that this evaluation provides in terms of revealing a point with a better objective function value than previously known. If this is the final point that will be evaluated in the outer optimization problem, and if additional conditions are satisfied (the evaluations are free from noise, and the implementation decision, i.e., the solution that will be implemented in practice after the optimization is complete, is restricted to be a previously evaluated point), then the point with largest expected improvement is the Bayes-optimal point to evaluate, in the sense of providing the best possible average-case performance in the outer expensive global optimization problem [@FrazierWang2016]. Solving EGO’s inner optimization problem is facilitated by an easy-to-compute and differentiate expression for the expected improvement in terms of the scalar normal cumulative distribution function. Fast evaluation of the expected improvement and its gradient make it possible in many applications to solve the inner optimization problem in significantly less time than the time required per evaluation of the expensive outer objective, which is critical to EGO’s usefulness as an optimization algorithm.
The inner optimization problem at the heart of EGO and its objective, the expected improvement, was generalized by [@GiLeCa08] to the parallel setting, in which the expensive objective can be evaluated at several points simultaneously. This generalization, called the “multi-points expected improvement” or the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$, is consistent with the decision-theoretic derivation of expected improvement and quantifies the expected utility that will result from the evaluation of a [*s*et]{} of points. This work also provided an analytical formula for $q=2$.
If this generalized inner optimization problem, which is to find the set of points to evaluate next that jointly maximize the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$, could be solved efficiently, then this would provide the one-step Bayes-optimal set of points to evaluate in the outer problem, and would create a one-step Bayes-optimal algorithm for global optimization of expensive functions able to fully utilize parallelism.
This generalized inner optimization problem is challenging, however, because unlike the scalar expected improvement used by EGO, the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ lacks an easy-to-compute and differentiate expression, and is calculable only through Monte Carlo simulation, high-dimensional numerical integration, or expressions involving high-dimensional multivariate normal cumulative distribution functions (CDFs). This significantly restricts the set of applications in which a naive implementation can solve the inner problem faster than a single evaluation of the outer optimization problem. Stymied by this difficulty, [@GiLeCa08] and later work [@chevalier2013fast], propose heuristic methods that are [*m*otivated]{} by the one-step optimal algorithm of evaluating the set of points that jointly maximize the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$, but that do not actually achieve this gold standard.
#### Contributions
The main contribution of this work is to provide a method that solves the inner optimization problem of maximizing the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ efficiently, creating a practical and broadly applicable one-step Bayes-optimal algorithm for parallel global optimization of expensive functions. To accomplish this we use infinitesimal perturbation analysis (IPA) [@Ho1987] to construct a stochastic gradient estimator of the gradient of the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ surface, and show that this estimator is unbiased, with a bounded second moment. Our method uses this estimator within a stochastic gradient ascent algorithm, which we show converges to the set of stationary points of the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ surface. We use multiple restarts to identify multiple stationary points, and then select the best stationary point found. As the number of restarts and the number of iterations of stochastic gradient ascent within each restart both grow large, the one-step optimal set of points to evaluate is recovered.
Our method can be implemented in both synchronous environments, in which function evaluations are performed in batches and finish at the same time, and asynchronous ones, in which a function evaluation may finish before others are done.
In addition to our methodological contribution, we have developed a high-quality open source software package, the “Metrics Optimization Engine (MOE)” [@moe-github2015], implementing our method for solving the inner optimization problem and the resulting algorithm for parallel global optimization of expensive functions. To further enhance computational speed, the implementation takes advantage of parallel computing and achieves 100X speedup over single-threaded computation when deployed on a graphical processing unit (GPU). This software package has been used by Yelp and Netflix to solve global optimization problems arising in their businesses [@YelpBlog2014; @NetflixMLConf2014]. For the rest of the paper, we refer to our method as “MOE-qEI” because it is implemented in MOE. We compare MOE-qEI against several benchmark methods. We show that MOE-qEI provides high-quality solutions to the outer optimization problem using fewer function evaluations than the heuristic CL-mix policy proposed by [@chevalier2013fast], which is motivated by the inner optimization problem. We also show that MOE-qEI provides a substantial parallel speedup over the single-threaded EGO algorithm, which is one-step optimal when parallel resources are unavailable. We also compare our simulation-based method for solving the inner optimization problem against methods based on exact evaluation of the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ from [@chevalier2013fast] and [@marmin2015differentiating] (discussed in more detail below) and show that our simulation-based approach to solving the inner optimization problem provides solutions to both the inner and outer optimization problem that are comparable in quality and speed when $q$ is small, and superior when $q$ is large.
#### Related Work
Developed independently and in parallel with our work is [@chevalier2013fast], which provides a closed-form formula for computing ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$, and the book chapter [@marmin2015differentiating], which provides a closed-form expression for its gradient. Both require multiple calls to high-dimensional multivariate normal CDFs. These expressions can be used within an existing continuous optimization algorithm to solve the inner optimization problem that we consider.
While attractive in that they provide closed-form expressions, calculating these expressions when $q$ is even moderately large is slow and numerically challenging. This is because calculating the multivariate normal CDF in moderately large dimension is itself challenging, with state of the art methods relying on numerical integration or Monte Carlo sampling as described in [@genz1992numerical]. Indeed, the method for evaluating the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ from [@chevalier2013fast] requires $q^2$ evaluations of the $q-1$ dimensional multivariate normal CDF, and the method for evaluating its gradient requires $O(q^4)$ calls to multivariate normal CDFs with dimension ranging from $q-3$ to $q$. In our numerical experiments, we demonstrate that our method for solving the inner optimization problem requires less computation time and parallelizes more easily than do these competing methods for $q>4$, and performs comparably when $q$ is smaller. We also demonstrate that MOE-qEI’s improved performance in the inner optimization problem for $q>4$ translates to improved performance in the outer optimization problem.
Other related work includes the previously proposed heuristic CL-mix from [@chevalier2013fast], which does not solve the inner maximization of ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$, instead using an approximation. While solving the inner maximization of ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ as we do makes it more expensive to compute the set of points to evaluate next, we show in our numerical experiments that it results in a substantial savings in the number of evaluations required to find a point with a desired quality. When function evaluations are expensive, this results in a substantial reduction in overall time to reach an approximately optimal solution.
In other related work on parallel Bayesian optimization, [@frazier2011value] and [@xie2013bayesian] proposed a Bayesian optimization algorithm that evaluates pairs of points in parallel, and is one-step Bayes-optimal in the noisy setting under the assumption that one can only observe noisy function values for single points, or noisy function value differences between pairs of points. This algorithm, however, is limited to evaluating pairs of points, and does not extend to a higher level of parallelism.
There are also other non-Bayesian algorithms for derivative-free global optimization of expensive functions with parallel function evaluations from [@dennis1991direct; @kennedy2010particle] and [@john1992adaptation]. These are quite different in spirit from the algorithm we develop, not being derived from a decision-theoretic foundation.
#### Outline
We begin in Section \[sec:problem\] by describing the mathematical setting in which Bayesian global optimization is performed, and then defining the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ and the one-step optimal algorithm. We construct our stochastic gradient estimator in Section \[sec:gradient\_estimator\], and use it within stochastic gradient ascent to define a one-step optimal method for parallel Bayesian global optimization in Section \[sec:optimization\_qEI\]. Then in Section \[sec:unbiasedness\] we show that the constructed gradient estimator of the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ surface is unbiased under mild regularity conditions, and in Section \[sec:SGA\_converge\] we provide convergence analysis of the stochastic gradient ascent algorithm. Finally, in Section \[sec:numerical\] we present numerical experiments: we compare MOE-qEI against previously proposed heuristics from the literature; we demonstrate that MOE-qEI provides a speedup over single-threaded EGO; we show that MOE-qEI is more efficient than optimizing evaluations of the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ using closed-form formula provided in [@chevalier2013fast] when $q$ is large; and we show that MOE-qEI computes the gradient of ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ faster than evaluating the closed-form expression proposed in [@marmin2015differentiating].
Problem formulation and background {#sec:problem}
==================================
In this section, we describe a decision-theoretic approach to Bayesian global optimization in parallel computing environments, previously proposed by [@GiLeCa08]. This approach was considered to be purely conceptual as it contains a difficult-to-solve optimization sub-problem (our so-called “inner” optimization problem). In this section, we present this inner optimization problem as background, and present a novel method in the subsequent section that solves it efficiently.
Bayesian Global Optimization
----------------------------
Bayesian global optimization considers optimization of a function $f$ with domain $\mathbb{A} \subseteq \mathbb{R}^{d}$. The overarching goal is to find an approximate solution to $$\min_{\bm{x} \in \mathbb{A}} f(\bm{x}).$$
We suppose that evaluating $f$ is expensive or time-consuming, and that these evaluations provide only the value of $f$ at the evaluated point and not its gradient or Hessian. We assume that the function defining the domain $\mathbb{A}$ is easy to evaluate and that projections from $\mathbb{R}^d$ into the nearest point in $\mathbb{A}$ can be performed quickly.
Rather than focusing on asymptotic performance as the number of function evaluations grows large, we wish to find an algorithm that performs well, on average, given a limited budget of function evaluations. To formalize this, we model our prior beliefs on the function $f$ with a Bayesian prior distribution, and we suppose that $f$ was drawn at random by nature from this prior distribution, before any evaluations were performed. We then seek to develop an optimization algorithm that will perform well, on average, when applied to a function drawn at random in this way.
Gaussian process priors {#sec:gp_model}
-----------------------
For our Bayesian prior distribution on $f$, we adopt a Gaussian process prior (see @RaWi06), which is specified by its mean function $\mu(\bm{x}) : \mathbb A \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ and positive semi-definite covariance function $k(\bm{x}, \bm{x}') : \mathbb A \times \mathbb A \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$. We write the Gaussian process as $$f \sim \mathcal{GP}(\mu, k).$$ Then for a collection of points $\bm{X} := ({\bm{x}}_1,\ldots,{\bm{x}}_q)$, the prior of $f$ at $\bm{X}$ is $$f(\bm{X}) \sim \mathcal{N} ({\bm{\mu}^{(0)}}, {\bm{\Sigma}^{(0)}}),
\label{eq:prior}$$ where ${\bm{\mu}^{(0)}}_i = \mu({\bm{x}}_i)$ and ${\bm{\Sigma}^{(0)}}_{ij} = k({\bm{x}}_i, {\bm{x}}_j), i,j \in \{1,\ldots, q\}$.
Our proposed method for choosing the points to evaluate next additionally requires that $\mu$ and $k$ satisfy some mild regularity assumptions discussed below, but otherwise adds no additional requirements. In practice, $\mu$ and $k$ are typically chosen using an empirical Bayes approach discussed in [@brochu2010bayesian], in which first, a parameterized functional form for $\mu$ and $k$ is assumed; second, a first stage of data is collected in which $f$ is evaluated at points chosen according to a Latin hypercube or uniform design; and third, maximum likelihood estimates for the parameters specifying $m$ and $k$ are obtained. In some implementations [@JoScWe98; @snoek2012practical], these estimates are updated iteratively as more evaluations of $f$ are obtained, which provides more accurate inference and tends to reduce the number of function evaluations required to find good solutions but increases the computational overhead per evaluation. We adopt this method below in our numerical experiments in Section \[sec:numerical\]. However, the specific contribution of this paper, a new method for solving an optimization sub-problem arising in the choice of design points, works with any choice of mean function $\mu$ and covariance matrix $k$, as long as they satisfy the mild regularity conditions discussed below.
In addition to the prior distribution specified in , we may also have some previously observed function values ${y^{(i)}}=f({\bm{x}^{(i)}})$, for $i=1,\ldots,n$. These might have been obtained through the previously mentioned first stage of sampling, running the second stage sampling method we are about to describe, or from some additional runs of the expensive objective function $f$ performed by another party outside of the control of our algorithm. If no additional function values are available, we set $n=0$. We define notation ${\bm{x}^{(1:n)}} = ({\bm{x}^{(1)}},\ldots,{\bm{x}^{(n)}})$ and ${y^{(1:n)}} = ({y^{(1)}},\ldots,{y^{(n)}})$. We require that all points in ${\bm{x}^{(1:n)}}$ be distinct.
We then combine these previously observed function values with our prior to obtain a posterior distribution on $f(\bm{X})$. This posterior distribution is still a multivariate normal (e.g., see Eq. (A.6) on pp. 200 in @RaWi06) $$f(\bm{X}) \mid \bm{X}, {\bm{x}^{(1:n)}}, {y^{(1:n)}} \sim \mathcal{N} ({\bm{\mu}^{(n)}}, {\bm{\Sigma}^{(n)}}),
\label{eq:posterior}$$ with $$\begin{split}
&{\bm{\mu}^{(n)}} = {\bm{\mu}^{(0)}} + K\left(\bm{X},{\bm{x}^{(1:n)}}\right) K\left({\bm{x}^{(1:n)}},{\bm{x}^{(1:n)}}\right)^{-1} \left({y^{(1:n)}} - \mu({\bm{x}^{(1:n)}}) \right), \\
&{\bm{\Sigma}^{(n)}} = K\left(\bm{X},\bm{X}\right) - K\left(\bm{X},{\bm{x}^{(1:n)}}\right) K\left({\bm{x}^{(1:n)}},{\bm{x}^{(1:n)}}\right)^{-1} K\left({\bm{x}^{(1:n)}},\bm{X}\right),
\end{split}
\label{eq:posterior_detail}$$ where $\mu({\bm{x}^{(1:n)}})$ is the vector obtained by evaluating the prior mean function at each point in ${\bm{x}^{(1:n)}}$, $K\left(\bm{X}, \bm{x}^{(1:n)}\right)$ is a $q \times n$ matrix with $K\left(\bm{X}, \bm{x}^{(1:n)}\right)_{ij} = k(\bm{x}_i, \bm{x}^{(j)})$, and similarly for $K\left(\bm{x}^{(1:n)}, \bm{X}\right)$, $K\left(\bm{X}, \bm{X}\right)$ and $K\left(\bm{x}^{(1:n)}, \bm{x}^{(1:n)}\right)$.
Multi-points expected improvement (${\text{\textit q-EI}}$)
-----------------------------------------------------------
In a parallel computing environment, we wish to use this posterior distribution to choose the set of points to evaluate next. [@GiLeCa08] proposed making this choice using a decision-theoretic approach that considers the utility provided by evaluating a particular candidate set of points in terms of their ability to reveal better solutions than previously known. We review this decision-theoretic approach here, and then present a new algorithm for implementing this choice in the next section.
Let $q$ be the number of function evaluations that we may perform in parallel, and let $\bm{X}$ be a candidate set of points that we are considering evaluating next. Let $f_{n}^{\star} = \min_{m \leq n} f({\bm{x}^{(m)}})$ indicate the value of the best point evaluated, before beginning these $q$ new function evaluations. The value of the best point evaluated after all $q$ function evaluations are complete will be $\min\left(f_n^{\star},\min_{i = 1,\ldots,q} f(\bm{x}_i )\right)$. The difference between these two values (the values of the best point evaluated, before and after these $q$ new function evaluations) is called the [*i*mprovement]{}, and is equal to $\left( f_{n}^{\star} - \min_{i = 1,\ldots,q} f(\bm{x}_i ) \right)^{+}$, where $a^+ = \max(a,0)$ for $a\in{\mathbb{R}}$.
We then compute the expectation of this improvement over the joint probability distribution over $f(\bm{x}_i), i=1,\ldots,q$, and we refer to this quantity as the [*m*ulti-points expected improvement]{} or ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ from [@GiLeCa08]. This multi-points expected improvement can be written as, $${\text{\textit q-EI}}(\bm{X} )=\mathbb{E}_n\left[\left( f_{n}^{\star} - \min_{i = 1,\ldots,q} f(\bm{x}_i ) \right)^{+} \right],
\label{eq:multiEI}$$ where $\mathbb{E}_n \left[ \cdot \right] := \mathbb{E} \left[\cdot |{\bm{x}^{(1:n)}}, {y^{(1:n)}} \right]$ is the expectation taken with respect to the posterior distribution.
[@GiLeCa08] then proposes evaluating next the set of points that maximize the multi-points expected improvement, $${\operatornamewithlimits{argmax}}_{\bm{X} \in H} {\text{\textit q-EI}}(\bm{X}),
\label{eq:maxEI}$$ where $H = \{(\bm{x}_1, \ldots, \bm{x}_q) : \bm{x}_i \in \mathbb{A}, \lvert\lvert \bm{x}_i - \bm{x}_j \rvert\rvert \geq r, \lvert\lvert \bm{x}_i - \bm{x}^{(\ell)} \rvert\rvert \geq r, i \neq j, 1 \leq i,j \leq q, 1 \leq \ell \leq n\}$.
This formulation generalizes [@GiLeCa08] slightly by allowing an optional requirement that new evaluation points be a distance of at least $r\ge0$ from each other and previously evaluated points. [@GiLeCa08] implicitly set $r=0$. Our convergence proof requires $r>0$, which provides a compact feasible domain over which the stochastic gradient estimator has bounded variance. Setting a strictly positive $r$ can also improve numerical stability in inference (see, e.g., @ababou1994condition), and evaluating a point extremely close to a previously evaluated point is typically unlikely to provide substantial improvement in the revealed objective value. In our experiments we set $r=10^{-5}$.
In the special case $q=1$, which occurs when we are operating without parallelism, the multi-points expected improvement reduces to the expected improvement [@mockus1989bayesian; @JoScWe98], which can be evaluated in closed-form in terms of the normal density and CDF as discussed in Section \[sec:intro\]. [@GiLeCa08] provided an analytical expression for ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ when $q=2$, but in the same paper the authors commented that computing ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ for $q>2$ involves expensive-to-compute $q$-dimensional Gaussian cumulative distribution functions relying on multivariate integral approximation, which makes solving difficult. [@Ginsbourger2009] writes “directly optimizing the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ becomes extremely expensive as q and d (the dimension of inputs) grow."
Algorithm {#sec:algorithm}
=========
In this section we present a new algorithm for solving the inner optimization problem of maximizing ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$. This algorithm uses a novel estimator of the gradient of the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ presented in Section \[sec:gradient\_estimator\], used within a multistart stochastic gradient ascent framework as described in Section \[sec:optimization\_qEI\]. We additionally generalize this technique from synchronous to asynchronous parallel optimization in Section \[sec:async\]. We begin by introducing additional notation used to describe our algorithm.
Notation
--------
In this section we define additional notation to better support construction of the gradient estimator. Justified by , we write $f(\bm{X})$ as $$f(\bm{X}) \,{\buildrel d \over =}\, \bm{\mu}(\bm{X}) +\bm{L}(\bm{X}) \bm{Z},
\label{eq:Y2}$$ where $\bm{L}(\bm{X})$ is the lower triangular matrix obtained from the Cholesky decomposition of ${\bm{\Sigma}^{(n)}}$ in , $\bm{\mu}(\bm{X})$ is the posterior mean (identical to ${\bm{\mu}^{(n)}}$ in , but rewritten here to emphasize the dependence on $X$ and de-emphasize the dependence on $n$), and $\bm{Z}$ is a multivariate standard normal random vector. We will also use the notation $\bm{\Sigma}(\bm{X})$ in place of $\bm{\Sigma}^{(n)}$ in our analysis.
By substituting into , we have $${\text{\textit q-EI}}(\bm{X}) =\mathbb{E} \left[\left( f_n^* - \min_{i=1,\ldots,q} \bm{e}_i \left[ \bm{\mu}(\bm{X})+\bm{L}(\bm{X}) \bm{Z} \right] \right)^+ \right],
\label{eq:EI_n1}$$ where $\bm{e}_i$ is a unit vector in direction $i$ and the expectation is over $\bm{Z}$. To make even more compact, define a new vector $\bm{m}(\bm{X})$ and new matrix $\bm{C}(\bm{X})$, $$\begin{split}
\bm{m}(\bm{X})_i&=
\begin{dcases}
f_n^* - \bm{\mu}(\bm{X})_i & \text{if $i>0$ ,} \\
0 & \text{if $i=0$ ,}
\end{dcases}
\\
\bm{C}(\bm{X})_{ij} &=\begin{dcases}
-\bm{L}(\bm{X})_{ij} & \text{if $i>0$ ,} \\
0 & \text{if $i=0$ ,}
\end{dcases}
\end{split}
\label{eq:multiEI_detail}$$ and becomes $$\label{eq:qEI}
{\text{\textit q-EI}}(\bm{X}) = \mathbb{E} \left[ \max_{i=0,\ldots,q} \bm{e}_i \left[ \bm{m}(\bm{X}) +\bm{C}(\bm{X}) \bm{Z} \right] \right].$$
Constructing the gradient estimator {#sec:gradient_estimator}
-----------------------------------
We now construct our estimator of the gradient $\nabla {\text{\textit q-EI}}(\bm{X})$. Let $$\label{eq:def_f}
h(\bm{X}, \bm{Z}) = \max_{i=0,\ldots,q} \bm{e}_i \left[ \bm{m}(\bm{X}) +\bm{C}(\bm{X}) \bm{Z} \right].$$ Then $$\nabla {\text{\textit q-EI}}(\bm{X}) = \nabla \mathbb{E} h(\bm{X}, \bm{Z}).
\label{eq:grad_qei}$$ If gradient and expectation in are interchangeable, the gradient would be $$\nabla {\text{\textit q-EI}}(\bm{X}) = \mathbb{E} \bm{g}(\bm{X}, \bm{Z}),
\label{eq:unbiasedness}$$ where $$\label{eq:gradient_def}
\bm{g}(\bm{X}, \bm{Z})= \begin{cases} \nabla h(\bm{X},\bm{Z}) & \text{if } \nabla h(\bm{X}, \bm{Z}) \text{ exists,} \\ 0 & \text{otherwise.} \end{cases}$$ $\bm{g}(\bm{X}, \bm{Z})$ can be computed using results on differentiation of the Cholesky decomposition from [@smith1995differentiation].
We use $\bm{g}(\bm{X}, \bm{Z})$ as our estimator of the gradient $\nabla {\text{\textit q-EI}}$, and will discuss interchangeability of gradient and expectation, which implies unbiasedness of our gradient estimator, in Section \[sec:unbiasedness\]. As will be discussed in Section \[sec:SGA\_converge\], unbiasedness of the gradient estimator is one of the sufficient conditions for convergence of the stochastic gradient ascent algorithm proposed in Section \[sec:optimization\_qEI\].
Optimization of ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ {#sec:optimization_qEI}
---------------------------------------
Our stochastic gradient ascent algorithm begins with some initial point $\bm{X}_0 \in H$, and generates a sequence $\{\bm{X}_t: t=1, 2, \ldots\}$ using $$\bm{X}_{t+1} = \prod_{H} \left[ \bm{X}_{t} + \epsilon_t \bm{G}(\bm{X}_t) \right],
\label{eq:sga}$$ where $\prod_{H}(\bm{X})$ denotes the closest point in $H$ to $\bm{X}$, and if the closest point is not unique, a closest point such that the function $\prod_{H}(\cdot)$ is measurable. $\bm{G}(\bm{X}_t)$ is an estimate of the gradient of ${\text{\textit q-EI}}(\cdot)$ at $\bm{X}_t$, obtained by averaging $M$ replicates of our stochastic gradient estimator, $$\bm{G}(\bm{X}_t) = \frac{1}{M} \sum_{m=1}^M \bm{g}(\bm{X}_t, \bm{Z}_{t,m}),
\label{eq:G_eval}$$ where {$\bm{Z}_{t,m}$: m=1, …, M} are i.i.d. samples generated from the multivariate standard normal distribution, $\bm{g}(\bm{X}_t, \bm{Z}_{t,m})$ is defined in . $\{\epsilon_t: t=0, 1, \ldots\}$ is a stochastic gradient stepsize sequence [@kushner2003stochastic], typically chosen to be equal to $\epsilon_t = \frac{a}{t^{\gamma}}$ for some scalar $a$ and $\gamma\in(0,1]$. Because we use Polyak-Ruppert averaging as described below, we set $\gamma<1$. Analysis in Section \[sec:theory\] shows that, under certain mild conditions, this stochastic gradient algorithm converges almost surely to the set of stationary points.
After running $T$ iterations of stochastic gradient ascent using , we obtain the sequence $\{\bm{X}_t : t=1,2,\ldots,T\}$. From this sequence we extract the average $\overline{X}_T = \frac1{T+1} \sum_{t=0}^T \bm{X}_t$ and use it as an estimated stationary point. This Polyak-Ruppert averaging approach [@polyak1990new; @ruppert1988efficient] is more robust to misspecification of the stepsize sequence than using $\bm{X}_T$ directly.
To find the global maximum of the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$, we use multiple restarts of the algorithm from a set of starting points, drawn from a Latin hypercube design [@mckay2000comparison], to find multiple stationary points, and then use simulation to evaluate ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ at these stationary points and select the point for which it is largest. For simplicity we present our approach using a fixed sample size $N$ to perform this evaluation and selection (Step \[step:estimate\] in Algorithm \[algo1\] below) but one one could also use a more sophisticated ranking and selection algorithm with adaptive sample sizes (see, e.g., @kim2007recent), or evaluate ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ using the closed-form formula in [@chevalier2013fast]. We summarize our procedure for selecting the set of points to sample next, which we call MOE-qEI, in Algorithm \[algo1\].
number of starting points $R$; stepsize constants $a$ and $\gamma$; number of steps for one run of gradient ascent $T$; number of Monte Carlo samples for estimating the gradient $M$; number of Monte Carlo samples for estimating ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ $N$. Draw $R$ starting points from a Latin hypercube design in $H$, $\bm{X}_{r,0}$ for $r=1,\ldots,R$ . Compute $\bm{G}_t = \frac{1}{M} \sum_{m=1}^M \bm{g}(\bm{X}_{r,t},\bm{Z}_{r,t,m})$ where $\bm{Z}_{r,t,m}$ is a vector of $q$ i.i.d. samples drawn from the standard normal distribution. Update solution using stochastic gradient ascent $\bm{X}_{r,t+1} = \prod_{H} \left[ \bm{X}_{r,t} + \frac{a}{t^{\gamma}} \bm{G}_t \right]$. \[step:polyak-ruppert\] Compute the simple average of the solutions for $\bm{X}_{r,t}$, $\overline{\bm{X}}_{r,T} = \frac{1}{T+1} \sum_{t=0}^T\bm{X}_{r, t}$. \[step:done\_start\] Estimate ${\text{\textit q-EI}}(\overline{\bm{X}}_{r,T})$ using Monte Carlo simulation with $N$ i.i.d. samples, and store the estimate as $\widehat{{\text{\textit q-EI}}}_r$. \[step:estimate\] $\overline{\bm{X}}_{r',T}$ where $r' = {\operatornamewithlimits{argmax}}_{r=1,\ldots,R} \widehat{{\text{\textit q-EI}}_r}$.
The MOE software package [@moe-github2015] implements Algorithm \[algo1\], and supplies the following additional optional fallback logic. If $\max_{r=1,\ldots,R} \widehat{{\text{\textit q-EI}}}_r \le \epsilon'$, so that multistart stochastic gradient ascent fails to find a point with estimated expected improvement better than $\epsilon'$, then it generates $L$ additional solutions from a Latin Hypercube on $H$, estimates the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ at each of these using the same Monte Carlo approach as in Step \[step:estimate\], and selects the one with the largest estimated ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$. This logic takes two additional parameters: a strictly positive real number $\epsilon'$ and an integer $L$. We turn this logic off in our experiments by setting $\epsilon'=0$.
Asynchronous parallel optimization {#sec:async}
----------------------------------
So far we have assumed synchronous parallel optimization, in which we wait for all $q$ points to finish before choosing a new set of points. However, in some applications, we may wish to generate a new partial batch of points to evaluate next while $p$ points are still being evaluated, before we have their values. This is common in expensive computer evaluations, which do not necessarily finish at the same time.
We can extend Algorithm \[algo1\] to solve an extension of proposed by [@ginsbourger2010kriging] for asynchronous parallel optimization: suppose parallelization allows a batch of $q$ points to be evaluated simultaneously; the first $p$ points are still under evaluation, while the remaining $q-p$ points have finished evaluation and the resources used to evaluate them are free to evaluate new points. We let $\bm{X'} := (\bm{x}_1, \ldots, \bm{x}_p)$ be the first $p$ points still under evaluation, and let $\bm{X}:=(\bm{x}_{p+1}, \ldots, \bm{x}_q)$ be the $(q-p)$ points ready for new evaluations. Computation of ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ for these $q$ points remains the same as in , but we use an alternative notation, ${\text{\textit q-EI}}(\bm{X'}, \bm{X})$, to explicitly indicate that $\bm{X}'$ are the points still being evaluated and $\bm{X}$ are the new points to evaluate. Keeping $\bm{X}'$ fixed, we optimize ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ over $\bm{X}$ by solving this alternative problem $$\label{eq:qpEI}
{\operatornamewithlimits{argmax}}_{\bm{X} \in H'} {\text{\textit q-EI}}(\bm{X}', \bm{X}),$$ where $H' = \{(\bm{x}_{p+1}, \ldots, \bm{x}_{q}): \bm{x}_i \in \mathbb{A}, \lvert\lvert \bm{x}_i - \bm{x}_j \rvert\rvert \geq r, \lvert\lvert \bm{x}_i - \bm{x}_k \rvert\rvert \geq r, \lvert\lvert \bm{x}_i - \bm{x}^{(m)} \rvert\rvert \geq r, i \neq j, p < i \leq q, p < j \leq q, 1 \leq k \leq p, 1 \leq m \leq n \}$. As we did in the algorithm for synchronous parallel optimization in Section \[sec:optimization\_qEI\], we estimate the gradient of the objective function with respect to $\bm{X}$, i.e., $\nabla_{\bm{X}} {\text{\textit q-EI}}(\bm{X}', \bm{X})$. The gradient estimator is essentially the same as that in Section \[sec:gradient\_estimator\], except that we only differentiate $h(\cdot, \cdot)$ with respect to $\bm{X}$. Then we proceed according to Algorithm \[algo1\].
In practice, one typically sets $p=q-1$. This is because Bayesian optimization procedures are used most frequently when function evaluation times are large, and asynchronous computing environments typically have a time between evaluation completions that increases with the evaluation time. When this inter-completion time is large relative to the time required to solve , it is typically better to solve each time an evaluation completes, i.e., to set $p=q-1$, rather than waiting and letting a machine sit idle. If the time to perform a function evaluation is small enough, or if the computing environment is especially homogeneous, or if $q$ is large (shortening the inter-completion time), then the time between completions might be smaller than the time to solve and one might wish to set $p$ strictly smaller than $q-1$.
Theoretical analysis {#sec:theory}
====================
In Section \[sec:algorithm\], when we constructed our gradient estimator and described the use of stochastic gradient ascent to optimize ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$, we alluded to conditions under which this gradient estimator is unbiased and this stochastic gradient ascent algorithm converges to the set of stationary points of the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ surface. In this section, we describe these conditions and state these results.
Unbiasedness of the gradient estimator {#sec:unbiasedness}
--------------------------------------
We now state our main theorem showing unbiasedness of the gradient estimator. Proofs of all results including supporting lemmas are available as supplemental material.
\[thm\_grad\] If $\bm{m}(\bm{X})$ and $\bm{C}(\bm{X})$ are continuously differentiable in a neighborhood of $\bm{X}$, and $\bm{C}(\bm{X})$ has no duplicate rows, then $\nabla h(\bm{X},\bm{Z})$ exists almost surely and $$\nabla \mathbb{E} h(\bm{X},\bm{Z}) = \mathbb{E} \nabla h(\bm{X},\bm{Z}).$$
Theorem \[thm\_grad\] requires continuous differentiability of $\bm{C}(\bm{X})$, which may seem difficult to verify. However, using [@smith1995differentiation], which shows that $m$th-order differentiability of a symmetric and nonnegative definite matrix implies $m$th-order differentiability of the lower triangular matrix obtained from its Cholesky factorization, $\bm{L}(\bm{X})$ and thus $\bm{C}(\bm{X})$ have the same order of differentiability as ${\bm{\Sigma}^{(n)}}$, whose order of differentiability can in turn be verified by examination of the prior covariance function $k(\cdot,\cdot)$. In addition, when ${\bm{\Sigma}^{(n)}}$ is positive definite, $\bm{C}(\bm{X})$ will not have duplicate rows. We will use these facts below in Corollary \[corollary\], after first discussing convergence, to provide easy-to-verify conditions under which unbiasedness and convergence to the set of stationary points hold.
Convergence analysis {#sec:SGA_converge}
--------------------
In this section, we show almost sure convergence of our proposed stochastic gradient ascent algorithm. We assume that $\mathbb{A}$ is compact and can be written in the form $\mathbb{A} = \{\bm{x}: a_i'(\bm{x}) \leq 0, i=1, \ldots, m'\} \subseteq \mathbb{R}^{d}$, where $a_i'(\cdot)$ is any real-valued constraint function. Then $H$ can be written in a form more convenient for analysis, $$H = \{\bm{X}: a_i(\bm{X}) \leq 0, i=1, \ldots, m\} \subseteq \mathbb{R}^{d \times q},$$ where $a_{(i-1)q+j}(\bm{X}) = a_i'(\bm{x}_j)$ with $\bm{x}_j$ being the $j$th point in $\bm{X}$, and $a_i(\bm{X})$ for $i>m'q$ encodes the constraints $\lvert\lvert \bm{x}_i - \bm{x}_j \rvert\rvert \ge r$ and $\lvert\lvert \bm{x}_i - \bm{x}^{(\ell)} \rvert\rvert \ge r$ present in .
The following theorem shows that Algorithm \[algo1\] converges to the set of stationary points under conditions that include those of Theorem \[thm\_grad\]. The proof is available as supplemental material.
\[thm:sga\] Suppose the following assumptions hold,
1. $a_i(\cdot), i = 1, \ldots, m$ are continuously differentiable.
2. $\epsilon_t \rightarrow 0$ for $t \geq 0$; $\sum_{t=1}^{\infty} \epsilon_t = \infty$ and $\sum_{t=0}^{\infty} \epsilon_t^2 < \infty$.
3. $\forall \bm{X} \in H$, $\bm{\mu}(\bm{X})$ and $\bm{\Sigma}(\bm{X})$ are twice continuously differentiable and $\bm{\Sigma}(\bm{X})$ is positive definite.
Then the sequence $\{\bm{X}_t: t=0,1,\ldots\}$ and its Polyak-Ruppert average $\{\overline{\bm{X}}_t : t=0,1,\ldots\}$ generated by algorithm converges almost surely to a connected set of stationary points of the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ surface.
The following corollary of Theorem \[thm:sga\] uses conditions that can be more easily checked prior to running MOE-qEI. It requires that the sampled points are distinct, which can be made true by dropping duplicate samples. Since function evaluations are deterministic, no information is lost in doing so.
\[corollary\] If the sampled points ${\bm{x}^{(1:n)}}$ are distinct and
1. the prior covariance function $k$ is positive definite and twice differentiable,
2. the prior mean function $\mu$ is twice differentiable,
3. conditions 1 and 2 in Theorem \[thm:sga\] are met,
then $\bm{X}_t$ and its Polyak-Ruppert average $\overline{\bm{X}}_t$ converge to a connected set of stationary points.
[Proof to Corollary \[corollary\]]{} Since ${\bm{x}^{(1:n)}}$ are distinct, and $\bm{X} \in H$, and the prior covariance function is positive definite and twice continuously differentiable, then $K\left(\bm{X}, \bm{x}^{(1:n)}\right)$, $K\left(\bm{x}^{(1:n)}, \bm{X}\right)$, $K\left(\bm{X}, \bm{X}\right)$ and $K\left(\bm{x}^{(1:n)}, \bm{x}^{(1:n)}\right)$ in are all positive definite and twice continuously differentiable. Since the prior mean function is also twice continuously differentiable, it follows that ${\bm{\mu}^{(n)}}=\bm{\mu}(\bm{X})$ and ${\bm{\Sigma}^{(n)}}=\bm{\Sigma}(\bm{X})$ defined in are twice continuously differentiable, and in addition, ${\bm{\Sigma}^{(n)}}$ is positive definite. Thus the conditions of Theorem \[thm:sga\] are verified, and its conclusion holds.
Numerical results {#sec:numerical}
=================
In this section, we present numerical experiments demonstrating the performance of MOE-qEI. The implementation of MOE-qEI follows Algorithm \[algo1\], and is available in the open source software package “MOE” [@moe-github2015].
We first discuss the choice of constants in Algorithm \[algo1\]: $R$, $T$, $M$, $N$, $\gamma$, and $a$.
1. Number of starting points, $R$: this should be larger and of the same order as the number of equivalence classes of stationary points of the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ surface, where we identify a set of stationary points as in the same class if they can be obtained from each other by permuting $\bm{x}_1,\ldots,\bm{x}_q$. (${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ is symmetric and such permutations do not change its value.) However, we do not know the number of such equivalence classes, and their number tends to grow with $n$ as the surface grows more modes. Setting $R$ larger increases our chance of finding the global maximum but increases computation. In our numerical experiments, we set $R=n$ to capture this trade-off between runtime and solution quality. As a diagnostic, one can check whether $R$ is large enough by checking the number of unique solutions we obtain; if we obtain the same solution repeatedly from multiple restarts, this suggests $R$ is large enough.
2. Number of steps in stochastic gradient ascent, $T$, and stepsize sequence parameters $a$ and $\gamma$: For simplicity, we set $a=1$. We set $\gamma=0.7$, which is significantly below $1$, to ensure that the stepsize sequence decreases slowly, as is recommended when using Polyak-Ruppert averaging. We then plotted the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ and norm of the gradient from stochastic gradient ascent versus $t$ for a few sample problems. Finding that convergence occurred well before the 100th iterate, we set $T=100$. As a diagnostic, one may also assess convergence by evaluating the gradient using a large number of Monte Carlo samples at the final iterate $T$ and comparing its norm to $0$.
3. Number of Monte Carlo samples $M$: this determines the accuracy of the gradient estimate and therefore affects stochastic gradient ascent’s convergence. We set $M=1000$ and as discussed in Section \[sec:optimization\_qEI\] performed an experiment to justify this setting. While we ran our experiments on a CPU except where otherwise stated to ensure a fair comparison with other competing algorithms, for which a GPU implementation is not available, the “MOE” software package provides a GPU implementation that can be used to increase the amount of parallelism used in MOE-qEI. When using the GPU implementation, we recommend setting $M=10^6$ because the GPU’s parallelism makes averaging a large number of independent replicates fast, and the reduction in noise reduces the number of iterates needed for convergence by stochastic gradient ascent.
4. Number of Monte Carlo samples for estimating ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$, $N$: we estimate the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ at a limiting solution only once for each restart, i.e., $R$ times, and so setting $N$ large introduces little computational overhead. We set $N=10^6$ to ensure an essentially noise-free selection of the best of the limiting solutions, and we assess this choice by examining the standard error of our estimates of the ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$.
For the outer optimization of the objective function, we begin with a small dataset, typically sampled using a Latin hypercube design, to train the Gaussian Process model described in Section \[sec:gp\_model\]. In our numerical experiments, we use $\mu=0$ and a squared exponential kernel $k$ whose hyperparameters are estimated using an empirical Bayes approach: we set them to the values that maximize the log marginal likelihood of the observed data. With the trained Gaussian Process model, we perform the inner optimization of MOE-qEI described in Algorithm \[algo1\] to find the batch of points to evaluate, and after evaluating them we update the hyperparameters as well as the Gaussian Process model. We repeat this process over a number of iterations and report the best solution found in each iteration.
Noise-free function evaluations may often lead to ill-conditioned covariance matrices $K(\cdot,\cdot)$ in . To resolve this problem, we adopt a standard trick from Gaussian process regression [@RaWi06 Section 3.4.3]: we manually impose a small amount of noise $\sim \mathcal{N}(0, \sigma^2)$ where $\sigma^2 = 10^{-4}$ and use Gaussian Process regression designed for noisy settings, which is almost identical to except that $K({\bm{x}^{(1:n)}},{\bm{x}^{(1:n)}})$ is replaced by $K({\bm{x}^{(1:n)}},{\bm{x}^{(1:n)}}) + \sigma^2 I_n$ where $I_n$ is the identity matrix [@RaWi06 Section 2.2].
Comparison on the outer optimization problem {#sec:horserace}
--------------------------------------------
Constant Liar is a heuristic algorithm motivated by proposed by [@GiLeCa08], which uses a greedy approach to iteratively construct a batch of $q$ points. At each iteration of this greedy approach, the heuristic uses the sequential EGO algorithm to find a point that maximizes the expected improvement. However, since the posterior used by EGO depends on the current batch of points, which have not yet been evaluated, Constant Liar imposes a heuristic response (the “liar”) at this point, and updates the Gaussian Process model with this “liar” value. The algorithm stops when $q$ points are added, and reports the batch for function evaluation.
There are three variants of Constant Liar (CL), which use three different strategies for choosing the liar value: CL-min sets the liar value to the minimum response observed so far; CL-max sets it to the maximum response observed so far; and CL-mix is a hybrid of the two, computing one set of points using CL-min, another set of points using CL-max, and sampling the set that has the higher ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$. Among the three methods, CL-mix was shown by [@chevalier2013fast] to have the best overall performance, and therefore we compare MOE-qEI against CL-mix.
We ran MOE-qEI and CL-mix on a range of standard test functions for global optimization [@jamil2013literature]: 2-dimensional Branin2; 3-dimensional Hartmann3; 5-dimensional Ackley5; and 6-dimensional Hartmann6. In the experiment, we first draw $(2d+2)$ points in the domain using a Latin hypercube design, where $d$ is the dimension of the objective function, and fit a Gaussian Process model using the initial points. Thereafter, we let MOE-qEI and CL-mix optimize over the test functions and report for each iteration the regret as $\text{regret}=f^*-\text{best solution so far}$ for each iteration, where we note that each of the problems considered is a minimization problem. We repeat the experiment 100 times using different initial sets of points, and report the average performance of both algorithms in Figure \[fig:benchmark\]. The result shows that MOE-qEI consistently finds better solutions than the heuristic method on all four test functions.
Next, we compare MOE-qEI and CL-MIX at different levels of parallelism using the same experimental setup as above. The sequential EGO algorithm makes the same decisions as MOE-qEI when $q=1$ and so this may also be seen as a comparison against EGO. Figure \[fig:speedup\] shows that MOE-qEI achieves significant speedup over EGO as $q$ grows, indicating substantial potential time saving using parallelization and MOE-qEI in Bayesian optimization tasks.
Comparison on the inner optimization problem {#sec:exact}
--------------------------------------------
[@chevalier2013fast] provided a closed-form formula for ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ and argued that it computes ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ “very fast for reasonably low values of $q$ (typically less than 10)”. The closed-form formula is provided as follows for reference, modified to use the notation in this paper. Recall and let $f(\bm{X}) = (Y_1, \ldots, Y_q)$ be a random vector with mean ${\bm{\mu}^{(n)}}$ and covariance matrix ${\bm{\Sigma}^{(n)}}$. For $k \in \{1, \ldots, q\}$ consider the vectors $\bm{Z}^k := (Z_1^k, \ldots, Z_q^k)$ defined as follows: $$\begin{split}
Z_j^k &:= Y_k - Y_j, j \neq k, \\
Z_k^k &:= Y_k.
\end{split}$$ Let $\bm{m}^k$ and $\Sigma^k$ denote the mean and covariance matrix of $\bm{Z}^k$, and define the vector $\bm{b}^k \in \mathbb{R}^q$ by $b_k^k = f_n^*$ and $b_j^k = 0$ if $j \neq k$. Then the closed-form formula is $${\text{\textit q-EI}}(\bm{X}) = \sum_{k=1}^q \left( (f_n^* - \mu_k^{(n)}) \Phi_q(\bm{b}^{k}-\bm{m}^{k}, \Sigma^{k}) + \sum_{i=1}^q \Sigma_{ik}^{k} \phi_{m_i^{k}, \Sigma_{ii}^{k}}(b_i^{(k)}) \Phi_{q-1} (\bm{c}_{.i}^{k}, \Sigma_{.i}^{k}) \right),
\label{eq:fast_ei}$$ where $\bm{c}^{k}$ is as defined in [@chevalier2013fast].
This formula requires $q$ calls of the $q$-dimensional multivariate normal CDF ($\Phi_q(\cdot, \cdot)$), and $q^2$ calls of the $q-1$ dimensional multivariate normal CDF ($\Phi_{q-1}(\cdot, \cdot)$). Since computing multivariate normal CDFs, which are often implemented with numerical integration or Monte Carlo sampling [@genz1992numerical], is expensive to evaluate even for moderate $q$, calculating this analytically formula quickly becomes slow and numerically challenging as $q$ grows.
While [@chevalier2013fast] did not propose using this closed-form formula to solve the inner optimization problem , one can adapt it to this purpose by using it within any derivative-free optimization method. We implemented this approach in the MOE package, where we use the L-BFGS [@liu1989limited] solver from SciPy [@scipy] as the derivative free optimization solver. We call this approach “Benchmark 1”.
We compare MOE-qEI, CL-mix, and Benchmark 1 in solving the inner optimization problem, in terms of both solution quality and runtime, as shown in Figure \[fig:qei\_opt\] and \[fig:qei\_time\]. Without surprise, MOE-qEI achieves the best solution quality among the three, and its running time is almost comparable to CL-mix, which is expected to be the fastest approach because it sacrifices solution quality for speed. We ran Benchmark 1 with $q$ going only up to 4 because its runtime goes up drastically with $q$. MOE-qEI’s runtime scales well as $q$ grows, making it feasible to run in applications with high parallelism. To our surprise, CL-mix achieves competitive solution quality against Benchmark 1, using only a fraction of Benchmark 1’s runtime. Therefore, despite the promise of using the closed-form formula for ${\text{\textit q-EI}}$ to fully solve the inner optimization problem, this formula’s long runtime and the slow convergence of L-BFGS due to lack of derivative information make Benchmark 1 a less favorable option than CL-mix in practice.
Figure \[fig:qei\_opt\] also includes a method called “MOE high-MC”. This method runs MOE-qEI on GPU with the number of Monte Carlo samples $M$ for the gradient estimator set to $10^7$, much higher than the default setting of 1000. As shown in the figure, the solution quality for “MOE high-MC” is the same as that of MOE-qEI, which confirms that $M=1000$ is sufficiently large.
Comparison on evaluation of $\nabla {\text{\textit q-EI}}$ {#sec:compare_against_exact_eval}
----------------------------------------------------------
A recently published book chapter [@marmin2015differentiating], developed independently and in parallel to this work, proposed a method for computing $\nabla {\text{\textit q-EI}}$ using a closed-form formula derived from , and then proposed to use this formula inside a gradient-based optimization routine to solve . The formula is complex and therefore we do not reproduce it here.
This formula faces even more severe computational challenges than ; indeed, it requires $O(q^4)$ calls to multivariate normal CDFs with dimension between $(q-3)$ and $q$. Because computing high-dimensional multivariate normal CDFs is itself challenging, this closed-form evaluation becomes extremely time-consuming. MOE-qEI’s Monte-Carlo based approach to evaluating $\nabla {\text{\textit q-EI}}$ offers three advantages over using the closed-form formula: first, numerical experiments below suggest that computation scales better with $q$; second, it can be easily parallelized, with significant speedups possible through parallel computing on graphical processing units (GPUs), as is implemented within the MOE library; third, by using a small number of replications to make each iteration run quickly, and by using it within a stochastic gradient ascent algorithm that averages noisy gradient information intelligently across iterations, we may more intelligently allocate effort across iterations, only spending substantial effort to estimate gradients accurately late in the process of finding a local maximum.
We first show that computation of exact gradients using our gradient estimator with many replications on a GPU scales better with $q$ through numerical experiments. We compare with closed-form gradient evaluation on a CPU as implemented in the “DiceOptim” package [@diceoptim] and call it “Benchmark 2”. We computed $\nabla {\text{\textit q-EI}}$ at 200 randomly chosen points from a 2-dimensional design space to obtain a $95\%$ confidence interval for the average computation time. To make the gradient evaluation in MOE-qEI close to exact, we increased the number of Monte Carlo samples used in the gradient estimator to $10^7$, which ensures that the variance of each component of the gradient is on the order of $10^{-10}$ or smaller for all $q$ we consider in our experiments. Given the large number of Monte Carlo samples, we use the GPU option in the MOE package to speed up computation. This GPU implementation is made possible by the trivial parallelism supported by our Monte-Carlo-based gradient estimator, while a massively parallel GPU implementation of closed-form gradient evaluation would be more challenging.
![Comparison against closed-form evaluation of $\nabla {\text{\textit q-EI}}$: average time to compute $\nabla {\text{\textit q-EI}}$ with high precision v.s. $q$, comparing the gradient-based estimator from MOE-qEI using a large number of samples ($10^7$) in a parallel GPU implementation with the closed-form formula from [@marmin2015differentiating]. The stochastic gradient estimator in MOE-qEI scales better in $q$ and is faster when $q \geq 4$.[]{data-label="fig:time_grad_ei"}](figs/compare_grad_ei_time.pdf){width="50.00000%"}
Figure \[fig:time\_grad\_ei\] shows that computational time for Benchmark 2 increases quickly as $q$ grows, but increases slowly for MOE-qEI’s Monte Carlo estimator, with this Monte Carlo estimator being faster when $q \geq 4$. This difference in performance arises because gradient estimation in MOE-qEI focuses Monte Carlo effort on calculating a single high-dimensional integral, while the closed-form formula decomposes this high-dimensional integral of interest into a collection of other high-dimensional integrals that are almost equally difficult to compute, and the size of this collection grows with $q$.
We may reduce the number of Monte Carlo samples used by MOE-qEI substantially while still providing high-accuracy estimates: if we reduce $M$ from $10^7$ to $10^4$, the variance of each component of the gradient remains below $10^{-7}$. Since the GPU implementation provides a roughly 100x to 1000x speedup, the CPU-only implementation of our stochastic gradient estimator with this reduced value of $M$ has run-time comparable to or better than the GPU-based results pictured in Figure \[fig:time\_grad\_ei\], showing that even without the hardware advantage offered by a GPU our stochastic gradient estimator provides high-accuracy estimates faster than [@marmin2015differentiating] for $q\ge4$.
Moreover, because stochastic gradient ascent is tolerant to noisy gradients, we may obtain additional speed improvements by reducing the number of Monte Carlo samples even further. Using fewer Monte Carlo samples in each iteration has the potential to increase efficiency by only putting effort toward estimating the gradient precisely when we are close to the stationary point, which stochastic gradient ascent performs automatically through its decreasing stepsize sequence. Thus, our stochastic gradient estimator is both faster when using a large number of samples to produce essentially exact estimates, and it offers more flexibility in its ability to produce inexact estimates at low computational cost.
Conclusions
===========
We proposed an efficient method based on stochastic approximation for implementing a conceptual parallel Bayesian global optimization algorithm proposed by [@GiLeCa08]. To accomplish this, we used infinitessimal perturbation analysis (IPA) to construct a stochastic gradient estimator and showed that this estimator is unbiased. We also provided convergence analysis of the stochastic gradient ascent algorithm with the constructed gradient estimator. Through numerical experiments, we demonstrate that our method outperforms the existing state-of-the-art approximation methods.
Appendix: proofs of results in the main paper {#appendix-proofs-of-results-in-the-main-paper .unnumbered}
=============================================
\[lemma:1\] Suppose functions $\lambda_i(x) : \mathbb{R} \mapsto \mathbb{R}$, $i=1,\ldots,m$ are continuously differentiable on a compact interval $\mathcal{X}$. Let $\Lambda(x) = \max_{i=1}^m \lambda_i(x)$, and $\overset{\sim}{\mathcal{X}}$ be the set of points where $\Lambda(x)$ fails to be differentiable. Then $\overset{\sim}{\mathcal{X}}$ is countable.
[Proof of Lemma \[lemma:1\].]{} We first consider $m=2$, and later extend to $m>2$. Let $x_0$ be a point of non-differentiability of $\Lambda(x)$. Then $\lambda_1(x_0) = \lambda_2(x_0)$ and $\lambda_1'(x_0) \neq \lambda_2'(x_0)$. (If the first condition were not true, and suppose $\lambda_1(x_0) > \lambda_2(x_0)$, then continuity of $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ would imply $\Lambda(x) = \lambda_1(x)$ in an open neighborhood of $x_0$. If the first condition were true but not the second, then $\Lambda'(x_0) = \lambda_1'(x_0) = \lambda_2'(x_0)$.)
By continuity of $\lambda_1'$ and $\lambda_2'$, $\exists \delta > 0$ such that $\lambda_1'(x) > \lambda_2'(x)$ for all $x\in(x_0-\delta, x_0+\delta)$. Therefore $\Lambda(x)=\lambda_1(x)$ at $x \in (x_0, x_0+\delta)$ and $\Lambda(x)=\lambda_2(x)$ at $x \in (x_0-\delta, x_0)$. Thus $\Lambda$ is differentiable on $(x_0-\delta, x_0+\delta) \backslash \{x_0\}$.
Let $n(x_0)$ be the smallest integer $n\ge1$ such that $\Lambda$ is differentiable on $(x_0-1/n, x_0+1/n) \backslash \{x_0\}$ and let $D(n)$ be the set of non-differentiable points $x$ such that $n(x)=n$. In an interval of length $L$, there can be at most $Ln+1$ points in $D(n)$. Hence the set of all non-differentiable points $\overset{\sim}{\mathcal{X}} = \cup_{n=1}^{\infty} D(n)$ is countable.
Now let $m>2$. We show that all points of discontinuity of $\Lambda(x)$ are also points of discontinuity of $\max(\lambda_i(x), \lambda_j(x))$ for at least one pair of $i,j$. Let $S(x) = {\operatornamewithlimits{argmax}}_i \lambda_i(x)$. Using Taylor’s theorem, for $\Delta \in \mathbb{R}$, $$\lambda_i(x+\Delta) = \lambda_i(x) + \lambda_i'(x) \Delta + h_i(x+\Delta) \Delta,$$ where $h_i(\cdot)$ is a function such that $\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} h_i(x+\Delta)=0$. We write the left and right derivative of $\Lambda$ at $x$ as $$\begin{split}
\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0^+} \frac{\Lambda(x+\Delta) - \Lambda(x)}{\Delta} &= \lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0^+} \frac{\max \{ \lambda_i(x) + \lambda_i'(x) \Delta + h_i(x+\Delta) \Delta\} - \lambda_{i^*}(x)}{\Delta},\\
&= \lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0^+} \max \{ \frac{\lambda_i(x) - \lambda_{i^*}(x)}{\Delta} + \lambda_i'(x) + h_i(x)\}, \\
&= \max \{\lambda_i'(x): i \in S \},
\end{split}$$ and $$\begin{split}
\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0^+} \frac{\Lambda(x) - \Lambda(x-\Delta)}{\Delta} &= \lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0^+} \frac{\lambda_{i^*}(x) - \max \{ \lambda_i(x) - \lambda_i'(x) \Delta - h_i(x-\Delta) \Delta\}}{\Delta},\\
&= \lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0^+} \min \{ \frac{\lambda_{i^*}(x) - \lambda_{i}(x)}{\Delta} + \lambda_i'(x) + h_i(x)\}, \\
&= \min \{\lambda_i'(x): i \in S \}.
\end{split}$$ If the left and right derivative are equal, $\Lambda$ is differentiable at $x$. If not, let $i^+ \in {\operatornamewithlimits{argmax}}\{ \lambda_i'(x) : i \in S\}$ and $i^- \in {\operatornamewithlimits{argmin}}\{ \lambda_i'(x) : i \in S\}$. Then $\max(\lambda_{i^+}(x),\lambda_{i^-}(x))$ fails to be differentiable at $x$.
Thus the non-differentiable points of $\Lambda'(x)$ are a subset of the union of the non-differentiable points of $\max(\lambda_i(x), \lambda_j(x))'$ over all $i,j$, and so it is a subset of a finite union of countable sets, which is countable.
\[lemma:2\] If $\bm{m}(\bm{X})$ and $\bm{C}(\bm{X})$ are differentiable in a neighborhood of $\bm{X}$, and there are no duplicated rows in $\bm{C}(\bm{X})$, then $P \left(\bm{e}_i [\bm{m}(\bm{X}) + \bm{C}(\bm{X}) \bm{Z}] = \bm{e}_j [\bm{m}(\bm{X}) + \bm{C}(\bm{X}) \bm{Z}]\right)=0$ for any $i \ne j$, and $\nabla h(\bm{X}, \bm{Z})$ exists almost surely for any $\bm{X}$.
[Proof of Lemma \[lemma:2\].]{} Observe that $h(\bm{X}, \bm{Z}) = \bm{e}_{I^*} \left[ \bm{m}(\bm{X}) + \bm{C}(\bm{X}) \bm{Z} \right]$, where $I^* \in {\operatornamewithlimits{argmax}}_{i=0,\ldots,q} \bm{e}_i \left[ \bm{m}(\bm{X}) + \bm{C}(\bm{X}) \bm{Z} \right] := \mathcal{S}$. $\nabla h(\bm{X}, \bm{Z})$ can fail to exist only if $\exists I_1, I_2 \in \mathcal{S}$ with $\bm{e}_{I_1} (\frac{\partial \bm{m}(\bm{X})}{\partial x_{ik}} +
\frac{\partial \bm{C}(\bm{X})}{\partial x_{ik}} \bm{Z}) \neq \bm{e}_{I_2} (\frac{\partial \bm{m}(\bm{X})}{\partial x_{ik}} +
\frac{\partial \bm{C}(\bm{X})}{\partial x_{ik}} \bm{Z})$. Thus, $$\begin{aligned}
P(\nabla h(\bm{X}, \bm{Z}) \text{\, does not exist}) &\leq P ( \vert\mathcal{S}\vert \geq 2), \\
&\leq \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i \neq j} P \left(\bm{e}_i [\bm{m}(\bm{X}) + \bm{C}(\bm{X}) \bm{Z}] = \bm{e}_j [\bm{m}(\bm{X}) + \bm{C}(\bm{X}) \bm{Z}]\right),\\
&= \frac{1}{2}\sum_{i \neq j} P \left( \left(\bm{C}(\bm{X})_{i\cdot} - \bm{C}(\bm{X})_{j\cdot} \right) \bm{Z} = m(\bm{X})_j - m(\bm{X})_i \right),\end{aligned}$$ where $\bm{C}_{i\cdot}(\bm{X})$ is the $i$th row of $\bm{C}(\bm{X})$. Since $\bm{C}_{i\cdot}(\bm{X}) \neq \bm{C}_{j\cdot}(\bm{X})$, $\{ \bm{Z}: \left(\bm{C}_{i\cdot}(\bm{X}) - \bm{C}_{j\cdot}(\bm{X}) \right) \bm{Z} = m_j(\bm{X}) - m_i(\bm{X}) \}$ is subspace of $\mathbb{R}^q$ with dimension smaller than $q$, and $$P \left( \left(\bm{C}_{i\cdot}(\bm{X}) - \bm{C}_{j\cdot}(\bm{X}) \right) \bm{Z} = m_j(\bm{X}) - m_i(\bm{X}) \right) = 0 \text{\quad} \forall i \neq j.$$ Hence $P (\nabla h(\bm{X}, \bm{Z}) \text{\, does not exist}) = 0$.
[Proof of Theorem \[thm\_grad\].]{} Without loss of generality, we consider the partial derivative with respect to the $k$th component of the $m$th point in $\bm{X}$, that is, $\frac{\partial h(\bm{X}, \bm{Z})}{\partial X_{mk}}$. We use the following result in Theorem 1.2. from [@Glasserman1991], restated here for convenience:
Suppose the following conditions (1), (2), (3) and (4) hold on a compact interval $\Theta$, then ${\mathbb{E}}\left[ \xi'(\bm{W}(\theta)\right] = \ell'(\theta)$ on $\Theta$, where $\ell(\theta) = {\mathbb{E}}\left[\xi(\bm{W}(\theta))\right]$.
1. For all $\theta \in \Theta$ and $i=1,\ldots,n$, $W_i$ is a.s. differentiable at $\theta$.
2. Define $D_{\xi}$ to be the subset of $\mathbb{R}^n$ on which $\xi$ is continuously differentiable. For all $\theta \in \Theta$, $P\left(\bm{W}(\theta) \in D_{\xi}\right)=1$.
3. $\xi\left(\bm{W}(\cdot)\right)$ is a.s. continuous and piecewise differentiable throughout $\Theta$.
4. $\overset{\sim}{D}$ is countable and ${\mathbb{E}}\left[ \sup_{\theta \notin \overset{\sim}{D}} |\xi'(\bm{W}(\theta)|\right] < \infty$, where $\overset{\sim}{D}$ is the random collection of points in $\Theta$ at which $\xi(\bm{W}(\cdot))$ fails to be differentiable.
We apply this result with $\theta=X_{mk}$, $\bm{W}(\cdot)$ equal to the random function mapping $X_{mk}$ to the random vector $\bm{m}(\bm{X}) + \bm{C}(\bm{X})\bm{Z}$, $\xi(w) = \max_{i=0,1,\ldots,q} w_i$, and $\overset{\sim}{D}$ equal to the set of $X_{mk}$ at which $h'(\bm{X}, \bm{Z})$ does not exist.
Condition (1) is satisfied because $\bm{m}(\cdot)$ and $\bm{C}(\cdot)$ are assumed differentiable.
For condition (2), the set of points $D_\xi$ at which $\xi$ is continuously differentiable is $D_\xi = \{ w \in \mathbb{R}^{q+1} : | {\operatornamewithlimits{argmax}}_{i=0,1,\ldots,q} w_i| = 1\}$. Lemma \[lemma:2\] implies that the probability of equality between two components of $W(\theta)$ is 0, and so $P(W(\theta) \in D_\xi) = 0$.
For condition (3), it is obvious that $\xi\left(\bm{W}(\cdot)\right)$ is a.s. continuous. Lemma \[lemma:1\] implies that the set of non-differentiable points is countable, and therefore $\xi\left(\bm{W}(\cdot)\right)$ is a.s. piecewise differentiable.
For condition (4), first $\overset{\sim}{D}$ is countable by Lemma \[lemma:1\]. We now show the second part of condition (4). Fix $\bm{X}$ except for $X_{mk}$. Since the interval is compact and $\bm{m}(\bm{X})$ and $\bm{C}(\bm{X})$ are continuously differentiable, $$\begin{split}
\sup_{X_{mk}} \left\lvert \frac{\partial\bm{m}_i(\bm{X})}{\partial X_{mk}} \right\rvert &= m_i^* < \infty, \\
\sup_{X_{mk}} \left\lvert \frac{\partial\bm{C}(\bm{X})}{\partial X_{mk}} \right\rvert &= C_{ik}^* < \infty.
\end{split}$$ Then $${\mathbb{E}}\left[\sup_{X_{mk} \notin \overset{\sim}{D}} \lvert h'(\bm{X}, \bm{Z}) \rvert \right] \leq m^{**} + q C^{**} {\mathbb{E}}[\lvert Z \rvert]
= m^{**} + \sqrt{\frac{2}{\pi}} q C^{**} < \infty,$$ where $m^{**}=\max_i m^*_i$ and $C^{**}=\max_{i,j} C^*_{ij}$. Therefore, condition (4) is satisfied.
Thus the conditions of Theorem 1.2 from [@Glasserman1991] are satisfied and $\nabla \mathbb{E} h(\bm{X},\bm{Z}) = \mathbb{E} \nabla h(\bm{X},\bm{Z})$.
[Proof of Theorem \[thm:sga\].]{} We use a convergence analysis result from Section 5, Theorem 2.3 of [@kushner2003stochastic] to prove our theorem, which we first state using our notation and setting: the sequence $\{\bm{X}_n\}$ produced by algorithm converges to a stationary point almost surely if the following assumptions hold,
1. $\epsilon_n \rightarrow 0$ for $n \geq 0$ and $\epsilon_n=0$ for $n<0$; $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \epsilon_n = \infty$
2. $\sup_n {\mathbb{E}}\left\vert\bm{G}(\bm{X}_n)\right\vert^2 < \infty$
3. There are functions $\lambda_n(\cdot)$ of $\bm{X}$, which are continuous uniformly in $n$, a continuous function $\overline{\lambda}(\cdot)$ and random variables $\beta_n$ such that $${\mathbb{E}}_n \bm{G}(\bm{X}_n) = \lambda_n(\bm{X}_n) + \beta_n,$$ and for each $\bm{X} \in H$, $$\lim_n \left\vert\sum_{i=n}^{m(t_n+t)} \epsilon_i [\lambda_i(\bm{X}) - \overline{\lambda}(\bm{X})] \right\vert = 0
$$ for each $t>0$, and $\beta_n \rightarrow 0$ with probability one. The function $m(t_n + \cdot)$ is defined in [@kushner2003stochastic Section 5.1].
4. $\sum_i \epsilon_i^2 < \infty$.
5. There is a continuously differentiable real-valued function $\phi(\cdot)$ such that $\bar{\lambda}(\cdot) = - \nabla \phi(\cdot)$ and $\phi(\cdot)$ is constant on each connected subset $S_i$ of the set of stationary points.
6. $a_i(\cdot), i=1,\ldots,p$ are continuously differentiable.
[@kushner2003stochastic] shows that if these conditions are satisfied, then $\{X_n\}$ converges to a unique $S_i$. Now we prove that the 5 conditions stated above are indeed satisfied if the assumptions in Theorem \[thm:sga\] hold, where $\phi(\bm{X}) = -{\text{\textit q-EI}}(\bm{X})$.
1. Condition 1 is satisfied by assumption 2 in Theorem \[thm:sga\]. Construction of this sequence has been discussed in Section \[sec:optimization\_qEI\].
2. First we assume $M=1$ and treat $M>1$ below. Then $\bm{G}(\bm{X}_n) = \bm{g}(\bm{X}_n, \bm{Z})$, and $$\begin{split}
{\mathbb{E}}\vert\bm{G}(\bm{X}_n) \vert^2 &= {\mathbb{E}}\sum_{m=1}^q \sum_{k=1}^d \bm{e}_{m,k} \bm{G}(\bm{X}_n)^2, \\
&= \sum_{m=1}^q \sum_{k=1}^d {\mathbb{E}}\left( \frac{\partial h(\bm{X}, \bm{Z})}{\partial X_{mk}} \bigg\vert_{\bm{X} = \bm{X}_n} \right)^2, \\
&= \sum_{m=1}^q \sum_{k=1}^d {\mathbb{E}}\left[ \bm{e}_{I^*_{\bm{Z}}} \left( \frac{\partial \bm{m}(\bm{X})}{\partial X_{mk}} + \frac{\partial \bm{C}(\bm{X})}{\partial X_{mk}} \bm{Z} \right) \bigg\vert_{\bm{X} = \bm{X}_n} \right]^2, \\
&\leq \sum_{m=1}^q \sum_{k=1}^d {\mathbb{E}}\sum_{i=0}^q \left[ \bm{e}_i \left( \frac{\partial \bm{m}(\bm{X})}{\partial X_{mk}} + \frac{\partial \bm{C}(\bm{X})}{\partial X_{mk}} \bm{Z} \right) \bigg\vert_{\bm{X} = \bm{X}_n} \right]^2, \\
& = \sum_{m=1}^q \sum_{k=1}^d \sum_{i=0}^q {\mathbb{E}}\left[ \bm{e}_i \left( \frac{\partial \bm{m}(\bm{X})}{\partial X_{mk}} + \frac{\partial \bm{C}(\bm{X})}{\partial X_{mk}} \bm{Z} \right) \bigg\vert_{\bm{X} = \bm{X}_n} \right]^2,
\end{split}
\label{}$$ where $I^*_{\bm{Z}} = \underset{i=0, \ldots, q}{{\operatornamewithlimits{argmax}}} \,\bm{e}_i \left( \bm{m}(\bm{X_n}) + \bm{C}(\bm{X}_n)\bm{Z} \right)$. Since $\bm{m}(\bm{X})$ and $\bm{C}(\bm{X})$ are continuously differentiable for $\forall \bm{X} \in H$ and $H$ is compact, $\sup_{\bm{X}_n} \left\vert\left\vert \frac{\partial \bm{m}(\bm{X})}{\partial X_{mk}} \right\vert\right\vert_{\infty} < \infty$ and $\sup_{\bm{X}_n} \left\vert\left\vert \frac{\partial \bm{C}(\bm{X})}{\partial X_{mk}} \right\vert\right\vert_{\infty} < \infty$. Thus $\sup_{\bm{X}_n} {\mathbb{E}}\left[ \left(\bm{e}_i \left( \frac{\partial \bm{m}(\bm{X})}{\partial X_{mk}} + \frac{\partial \bm{C}(\bm{X})}{\partial X_{mk}} \bm{Z} \right) \right)^2 \right] < \infty$, and we can conclude that $\sup_n {\mathbb{E}}\vert\bm{G}(\bm{X}_n)\vert^2 < \infty$. If $M > 1$, $\bm{G}(\bm{X}_n)$ is an average of i.i.d. samples of $g(X_n,Z)$. Then ${\mathbb{E}}\vert g(X_n,Z) \vert^2
= \frac{1}{M} {\mathbb{E}}\vert g(X_n,Z) \vert^2$. We have just showed that $\sup_n {\mathbb{E}}\vert\bm{G}^1(\bm{X}_n) \vert^2$ is finite, and thus $\sup_n {\mathbb{E}}\vert\bm{G}(\bm{X}_n) \vert^2$ is finite. Therefore, condition 2 is satisfied.
3. Define a function $\bar{\bm{g}}(\cdot)$ on $H$ by $\bar{\bm{g}}(X)={\mathbb{E}}\bm{g}(\bm{X},\bm{Z})$. Then ${\mathbb{E}}_n \bm{G}(\bm{X}_n) = {\mathbb{E}}\bm{g}(\bm{X}_n, \bm{Z})$. Then, since our assumptions meet the requirements for Theorem \[thm\_grad\] ($\bm{\Sigma}(\bm{X})$ being positive definite implies that $\bm{C}(\bm{X})$ has no duplicate rows), we know $\bar{\bm{g}}(\bm{X})=\nabla {\mathbb{E}}h(\bm{X},\bm{Z})$. We will show $\nabla {\mathbb{E}}h(\bm{X}, \bm{Z})$ is continuous on $H$. Letting $\lambda_n(\cdot) \equiv \overline{\lambda}(\cdot) \equiv \overline{\bm{g}}(\cdot)$, and $\beta_n = 0$, the first half of condition 3 will then be satisfied. Since $\lambda_n(\cdot) \equiv \overline{\lambda}(\cdot)$, the second half of condition 3 is satisfied from the fact that the summand is 0.
We now show $\nabla \mathbb{E} h(\bm{X},\bm(Z)$ is continuous. First, we let $\bm{m}'(\bm{X}) = f_n^* - \bm{\mu}(\bm{X})$, and $\bm{C}'(\bm{X}) = -\bm{L}(\bm{X})$, which are the first through the $q$th entries and rows of $\bm{m}(\bm{X})$ and $\bm{C}(\bm{X})$ respectively. Note that $\bm{\Sigma}(\bm{X}) = \bm{C}'(\bm{X}) \bm{C}'^T(\bm{X})$. Then $$\label{eq:ec_eh}
{\mathbb{E}}\left[ h(\bm{X}, \bm{Z}) \right] = {\mathbb{E}}\left[ {\mathbb{E}}\left[ h(\bm{X}, \bm{Z}) \mid t_{-i} \right] \right],$$ where $t_{-i} = \{\bm{e}_{\ell} \left( \bm{m}'(\bm{X}) + \bm{C}'(\bm{X}) \bm{Z} \right), \forall \ell \ne i, \ell = 1, \ldots, q\}$ for some $i=1,\ldots,q$.
Fix $i$, and letting $t_i = \bm{e}_i \left( \bm{m}'(\bm{X}) + \bm{C}'(\bm{X}) \bm{Z} \right)$, we know that $t_i$ given $t_{-i}$ has a normal distribution: $$t_i \mid t_{-i} \sim \mathcal{N}\left(\mu(\bm{X}, t_{-i}), \sigma^2(\bm{X})\right),$$ where $$\begin{split}
\mu(\bm{X}, t_{-i}) &= m'_i(\bm{X}) + \Sigma_{i, -i}(\bm{X}) \Sigma_{-i, -i}^{-1}(\bm{X}) \left(t_{-i} - m'_{-i}(\bm{X}) \right) \\
&= a(\bm{X}) + \sum_{\ell \ne i} b_{\ell}(\bm{X}) t_{\ell},\\
\sigma^2(\bm{X}) &= \Sigma_{i,i}(\bm{X}) - \Sigma_{i,-i}(\bm{X}) \Sigma_{-i,-i}^{-1}(\bm{X}) \Sigma_{-i,i}(\bm{X}).
\end{split}$$ Note that $\sigma^2(\bm{X})$ is the Schur complement of $\bm{\Sigma}(\bm{X})$, and since $\bm{\Sigma}(\bm{X})$ is positive definite, we know that both $\bm{\Sigma}_{-i,-i}(\bm{X})$ and $\sigma^2(\bm{X})$ are positive definite. Knowing the distribution of $t_i$ given $t_{-i}$, we can write the inner expectation of as $$\label{eq:ec_f}
\begin{split}
f(\bm{X}, t_{-i}) &= {\mathbb{E}}\left[ h(\bm{X}, \bm{Z}) \mid t_{-i} \right],\\
&= \left(\mu(\bm{X}, t_{-i}) - t_{-i}^*\right) \Phi\left( \frac{\mu(\bm{X}, t_{-i})-t_{-i}^*}{\sigma(\bm{X})}\right) + \sigma(\bm{X}) \phi \left(\frac{\mu(\bm{X}, t_{-i})-t_{-i}^*}{\sigma(\bm{X})}\right) + t_{-i}^*,
\end{split}$$ where $t_{-i}^* = \max(t_{-i}, 0)$. Without loss of generality, we only look at $j$th component of the gradient, and we have $$\label{eq:ec_df}
\begin{split}
\frac{\partial f(\bm{X}, t_{-i})}{\partial \bm{X}_j} &= \frac{\partial \mu(\bm{X}, t_{-i})}{\partial \bm{X}_j} \Phi \left(\frac{\mu(\bm{X}, t_{-i})-t^*_{-i}}{\sigma(\bm{X})} \right) + \frac{\partial \sigma(\bm{X})}{\partial \bm{X}_j} \phi \left(\frac{\mu(\bm{X}, t_{-i})-t^*_{-i}}{\sigma(\bm{X})} \right), \\
&= \left(\frac{\partial a(\bm{X})}{\partial \bm{X}_j} + \sum_{\ell \ne i} \frac{\partial b_{\ell}(\bm{X})}{\partial \bm{X}_j} t_{\ell} \right) \Phi \left( \frac{\mu(\bm{X}, t_{-i})-t^*_{-i}}{\sigma(\bm{X})} \right) + \frac{\partial \sigma(\bm{X})}{\partial \bm{X}_j} \phi \left( \frac{\mu(\bm{X}, t_{-i})-t^*_{-i}}{\sigma(\bm{X})} \right). \\
\end{split}$$ Since $\bm{\Sigma}_{-i,-i}(\bm{X})$ is positive definite, and the matrix inverse is a continuous function when restricted to the set of positive definite matrices, and the composition of two continuous functions is continuous, we have that $\bm{\Sigma}_{-i,-i}^{-1}(\bm{X})$ is continuously differentiable. Moreover, $\bm{\mu}(\bm{X})$ and $\bm{\Sigma}(\bm{X})$ are assumed continuously differentiable in the statement of the theorem. This together implies continuous differentiability of $a(\bm{X}), b_{\ell}(\bm{X})$ and $\sigma(\bm{X})$. Then $$\left\lvert \frac{\partial f(\bm{X}, t_{-i})}{\partial \bm{X}_j} \right\rvert \le a^* + \sum_{\ell \ne i} b^*_{\ell} \lvert t_{\ell} \rvert + \sigma^*$$ for all $\bm{X} \in H$ and $t_{-i}$, where $$\begin{split}
a^* = \sup_{\bm{X}\in H} \left\lvert \frac{\partial a(\bm{X})}{\partial \bm{X}_j} \right\rvert, \\
b_{\ell}^* = \sup_{\bm{X}\in H} \left\lvert \frac{\partial b_{\ell}(\bm{X})}{\partial \bm{X}_j} \right\rvert, \\
\sigma^* = \sup_{\bm{X}\in H} \left\lvert \frac{\partial \sigma(\bm{X})}{\partial \bm{X}_j} \right\rvert,
\end{split}$$ and $a^*, b_{\ell}^*, \sigma^*$ are finite because $H$ is compact.
Since $t_{\ell}$ has a normal distribution, ${\mathbb{E}}[\lvert t_{\ell} \rvert] < \infty$ and therefore $${\mathbb{E}}\left[ \lvert \frac{\partial f(\bm{X}, t_{-i})}{\partial \bm{X}_j} \rvert \right] < \infty.$$ With the conditions above, we can apply Theorem 1.2 in [@Glasserman1991], and have $$\label{eq:ec_grad_interchange}
\frac{\partial {\mathbb{E}}\left[ f(\bm{X}, t_{-i}) \right]}{\partial \bm{X}_j} = {\mathbb{E}}\left[ \frac{\partial f(\bm{X}, t_{-i})}{\partial \bm{X}_j} \right].$$ Moreover, we can write as $${\mathbb{E}}\left[ \frac{\partial f(\bm{X}, t_{-i})}{\partial \bm{X}_j} \right] = {\mathbb{E}}\left[ \frac{\partial f(\bm{X}, t'_{-i})}{\partial \bm{X}_j} \phi(t'_{-i}) \right],$$ where each component of $t'_{-i}$ is an independent uniform random variable on $(-\infty, \infty)$, and $\phi(\cdot)$ is the multivariate normal probability density function for $t_{-i}$. Define the function $$G(\bm{X}, t'_{-i}) = \frac{\partial f(\bm{X}, t'_{-i})}{\partial \bm{X}_j} \phi(t'_{-i}),$$ From Lemma \[lemma:bound\_div\], $\lvert \frac{\partial G(\bm{X}, t'_{-i})}{\partial \bm{X}_k} \rvert$ is bounded by a finite constant for all $t'_{-i}$. Thus $G(\bm{X}, t'_{-i})$ is Lipschitz continuous in $\bm{X}$ with some constant $K$.
Given any $\epsilon > 0$, we let $\delta = \epsilon / K$, and for any $\bm{X}'$ such that $\lvert \bm{X}' - \bm{X} \rvert < \delta$, $\lvert G(\bm{X}', t'_{-i}) - G(\bm{X}, t'_{-i}) \rvert < K \cdot \delta = \epsilon$. Hence, $\lvert {\mathbb{E}}\left[G(\bm{X}', t'_{-i})\right] - {\mathbb{E}}\left[G(\bm{X}, t'_{-i})\right] \rvert \leq {\mathbb{E}}\left[ \lvert G(\bm{X}', t'_{-i}) - G(\bm{X}, t'_{-i}) \rvert \right] < \epsilon$ by Jensen’s inequality. Therefore, ${\mathbb{E}}\left[ G(\bm{X}, t'_{-i})\right]
= \partial {\mathbb{E}}[h(\bm{X},\bm{Z})] / \partial \bm{X}_j$ is continuous at any $\bm{X} \in H$.
4. Condition 4 is satisfied by assumption 2 in Theorem \[thm:sga\].
5. From the proof of condition 3, we know $\bar{\lambda}(\cdot) = \overline{\bm{g}}(\cdot) = \nabla {\text{\textit q-EI}}(\cdot)$, and thus $\phi(\cdot)=-{\text{\textit q-EI}}(\cdot)$. We have shown that $\bar{\bm{g}}(\cdot)$ is continuous, and it is also trivial to see $\phi(\cdot)$ is constant on each $S_i$. Therefore, condition 5 is satisfied.
6. This is satisfied by assumption 1 in Theorem \[thm:sga\].
In conclusion, all conditions are satisfied and therefore $\{\bm{X}_n\}$ converges to a connected set of stationary points almost surely. From Lemma \[lemma:polyak-ruppert\], the Polyak-Ruppert average $\overline{\bm{X}_n(\omega)}$ of the sequence $\{\bm{X}_n(\omega)\}$ converges to the same set as the sequence $\{\bm{X}_n(\omega)\}$ for every $\omega$.
\[lemma:bound\_div\] If $\bm{\mu}(\bm{X})$, $\bm{\Sigma}(\bm{X})$ are twice differentiable, and $\bm{\Sigma}(\bm{X})$ is positive definite, then $\lvert \frac{\partial G(\bm{X}, t'_{-i})}{\partial \bm{X}_k} \rvert$ is bounded by a finite constant for all $t'_{-i}$.
[Proof of Lemma \[lemma:bound\_div\]]{} We can write $G(\bm{X}, t'_{-i})$ as $$G(\bm{X}, t'_{-i}) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{(2\pi)^{q-1} \lvert \Sigma_{-i,-i}(\bm{X}) \rvert}} \frac{\partial f(\bm{X}, t'_{-i})}{\partial \bm{X}_j} e ^{-\frac{1}{2} \left(t'_{-i} - \bm{m}'_{-i}(\bm{X}) \right)^T \Sigma^{-1}_{-i,-i}(\bm{X}) \left(t'_{-i} - \bm{m}'_{-i}(\bm{X}) \right)}.$$ Since $\bm{\mu}(\bm{X})$, $\bm{\Sigma}(\bm{X})$ are twice differentiable, and $\bm{\Sigma}(\bm{X})$ is positive definite, we can take the partial derivative with respect to $\bm{X}_k$. With some algebra, we can show $$\label{eq:ec_lemma}
\left\lvert \frac{\partial G(\bm{X}, t'_{-i})}{\partial \bm{X}_k} \right\rvert < \sum_r c_r \lvert P_r(t'_{-i}) \rvert e ^{-\frac{1}{2} \left(t'_{-i} - \bm{m}'_{-i}(\bm{X}) \right)^T \Sigma^{-1}_{-i,-i}(\bm{X}) \left(t'_{-i} - \bm{m}'_{-i}(\bm{X}) \right)},$$ where each $P_r(t'_{-i})$ is a monomial in components of $t'_{-i}$ with coefficient 1 and order ranging between 0 and 2, and $0 < c_r < \infty$. Let $\bm{L}_{-i,-i}(\bm{X})$ be the Cholesky decomposition of $\bm{\Sigma}^{-1}_{-i,-i}(\bm{X})$, and $z_{-i} = \bm{L}_{-i,-i}(\bm{X}) \left( t'_{-i} - m'_{-i}(\bm{X})\right)$. Invertibility of $\Sigma^{-1}_{-i,-i}(\bm{X})$ implies that $t'_{-i}$ can be written in terms of $z_{-i}$ Substitute $z_{-i}$ into and, and we get $$\left\lvert \frac{\partial G(\bm{X}, z_{-i})}{\partial \bm{X}_k} \right\rvert < \sum_r c_r' \lvert P_r'(z_{-i}) \rvert e ^{-\frac{1}{2} z_{-i}^T z_{-i}},$$ where each $c_r'$ is a finite constant and each $P_r'(\cdot)$ is a monomial with coefficient 1 and order between 0 and 2. Without loss of generality, we assume the first component, $z_0$, has the largest absolute value among $z_{-i}$. Then $$\label{eq:ec_lemma2}
\left\lvert \frac{\partial G(\bm{X}, z_{-i})}{\partial \bm{X}_k} \right\rvert < \sum_r c_r' \lvert P_r'(z_0) \rvert e ^{-\frac{1}{2} z_0^2}.$$ We can show that $\lvert x^p \rvert e^{-\frac{1}{2}x^2} \leq p^{\frac{p}{2}} e^{-\frac{1}{2}p}, \forall x\in(-\infty,\infty)$. Therefore, each summand in is bounded by a constant.
\[lemma:polyak-ruppert\] Let $\{\bm{X}_n: n \geq 1\}$ be a sequence in $H$, where $H$ is compact, converging to a set $A$. Let $\overline{\bm{X}}_n = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{m=1}^n \bm{X}_m$. Then $\{\overline{\bm{X}}_n : n\geq 1\}$ also converges to $A$.
[Proof of Lemma \[lemma:polyak-ruppert\]]{} Let $\rho_A(\bm{X}) := \inf\{ \lvert\lvert \bm{X} - \bm{X'} \rvert\rvert : \bm{X}' \in A\}$ denote the distance to $A$, where $\lvert\lvert \cdot \rvert\rvert$ denotes the $\mathrm{L}_2$ norm. $\rho_A(\cdot)$ is convex.
Let $\epsilon >0$. Since $\bm{X}_n$ converges to $A$, $\exists N_{\epsilon}$ such that $\rho_A(\bm{X}_n) < \epsilon$ for all $n > N_{\epsilon}$. For $n > N_\epsilon$, $$\overline{\bm{X}}_n = \frac{N_{\epsilon}}{n} \overline{\bm{X}}_{N_{\epsilon}} +
\left(1-\frac{N_{\epsilon}}{n}\right) \cdot \frac{1}{n-N_{\epsilon}} \sum_{m=N_{\epsilon}+1}^{n} \bm{X}_m.$$
Then $$\begin{split}
\rho_A(\overline{\bm{X}}_n)
&=
\rho_A\left(
\frac{N_{\epsilon}}{n} \overline{\bm{X}}_{N_{\epsilon}} +
\left(1-\frac{N_{\epsilon}}{n}\right)
\frac1{n-N_\epsilon}\sum_{m=N_{\epsilon}+1}^{n}\bm{X}_m \right) \\
&\le \frac{N_{\epsilon}}{n}
\rho_A(\overline{\bm{X}}_{N_{\epsilon}}) +
\left(1-\frac{N_{\epsilon}}{n}\right) \frac{1}{n-N_{\epsilon}} \sum_{m=N_{\epsilon}+1}^{n}\rho_A\left(\bm{X}_m \right) \\
&\leq \frac{N_{\epsilon}}{n} \cdot C + \left(1-\frac{N_{\epsilon}}{n}\right) \cdot \epsilon,
\end{split}$$ where $C := \sup_{\bm{X} \in H} \rho_A(\bm{X})$ is finite. Let $\epsilon'>0$, and choose $\epsilon = \frac{\epsilon'}{2}$. Let $n>N_\epsilon$ be such that $\frac{N_{\epsilon}}{n}C + (1-\frac{N_{\epsilon}}{n}) \epsilon \leq \epsilon' = 2\epsilon$. Then $\forall n' > n$, $\rho_A(\overline{\bm{X}_{n'}}) \leq \epsilon'$.
[^1]: [email protected]
[^2]: [email protected]
[^3]: [email protected]
[^4]: [email protected]
[^5]: Peter Frazier and Jialei Wang were partially supported by NSF CAREER CMMI-1254298, NSF CMMI-1536895, NSF IIS-1247696, AFOSR FA9550-12-1-0200, AFOSR FA9550-15-1-0038, and AFOSR FA9550-16-1-0046.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Due to recent advances in laboratory spectroscopy, the first optical detection of a very large molecule has been claimed in the diffuse interstellar medium (ISM): [C$_{60}^+$]{} (ionized Buckminsterfullerene). Confirming the presence of this molecule would have significant implications regarding the carbon budget and chemical complexity of the ISM. Here we present results from a new method for ultra-high signal-to-noise (S/N) spectroscopy of background stars in the near infrared (at wavelengths 0.9-1 $\mu$m), using the Hubble Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph (STIS) in a previously untested ‘STIS scan’ mode. The use of HST provides the crucial benefit of eliminating the need for error-prone telluric correction methods in the part of the spectrum where the [C$_{60}^+$]{} bands lie, and terrestrial water vapor contamination is severe. Our STIS spectrum of the heavily-reddened B0 supergiant star [BD+631964]{} reaches an unprecedented S/N for this instrument ($\sim600$-800), allowing the detection of the diffuse interstellar band (DIB) at 9577 Å attributed to [C$_{60}^+$]{}, as well as new DIBs in the near-IR. Unfortunately, the presence of overlapping stellar lines, and the unexpected weakness of the [C$_{60}^+$]{} bands in this sightline, prevents conclusive detection of the weaker [C$_{60}^+$]{} bands. A probable correlation between the 9577 Å DIB strength and interstellar radiation field is identified, which suggests that more strongly-irradiated interstellar sightlines will provide the optimal targets for future [C$_{60}^+$]{} searches.'
author:
- 'M. A. Cordiner, N. L. J. Cox, R. Lallement, F. Najarro, J. Cami, T. R. Gull, B. H. Foing, H. Linnartz, D. J. Lindler, C. R. Proffitt, P. J. Sarre, S. B. Charnley'
title: |
Searching for interstellar C$_{60}^+$ using a new method for high signal-to-noise\
HST/STIS spectroscopy
---
Introduction
============
The diffuse interstellar band (DIB) problem is the longest-standing puzzle in interstellar chemistry, seemingly impenetrable despite the dedicated efforts of astronomers and laboratory chemists since the early 20th century [@her95; @sar06; @sno14]. The DIBs manifest as broad spectroscopic absorption features in the optical to near-infrared (NIR) spectra of stars as their light passes through the diffuse interstellar medium, indicating the presence of a large quantity of (mostly carbonaceous), [ unidentified]{} molecular material [[*e.g.*]{} @cor11]. @foi94 discovered two DIBs at 9577 Å and 9632 Å that they assigned to [C$_{60}^+$]{} (ionized Buckminsterfullerene) based on a similarity with the absorption wavelengths seen in neon matrix spectroscopy [@dhe92; @ful93]. Recently obtained gas-phase spectra of [C$_{60}^+$]{}$-$He$_n$ complexes (for $n\leq4$; @cam15 [@cam16; @khu16]), show that the match between the interstellar and laboratory wavelengths is accurate to within the observational uncertainties (a fraction of an angstr[ö]{}m). [ The bare [C$_{60}^+$]{} absorption wavelengths were confirmed in an independent laboratory study by Spieler et al. (2017, submitted) using [C$_{60}^+$]{} cations embedded in He-droplets.]{}
If confirmed, the detection of interstellar C$_{60}^+$ will constitute a major breakthrough in interstellar chemistry and may provide, for the first time, an insight into the true scale of chemical complexity in the diffuse ISM. Measurement of the NIR electronic transitions of C$_{60}^+$ (in absorption) would also provide a unique complement to the discovery of mid-infrared C$_{60}$ and C$_{60}^+$ emission bands in circumstellar and interstellar environments [@cam10; @sel10; @ber13].
Despite dedicated observational studies [@wal15; @wal16; @gal17], the case for interstellar C$_{60}^+$ has not yet been proven beyond reasonable doubt. Based on the laboratory measurements, five absorption features are expected (at 9348.4, 9365.2, 9427.8, 9577.0 and 9632.1 Å, with strength ratios 0.07:0.2:0.3:1.0:0.8; @cam16b). @gal17 were unable to confirm the presence of the weakest three features in a sample of 19 heavily-reddened Galactic sightlines observed from the ground. Instead of a constant ratio for the two strongest C$_{60}^+$ DIBs ([$\lambda$]{}9577 and [$\lambda$]{}9632), as expected for electronic transitions arising from a $^2A_{1u}$ ground vibronic state, @gal17 found that the interstellar band ratio was highly variable among different lines of sight. We note, however, that if the observed transitions involve lower levels above the ground state (such as the split levels arising from Jahn-Teller distortion), a variable ratio could potentially occur. Although @wal16 claimed interstellar detections of all five [C$_{60}^+$]{} bands, the three weaker [C$_{60}^+$]{} bands are problematic as they fall in a wavelength region heavily obscured by absorption due to water vapor in the Earth’s atmosphere [see @gal00; @gal17]. Telluric correction methods for such weak interstellar absorption features are error-prone as a result of incomplete telluric line cancellation, and from the possible presence of weak (unseen) stellar lines in the telluric standard spectrum. To rigorously confirm the identification of interstellar C$_{60}^+$, high signal-to-noise observations of all five absorption bands are required, preferably from outside Earth’s atmosphere.
In this article, we present the first ever ultra-high S/N, high resolution stellar/interstellar spectra obtained using the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) imaging spectrograph, targeting four of the five [C$_{60}^+$]{} features ([$\lambda$]{}9349, [$\lambda$]{}9365, [$\lambda$]{}9428 and [$\lambda$]{}9577) along a heavily reddened line of sight. Very high continuum signal-to-noise ratios (S/N$>500$ per spectral channel) are commonly achieved using ground-based telescopes, but such sensitivity has not previously been obtained using (direct) HST spectroscopy due to the severe CCD fringing at red and near-IR wavelengths. After successfully employing a previously untested ‘STIS scan’ observing mode to trail the target star along the spectrograph slit (crossing hundreds of CCD rows to facilitate fringe cancellation), unprecedented signal-to-noise ratios $\sim600$-800 have been obtained. These spectra have permitted the first search for weak interstellar absorption features in the NIR, unhindered by telluric absorption.
Observations and data reduction {#obs}
===============================
To reliably detect the weaker [C$_{60}^+$]{} DIBs, a high-S/N interstellar spectrum is required, with minimal contamination from interloping stellar photospheric lines. The heavily-reddened ([$E_{B-V}$]{} = 1.01) B0I star [BD+631964]{} was selected due to its extremely strong DIBs — the majority of DIBs are among the strongest for stars of comparable extinction [@tua00] — as well as its early spectral type and relatively clean predicted spectrum in the vicinity of the [$\lambda$]{}9365 and [$\lambda$]{}9428 [C$_{60}^+$]{} bands. The lightly-reddened B0I star 69 Cygni ([$E_{B-V}$]{} = 0.14) was selected for comparison, to assist in the discrimination of stellar and interstellar features.
HST STIS {#stis}
--------
Data were acquired over a single orbit for 69 Cyg and two orbits for [BD+631964]{}, using the G750M grating with a central wavelength of 9336 Å (covering the range 9050-9610 Å). [ This covers four of the five known [C$_{60}^+$]{} bands; a change of grating tilt would be required to obtain the fifth band]{}. We used the $52''\times0.1''$ slit, and the plate scale was $0.05''$ per pixel. Following peakup and focusing maneuvers, a series of STIS-scan exposures was performed for each star, trailing the star along the slit at a constant rate with the shutter held open. For 69 Cyg, six exposures were obtained: two long scans spanning up to 1000 detector rows and four shorter scans spanning $\sim300$ rows. The scan direction was alternated for successive exposures. For [BD+631964]{} (observed in a separate visit after the optimal observing sequence had been established), eight identical forward scans were obtained spanning 700 detector rows each, towards the upper part of the CCD. A pair of flat-field exposures (contemporaneous fringe flats) was obtained in sequence following each pair of target star exposures, and 5-6 additional pairs of flats were obtained to fill in the remaining orbital time during occultation. Exposures of a Pt/Cr-Ne lamp were obtained during each orbit for wavelength calibration. Subsequent conversion from vacuum to air wavelengths was performed using the @mor00 formula.
The STIS CCD suffers from charge transfer inefficiency (CTI) during readout, as a result of long-term radiation damage. The raw frames were corrected for CTI using the procedure outlined by @and10[^1], which significantly reduces the severity of bad CCD columns. Standard dark current, bias, geometric distortion and wavelength corrections were performed using the [Iraf]{} [calstis]{} package [@hod98]. For [BD+631964]{}, the four trailed science exposures in each orbit were sufficiently well matched to allow statistical cosmic ray rejection using [ocrreject]{}. This was not possible for 69 Cyg due to imperfect registration of the exposed rows between each frame, which may have occurred due to errors in the guide star tracking, as well as possible exposure timing errors.
![HST spectra of [BD+631964]{} using three different scanning/flat-fielding schemes (with additive vertical offsets). Top: standard STIS spectroscopic acquisition and reduction (extracted over 10 dispersion rows), showing severe CCD fringing. Middle: a substantial reduction in fringe amplitude is achieved by STIS scanning (extracted over 700 dispersion rows). Bottom: the combined result of STIS scanning and flat fielding using a contemporaneous (in-orbit) fringe flat.\[fig:fringe\]](STIS_scanning.pdf){width="\columnwidth"}
{width="33.00000%"} {width="33.00000%"} {width="33.00000%"}
Spectral extraction was performed by summing the counts along CCD columns. Bad pixels and residual cosmic rays were rejected based on their standard deviation (using a $3\sigma$ threshold), after first normalizing the individual CCD rows by their median levels. Such row normalization was required due to variations in the illumination function along the slit, resulting from slight variations in the slit width and telescope scan rate. Scattered light subtraction was performed with a low-order fit to the light under the two occulting bars (positioned 1/3 and 2/3 way along the slit). Extracted Pt/Cr-Ne lamp line widths were consistent with the nominal instrumental resolving power of 10,000 (30 ).
The STIS CCD suffers from severe fringing due to internal reflections at wavelengths greater than 700 nm, where the chip starts to become transparent to incoming light. Fringe amplitudes are variable with wavelength, with a maximum of $\pm20\%$ near 900 nm (see [*e.g.*]{} Figure \[fig:fringe\]). The aim of our fringe cancellation strategy was to match as closely as possible the illumination pattern of the science exposure to that of the flat field, by STIS-scanning. This approach has the major advantages of (1) reducing the impact of individual bad pixels and cosmic ray hits, (2) allowing for orders of magnitude increases in the number of counts per science exposure, (3) eliminating the need to change the slit mechanism during observations, resulting in a consistent optical setup for the science and flat-field exposures.
As shown in Figure \[fig:fringe\], scanning the exposed star across hundreds of CCD rows results in significantly reduced fringe amplitudes (a five-fold reduction in the spectral RMS in this case). Following correction using a contemporaneous fringe flat, we obtained apparently complete fringe cancellation down to the level of the statistical noise.
CFHT [ESPaDOnS]{} {#espadons}
-----------------
For comparison with our STIS data, four 1000 s exposures of [BD+631964]{} were obtained over 2 nights in 2016 December, using the [ESPaDOnS]{} [é]{}chelle spectrograph of the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope (CFHT). Observing conditions were good and the airmass was in the range of 1.41-1.49. The data were reduced by the automated Upena pipeline, which uses the Libre-ESpRIT data reduction software [@don97]. The reduced spectra cover the range 370-1048 nm at a resolving power of $\sim$80,000, and have a continuum signal-to-noise ratio $\sim500$ at 900 nm.
Due to the forest of atmospheric H$_2$O absorption lines in our STIS range, the [ESPaDOnS]{} spectra need to be telluric-corrected. The conventional approach of division by a standard star is unreliable for the measurement of weak DIBs due to the likely presence of stellar features in the standard star spectrum, which would introduce artifacts upon division. We therefore adopted a transmission modeling approach, using synthetic atmospheric transmittances provided by the TAPAS website[^2] [@ber14], adapted for Mauna Kea. A preliminary telluric correction was performed using the ‘rope length’ method for weak to moderately strong lines [@rai12], excluding from the length the spectral intervals corresponding to the central parts of the strongest lines. The preliminary correction was then interpolated in the most heavily contaminated intervals to remove residual artifacts. Next, the observed data were fitted to the convolved product of this spectrum and the TAPAS synthetic transmittance, allowing for variable airmass, refined wavelength correction and variable line-spread function. The observed data were divided by this new, adjusted transmission spectrum to provide a new corrected spectrum. The second step was then iterated to convergence to produce the final corrected spectrum. [ Despite our best efforts, telluric residuals still remain at the locations of the most heavily saturated lines, which may be due to time-variability of the telluric spectrum, scattered light residuals or small asymmetries in the [ESPaDOnS]{} instrumental response function.]{}
Comparison between STIS and [ESPaDOnS]{} spectra
------------------------------------------------
The main purpose of these [ESPaDOnS]{} spectra was to verify the reliability of our nonstandard STIS observation and reduction procedures. A comparison between the HST/STIS and telluric-corrected CFHT/[ESPaDOnS]{} spectra is shown in Figure \[fig:hstcfht\]. [ Telluric-correction artifacts in panels (a) and (b) are severe, preventing a reliable comparison in the vicinity of the weaker [C$_{60}^+$]{} bands. However, in the less problematic range 9500-9600 Å (panel c), the agreement between the two instruments is excellent, which]{} demonstrates the success of our STIS observation and data reduction strategy. Slight discrepancies may be due to differences in the instrumental resolving power, telluric correction residuals or uncertainties in the continuum level of the high-dispersion CFHT spectrum. Some uncertainty in the STIS scattered light correction also remains, leading to uncertainty in the zero level. More detailed characterization of the (2D) scattered light properties for STIS scan exposures awaits further study.
{width="\textwidth"}
{width="\textwidth"}
Results
=======
The combined, scattered-light-subtracted exposures of [BD+631964]{} and 69 Cyg reached total counts of $8\times10^5$ and $5.5\times10^5$, respectively (per dispersion pixel). The presence of weak stellar and interstellar features precludes an accurate measurement of the continuum RMS, but in regions free of any obvious lines, S/N = 600-800 was found for [BD+631964]{} and $\sim700$ for 69 Cyg. To our knowledge, this is the highest S/N ever demonstrated with STIS for direct near-infrared spectroscopy at full grating resolution. The continuum-normalized spectra are shown in Figure \[fig:spectra\].
Both stars are B0 supergiants and have nearly identical stellar spectra. We used the non-LTE model atmosphere code CMFGEN [@hil98; @hil99; @hil11], which solves the radiative-transfer equation for a spherically symmetric wind in the co-moving frame under the constraints of radiative and statistical equilibrium. [ An effective temperature of 27,000 K, macro-turbulent velocity of 120 and projected rotational velocity of 85 was derived for both stars]{}. The modeled lines are identified in Figure \[fig:spectra\]. Four features stand out in the [BD+631964]{} spectrum that are not present in 69 Cyg or in the stellar model, which are likely due to interstellar absorption. The first three of these (at 9088, 9302 and 9412 Å) are identified as new diffuse interstellar bands; @gal00 also found a possible DIB near 9412 Å. The absorption feature at 9577 Å coincides with the laboratory [C$_{60}^+$]{} wavelength. [ 69 Cyg also shows evidence for weak absorptions at 9577 and 9412 Å]{}.
The equivalent width (EW) of the [$\lambda$]{}9577 band is $74\pm3$ mÅ. A Gaussian fit to its profile gives EW = $76\pm3$ mÅ, with a central wavelength of $9576.60\pm0.03$ Å, a central depth of 2.3% and FWHM = $3.1\pm0.1$ Å. These line strength measurements may be considered accurate to within about $\pm10$% due to uncertainties in the STIS scattered light subtraction.
A close-up view of the four observed [C$_{60}^+$]{} band regions is shown in Figure \[fig:zoom\]. A spectral model for [C$_{60}^+$]{} is overlaid using the laboratory wavelengths and band strengths of @cam16. We adopt Gaussian band shapes because a Lorentzian profile provides a poor match to the observed [$\lambda$]{}9577 band wings (Fig. \[fig:zoom\]). The model has been Doppler shifted to match the interstellar K[i]{} velocity. As with most heavily-reddened diffuse sightlines, the K[i]{} line towards [BD+631964]{} (recorded in our [ESPaDOnS]{} data) shows complex velocity structure, with three main components at $-16$, $-27$ and $-33$ . We take the average of these ($-25$ ) as the interstellar [C$_{60}^+$]{} radial velocity. The [$\lambda$]{}9577 band carrier abundance could be variable across the three K[i]{} clouds (due to variations in chemical abundances and ionization levels), so we assign an error margin of $\pm10$ , which corresponds to $\pm0.3$ Å. Within the uncertainties, our inferred (Doppler corrected) [$\lambda$]{}9577 rest wavelength of $9577.4$ Å matches the laboratory value of $9577.0\pm0.2$ Å; the slight redshift could indicate that [C$_{60}^+$]{} is more associated with the higher-velocity K[i]{} gas. [ The 1.0 Å instrumental resolution contributes 0.2 Å to the observed DIB FWHM.]{} The additional (0.4 Å) of broadening in the observed band compared with the laboratory measurement of 2.5 Å is consistent with the spread of interstellar K[i]{} velocities in this sightline.
We find weak absorption features in our [BD+631964]{} spectrum close to the wavelengths of the [$\lambda$]{}9348, [$\lambda$]{}9365 and [$\lambda$]{}9428 [C$_{60}^+$]{} bands. These features are not present towards our standard star 69 Cyg, and may therefore be due to interstellar [C$_{60}^+$]{}. However, the appearance of the [$\lambda$]{}9348 band is far from clear due to contamination [ by another possible weak DIB at 9350 Å (previously identified at a rest wavelenth of 9351 Å by @wal16)]{}, as well as overlapping stellar He[ii]{} absorption. The [$\lambda$]{}9365 feature [ is partially contaminated by a weak stellar O[ii]{} line, and]{} is broader and deeper than expected. The [$\lambda$]{}9428 feature is too weak for a reliable measurement.
Discussion
==========
The strengths of different diffuse interstellar bands are known to vary among sightlines with differing physical and chemical properties, independent of the total amount of interstellar material [[*e.g.*]{} @kre87; @ehr95; @cam97; @ens17; @ely17]. The equivalent width per unit reddening (EW/[$E_{B-V}$]{}) provides a measure of the relative strength of a given DIB. For [BD+631964]{} we find EW(9577)/[$E_{B-V}$]{} = 73 mÅ, which is among the smallest values known for this band. Unfortunately for our present study, this means that [BD+631964]{} is one of the least favorable sightlines in which to search for [C$_{60}^+$]{}, which explains to some degree our difficulties in establishing (or disproving) the presence of the weaker [C$_{60}^+$]{} absorption bands.
The extreme weakness of the [$\lambda$]{}9577 band may be due to a lower than normal degree of ionization in this sightline. The well-known DIB at 6283 Å has a large EW/[$E_{B-V}$]{} value in diffuse clouds that are strongly irradiated by UV (see above references), while the 5797 Å DIB tends to be favored in more neutral, less irradiated clouds. The [$\lambda$]{}5797/[$\lambda$]{}6283 equivalent width ratio is thus considered to be a tracer of the radiation field strength in the line of sight. Data have been taken from compilations of optical DIB measurements by @xia17 and the [$\lambda$]{}9577 measurements of @gal00 to study the relationship between EW(9577)/[$E_{B-V}$]{} and the [$\lambda$]{}5797/[$\lambda$]{}6283 DIB strength ratio. Additional [$\lambda$]{}6283 and [$\lambda$]{}5797 measurements were obtained from archival data from the CFHT and Telescope Bernard Lyot. The results for 9 sightlines are shown in Figure \[fig:vs6283\], including the present results for [BD+631964]{}. Even without HD37022 (a highly-irradiated sightline through the Orion Nebula with unusually high EW(9577)/[$E_{B-V}$]{}), the trend is for increasing [$\lambda$]{}9577 strength in gas pervaded by stronger radiation fields. In a survey of DIBs and atomic lines towards [BD+631964]{} by @ehr97, a relatively high gas density and low level of ionization was inferred, and the extremely low [$\lambda$]{}5797/[$\lambda$]{}6283 ratio is suggestive of weakly-irradiated gas. The trend for increasing EW(9577)/[$E_{B-V}$]{} with radiation field strength is consistent with the assignment to [C$_{60}^+$]{} or another species whose ionisation stage becomes dominant in more irradiated diffuse clouds [see also @foi97].
![Strength of the [$\lambda$]{}9577 [C$_{60}^+$]{} band (per unit reddening) *vs.* equivalent width ratio of the [$\lambda$]{}6283 and [$\lambda$]{}5797 DIBs (an indicator of radiation field strength), [ for a sample of Galactic sightlines, labeled by HD number]{}. \[fig:vs6283\]](EW9577NORM_RAP5797_6283.pdf){width="\columnwidth"}
Conclusion
==========
We performed the first successful test of the HST ‘STIS scan’ spectroscopic observational mode. The resulting spectroscopic S/N (up to $\sim800$) is, to our knowledge, by far the highest demonstrated with STIS for direct stellar measurements at full grating resolution. This technical demonstration opens up a new wavelength range for interstellar, stellar and exoplanetary spectroscopy, with unprecedented sensitivity.
We obtained the first ‘clean’ measurements of the spectral region covering the [$\lambda$]{}9348, [$\lambda$]{}9365, [$\lambda$]{}9428 and [$\lambda$]{}9577 [C$_{60}^+$]{} bands, without the confounding presence of telluric contamination or fringing artifacts. The [$\lambda$]{}9577 band exhibits a closely Gaussian shape with FWHM and peak wavelength consistent with laboratory measurements. However, due to the surprising weakness of the [C$_{60}^+$]{} features in our chosen sightline, the strengths and profiles of the (intrinsically weaker) [$\lambda$]{}9348, [$\lambda$]{}9365 or [$\lambda$]{}9428 bands could not be reliably measured. We identify a correlation between the [$\lambda$]{}9577 band strength (per unit reddening) and the [$\lambda$]{}5797/[$\lambda$]{}6283 DIB strength ratio (an indicator for radiation field strength), which suggests that the weakness of [$\lambda$]{}9577 towards [BD+631964]{} is due to a low-radiation environment, consistent with the assignment of this DIB to an ion of a species whose first ionization energy is much less than that of neutral hydrogen (13.6 eV), and whose second ionization energy is $\gtrsim13.6$ eV. Using the STIS scanning technique, high-S/N HST spectroscopy of more strongly UV-irradiated, heavily reddened sightlines may provide the best opportunity for a conclusive identification of all five [C$_{60}^+$]{} bands, which will be required to place the detection of this molecule beyond reasonable doubt.
Possible new DIBs are reported at 9088, 9302 and 9412 Å. Their interstellar origin may be confirmed by followup studies of stars with differing spectral types and degrees of extinction.
Based on observations made with the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope (program \#14705). Support was provided by NASA through a grant from the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under NASA contract NAS 5-26555. F.N. acknowledges Spanish grants FIS2012-39162-C06-01, ESP2013-47809-C3-1-R and ESP2015-65597-C4-1-R. [ESPaDOnS]{} observations were obtained under program 16BD86 at the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope, which is operated by the National Research Council of Canada, the Institut National des Sciences de l’Univers of the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique of France, and the University of Hawaii.
Anderson, J., Bedin, L. R. 2010, PASP, 122, 1035 Bern[é]{}, O., Mulas, G., Joblin, C. 2013, A&A Letters, 550, 4 Bertaux, J. L., Lallement, R., Ferron, S., Boonne, C., Bodichon, R. 2014, A&A, 564, A46 Cami, J., Sonnentrucker, P., Ehrenfreund, P., Foing, B. H., 1997, A&A, 326, 822 Cami, J., Bernard-Salas J., Peeters E., Malek S. E., 2010, Sci, 329, 1180 Campbell, E. K., Holz M., Gerlich D., Maier J. P. 2015, Nature, 523, 322 Campbell, E. K., Holz M., Maier J. P. et al. 2016, ApJ, 822, 17 Campbell, E. K., Holz, M., Maier, J. P. 2016, ApJ, 826, L4 Cordiner, M. A. 2011, Encyclopedia of Astrobiology, Springer-Verlag, p. 432 Donati, J.-F., Semel, M., Carter, B. D. et al. 1997, MNRAS, 291, 658 Ehrenfreund, P., Jenniskens, P. 1995, ASSL Vol. 202: The Diffuse Interstellar Bands, D. Reidel Publishing Company, 105 Ehrenfreund, P., Cami, J., Dartois, E., Foing, B. H. 1997, A&A, 318, L28 Elyajouri, M., Lallement, R., Monreal-Ibero, A., Capitanio, L., Cox, N. L. J. 2017, A&A, 600, A129 Ensor, T., Cami, J., Bhatt, N. H., Soddu, A. 2017, ApJ, 836, 162 Foing, B. H. & Ehrenfreund, P. 1994, Nature, 369, 296 Foing, B. H. & Ehrenfreund, P. 1997, A&A, 319, 59 Fulara, J., Jakobi, M., Maier, J. P. 1993, Chem Phys. Lett. 211, 227 d’Hendecourt, L., Fostiropoulos, K., L[é]{}ger, A. 1992 in C. Joblin PhD thesis, Univ. Paris VII Hillier, D. J. & Miller, D. L. 1998, ApJ, 496, 407 Hillier, D. J. & Miller, D. L. 1999, ApJ, 519, 354 Hillier, D.J. 2011, APSS, 336, 1, 87 Galazutdinov, G. A., Kre[ł]{}owski, J., Musaev, F. A., Ehrenfreund, P., Foing, B. H. 2000, MNRAS, 317, 750 Galazutdinov, G. A., Shimansky, V. V., Bondar, A., Valyavin, G., Kre[ł]{}owski, J. 2017, MNRAS, 465, 3956 Herbig, G. H. 1995, ARA&A, 33, 19 Hodge, P. E., Hulbert, S. J., Lindler, D. et al. 1998, ASPC, 145, 316 M. Kuhn, M. Renzler, J. Postler, S. et al. 2016, Nature Communications, 7, 13550 Kre[ł]{}owski, J., Walker, G. A. H. 1987, ApJ, 312, 860 Morton, D. C. 2000, ApJ. Suppl., 130, 403 Raimond, S., Lallement, R., Vergely, J. L., Babusiaux, C., & Eyer, L. 2012, A&A, 544, A136 Sarre, P.J. 2006, J. Mol. Spect., 238, 1 Sellgren K., Werner M. W., Ingalls J. G. et al. 2010, ApJL, 722, L54 Snow, T. P. 2014, IAUS, 297, 3 Tuairisg, S. [Ó]{} et al. 2000, A&AS, 142, 225 Walker, G. A. H., Bohlender, D. A., Maier, J. P., Campbell, E. K. 2015, 812, L8 Walker, G. A. H., Campbell, E. K., Maier, J. P., Bohlender, D., Malo, L. 2016, ApJ, 831, 130 Xiang, F. Y., Li, Aigen, Zhong, J. X. 2017, ApJ, 835, 107
[^1]: see http://www.stsci.edu/hst/stis/software/analyzing/scripts/pixel\_based\_CTI
[^2]: http://ether.ipsl.jussieu.fr/tapas/
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We introduce a near-linear complexity (geometric and meshless/algebraic) multigrid/multiresolution method for PDEs with rough ($L^\infty$) coefficients with rigorous a-priori accuracy and performance estimates. The method is discovered through a decision/game theory formulation of the problems of (1) identifying restriction and interpolation operators (2) recovering a signal from incomplete measurements based on norm constraints on its image under a linear operator (3) gambling on the value of the solution of the PDE based on a hierarchy of nested measurements of its solution or source term. The resulting elementary gambles form a hierarchy of (deterministic) basis functions of $H^1_0(\Omega)$ (gamblets) that (1) are orthogonal across subscales/subbands with respect to the scalar product induced by the energy norm of the PDE (2) enable sparse compression of the solution space in $H^1_0(\Omega)$ (3) induce an orthogonal multiresolution operator decomposition. The operating diagram of the multigrid method is that of an inverted pyramid in which gamblets are computed locally (by virtue of their exponential decay), hierarchically (from fine to coarse scales) and the PDE is decomposed into a hierarchy of independent linear systems with uniformly bounded condition numbers. The resulting algorithm is parallelizable both in space (via localization) and in bandwith/subscale (subscales can be computed independently from each other). Although the method is deterministic it has a natural Bayesian interpretation under the measure of probability emerging (as a mixed strategy) from the information game formulation and multiresolution approximations form a martingale with respect to the filtration induced by the hierarchy of nested measurements.'
author:
- 'Houman Owhadi[^1]'
bibliography:
- 'RPS.bib'
title: |
Multigrid with rough coefficients\
and Multiresolution operator decomposition\
from Hierarchical Information Games
---
Introduction {#secdt}
============
Scientific discovery as a decision theory problem
-------------------------------------------------
The process of scientific discovery is oftentimes based on intuition, trial and error and plain guesswork. This paper is motivated by the question of the existence of a rational decision framework that could be used to facilitate/guide this process, or turn it, to some degree, into an algorithm. In exploring this question, we will consider the problem of finding a method for solving (up to a pre-specified level of accuracy) PDEs with rough ($L^\infty$) coefficients as fast as possible with the following prototypical PDE (and its possible discretization over a fine mesh) as an example $$\label{eqn:scalar}
\begin{cases}
-\diiv \big(a(x) \nabla u(x)\big)=g(x) \quad x \in \Omega;\, g \in L^2(\Omega),\text{ or }g \in H^{-1}(\Omega) \\
u=0 \quad \text{on}\quad \partial \Omega,
\end{cases}$$ where $\Omega$ is a bounded subset of $\R^d$ (of arbitrary dimension $d\in \mathbb{N}^*$) with piecewise Lipschitz boundary, $a$ is a symmetric, uniformly elliptic $d\times d$ matrix with entries in $L^\infty(\Omega)$ and such that for all $x\in \Omega$ and $l\in \R^d$, $$\lambda_{\min}(a) |l|^2 \leq l^T a(x) l \leq \lambda_{\max}(a)|l|^2.$$ Although multigrid methods [@Fedorenko:1961; @Brandt:1973; @Hackbusch:1978; @Hackbusch:1985; @Stuben:2001] are now well known as the fastest for solving elliptic boundary-problems and have successfully been generalized to other types of PDEs and computational problems [@Yavneh:2006], their convergence rate can be severely affected by the lack of regularity of the coefficients [@EngquistLuo:1997; @wan2000]. Furthermore, although significant progress has been achieved in the development of multigrid methods that are, to some degree, robust with respect to meshsize and lack of smoothness (we refer in particular to algebraic multigrid [@RugeStuben1987], multilevel finite element splitting [@Yserentant1986], hierarchical basis multigrid [@BankYserentant88; @ChowVassilevski2003], multilevel preconditioning [@Vassilevski89], stabilized hierarchical basis methods [@Vassilevski1997sirev; @VassilevskiWang1997a; @VassilevskiWang1998], energy minimization [@Mandel1999; @wan2000; @Xu2004; @XuZhu2008; @Vassilevski2010] and homogenization based methods [@EngquistLuo:1997; @Efendiev2011]), the design of multigrid methods that are provably robust with respect to rough ($L^\infty$) coefficients has remained an open problem of practical importance [@BraWu09].
Alternative hierarchical strategies for the resolution of are (1) wavelet based methods [@Beylkin:1995; @Beylkin:1998; @Beylkin:1998b; @DorobantuEngquist1988; @EngquistRunborg02] (2) the Fast Multipole Method [@GreengardRokhlin:1987] and (3) Hierarchical matrices [@HackbuschGrasedyck:2002; @Bebendorf:2008]. Although methods based on (classical) wavelets achieve a multiresolution compression of the solution space of in $L^2$ and although approximate wavelets and approximate $L^2$ projections can stabilize hierarchical basis methods [@VassilevskiWang1997a; @VassilevskiWang1998], their applications to are limited by the facts that (a) the underlying wavelets can perform arbitrarily badly [@BaOs:2000] in their $H^1_0(\Omega)$ approximation of the solution space and (b) the operator does not preserve the orthogonality between subscales/subbands with classical wavelets. The Fast Multipole Method and hierarchical matrices exploit the property that sub-matrices of the inverse discrete operator are low rank away from the diagonal. This low rank property can be rigorously proven for (based on the approximation of its Green’s function by sums of products of harmonic functions [@Bebendorf2005]) and leads to provable convergence (with rough coefficients), up to the pre-specified level of accuracy $\epsilon$ in $L^2$-norm, in $\mathcal{O}(N \ln^{6} N \ln^{2d+2} \frac{1}{\epsilon})$ operations ([@Bebendorf2005] and [@Bebendorf:2008 Thm. 2.33 and Thm. 4.28]). Can the problem of finding a fast solver for be, to some degree, reformulated as an Uncertainty Quantification/Decision Theory problem that could, to some degree, be solved as such in an automated fashion? Can discovery be computed? Although these questions may seem unorthodox their answer appears to be positive: this paper shows that this reformulation is possible and leads to a multigrid/multiresolution method/algorithm solving , up to the pre-specified level of accuracy $\epsilon$ in $H^1$-norm (i.e. finding $u^{\app}$ such that $\|u-u^{\app}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)}\leq \epsilon \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}$ for an arbitrary $g$ decomposed over $N$ degrees of freedom), in $\mathcal{O}\big(N \ln^{3d}\big( \max(\frac{1}{\epsilon},N^{1/d})\big)\big)$ operations (for $\epsilon\sim N^{-1/d}$, the hierarchical matrix method achieves $\epsilon$-accuracy in $L^2$ norm in $\mathcal{O}(N \ln^{2d+8} N)$ operations and the proposed multiresolution method achieves $\epsilon$-accuracy in $H^1$ norm in $\mathcal{O}(N \ln^{3d} N)$ operations). For subsequent solves (i.e. if needs to be solved for more than one $g$) then the proposed multiresolution method achieves accuracy $\epsilon \approx N^{-\frac{1}{d}}$ in $H^1$-norm in $\mathcal{O}(N \ln^{d+1} N)$ operations (we refer to Subsection \[subseccomplexity\] and in particular to Table \[tabcomplexity\] for a detailed complexity analysis of the proposed method, which can also achieve sublinear complexity if one only requires $L^2$-approximations).
The core mechanism supporting the complexity of the method presented here is the fast decomposition of $H^1_0(\Omega)$ into a direct sum of linear subspaces that are orthogonal (or near-orthogonal) with respect to the energy scalar product and over which has uniformly bounded condition numbers. It is, to some degree, surprising that this decomposition can be achieved in near linear complexity and not in the complexity of an eigenspace decomposition. Naturally [@OwZh:2016], this decomposition can be applied to the fast simulation of the wave and parabolic equations associated to or to its fast diagonalization.
The essential step behind the automation of the discovery/design of scalable numerical solvers is the observation that fast computation requires repeated computation with partial information (and limited resources) over hierarchies of levels of complexity and the reformulation of this process as that of playing underlying hierarchies of adversarial information games [@VNeumann28; @VonNeumann:1944].
Although the problem of finding a fast solver for may appear disconnected from that of finding statistical estimators or making decisions from data sampled from an underlying unknown probability distribution, the proposed game theoretic reformulation is, to some degree, analogous to the one developed in Wald’s Decision Theory [@Wald:1945], evidently influenced by Von Neumann’s Game Theory [@VNeumann28; @VonNeumann:1944] (the generalization of worst case Uncertainty Quantification analysis [@ouq2010] to sample data/model uncertainty requires an analogous game theoretic formulation [@OwhadiScovel:2015w], see also [@OwhadiScovel:2013] for how the underlying calculus could be used to guide the discovery of new Selberg identities). We also refer to subsection \[subsecone3\] for a review of the correspondence between statistical inference and numerical approximation.
Outline of the paper
--------------------
The essential difficulty in generalizing the multigrid concept to PDEs with rough coefficients lies in the fact that the interpolation (downscaling) and restriction (upscaling) operators are, a priori, unknown. Indeed, in this situation, piecewise linear finite-elements can perform arbitrarily badly [@BaOs:2000] and the design of the interpolation operator requires the identification of accurate basis elements adapted to the microstructure $a(x)$.
This identification problem has also been the essential difficulty in numerical homogenization [@WhHo87; @BaOs:1983; @BaCaOs:1994; @Beylkin:1995; @HoWu:1997; @EEngquist:2003; @OwZh:2007a; @BraWu09]. Although inspired by classical homogenization ideas and concepts (such as oscillating test functions [@Mur78; @EfHo:2007; @EfGiHouEw:2006], cell problems/correctors and effective coefficients [@BeLiPa78; @PapanicolaouVaradhan:1981; @Abdulle:2004; @NoPaPi:2008; @EnSou08; @AnGlo06], harmonic coordinates [@Kozlov:1979; @BaOs:1983; @BaCaOs:1994; @Owhadi:2003; @BenarousOwhadi:2003; @AllBri05; @OwZh:2007a], compactness by compensation [@Spagnolo:1968; @Gio75; @Muratb:1978; @BeOw:2010]) an essential goal of numerical homogenization has been the numerical approximation of the solution space of with arbitrary rough coefficients [@OwZh:2007a], i.e., in particular, without the assumptions found in classical homogenization, such as scale separation, ergodicity at fine scales and $\epsilon$-sequences of operators (otherwise the resulting method could lack robustness to rough coefficients, even under the assumption that coefficients are stationary [@BalJing10]). Furthermore, to envisage applications to multigrid methods, the computation of these basis functions must also be provably localized [@BaLip10; @OwZh:2011; @MaPe:2012; @GrGrSa2012; @OwhadiZhangBerlyand:2014; @HouLiu2015] and compatible with nesting strategies [@OwhadiZhangBerlyand:2014]. In [@Owhadi:2014], it has been shown that this process of identification (of accurate basis elements for numerical homogenization), could, in principle, be guided through its reformulation as a Bayesian Inference problem in which the source term $g$ in is replaced by noise $\xi$ and one tries to estimate the value of the solution at a given point based on a finite number of observations. In particular it was found that Rough Polyharmonic Splines [@OwhadiZhangBerlyand:2014] and Polyharmonic Splines [@Harder:1972; @Duchon:1976; @Duchon:1977; @Duchon:1978] can be re-discovered as solutions of Gaussian filtering problems. This paper is inspired by the suggestion that this link between numerical homogenization and Bayesian Inference (and the link between Numerical Quadrature and Bayesian Inference [@Poincare:1896; @Diaconis:1988; @Shaw:1988; @Hagan:1991; @Hagan:1992]) are not coincidences but particular instances of mixed strategies for underlying information games and that optimal or near optimal methods could be obtained by identifying such games and their optimal strategies.
The process of identification of these games starts with the (Information Based Complexity [@Woniakowski2009]) notion that computation can only be done with partial information. For instance, since the operator is infinite dimensional, one cannot directly compute with $u\in H^1_0(\Omega)$ but only with finite-dimensional *features* of $u$. An example of such finite-dimensional features is the $m$-dimensional vector $u_m:=(\int_{\Omega}u\phi_1,\ldots,\int_{\Omega}u\phi_m)$ obtained by integrating the solution $u$ of against $m$ test/measurement functions $\phi_i \in L^2(\Omega)$. However to achieve an accurate approximation of $u$ through computation with $u_m$ one must fill the information gap between $u_m$ and $u$ (i.e. construct an interpolation operator giving $u$ as a function of $u_m$). We will, therefore, reformulate the identification of this interpolation operator as a non-cooperative (min max) game where Player I chooses the source term $g$ in an admissible set/class (e.g. the unit ball of $L^2(\Omega)$) and Player II is shown $u_m$ and must approximate $u$ from these incomplete measurements. Using the energy norm $$\label{eqenergynorm}
\|u\|_a^2:=\int_{\Omega}\nabla u^T(x) a(x)\nabla u(x)\,dx,$$ to quantify the accuracy of the recovery and calling $u^*$ Player I’s bet (on the value of $u$), the objective of Player I is to maximize the approximation error $\|u-u^*\|_{a}$, while the objective of Player II is to minimize it. A remarkable result from Game Theory (as developed by Von Neumann [@VNeumann28], Von Neumann and Morgenstern [@VonNeumann:1944] and Nash [@Nash:1951]) is that optimal strategies for deterministic zero sum finite games are mixed (i.e. randomized) strategies. Although the information game described above is zero sum, it is not finite. Nevertheless, as in Wald’s Decision Theory [@Wald:1945], under sufficient regularity conditions it can be made compact and therefore approximable by a finite game. Therefore although the information game described above is purely deterministic (and has no a priori connection to statistical estimation), under compactness (and continuity of the loss function), the best strategy for Player I is to play at random by placing a probability distribution $\pi_{I}$ on the set of candidates for $g$ (and select $g$ as a sample from $\pi_{I}$) and the optimal strategy for Player II is to place a probability distribution $\pi_{II}$ on the set of candidates for $g$ and approximate the solution of by the expectation of $u$ (under $\pi_{II}$ used as a prior distribution) conditioned on the measurements $\int_{\Omega} u\phi_i$.
Although the estimator employed by Player II may be called Bayesian, the game described here is not (i.e. the choice of Player I might be distinct from that of Player II) and Player II must solve a min max optimization problem over $\pi_{I}$ and $\pi_{II}$ to identify an optimal prior distribution for the Bayesian estimator (a careful choice of the prior also appears to be important due to the possible high sensitivity of posterior distributions [@OSS:2013; @OwhadiScovel:2013; @owhadiBayesiansirev2013]). Although solving the min max problem over $\pi_{I}$ and $\pi_{II}$ may be one way of determining the strategy of Player II, it will not be the method employed here. We will instead analyze the error of Player II’s approximation as a function of Player II’s prior and the source term $g$ picked by Player I. Furthermore, to preserve the linearity of the calculations we will restrict Player II’s decision space (the set of possible priors $\pi_{II}$) to Gaussian priors on the source term $g$. Since the resulting analysis is independent of the structure of and solely depends on its linearity we will first perform this investigation, in Section \[sec:problem\], in the algebraic framework of linear systems of equations, identify Player II’s optimal mixed strategy and show that it is characterized by deterministic optimal recovery and accuracy properties. The mixed strategy identified in Section \[sec:problem\] will then be applied in \[sec:contcase\] to the numerical homogenization of and the discovery of interpolation interpolators. In particular, it will be shown that the resulting elementary gambles form a set of deterministic basis functions (gamblets) characterized by (1) optimal recovery and accuracy properties (2) exponential decay (enabling their localized computation) (3) robustness to high contrast.
To compute fast, the game presented above must not be limited to filling the information gap between $u_m\in \R^m$ and $u\in H^1_0(\Omega)$. This game must be played (and repeated) over hierarchies of levels of complexity (e.g. one must fill information gaps between $\R^{4}$ and $\R^{16}$, then $\R^{16}$ and $\R^{64}$, etc...). We will therefore, in Section \[sechnh\], consider the (hierarchical) game where Player I chooses the r.h.s of and Player II must (iteratively) gamble on the value of its solution based on a hierarchy of nested measurements of $u$ (from coarse to fine measurements). Under Player II’s mixed strategy (identified in Section \[sec:problem\] and used in Section \[sec:contcase\]), the resulting sequence of multi-resolution approximations forms a martingale. Conditioning and the independence of martingale increments lead to the hierarchy of nested interpolation operators and to the multiresolution orthogonal decomposition of into independent linear systems of uniformly bounded condition numbers. The resulting elementary gambles (gamblets) (1) form a hierarchy of nested basis functions leading to the orthogonal decomposition (in the scalar product of the energy norm) of $H^1_0(\Omega)$ (2) enable the sparse compression of the solution space of (3) can be computed and stored in near-linear complexity by solving a nesting of linear systems with uniformly bounded condition numbers (4) enable the computation of the solution of (or its hyperbolic or parabolic analogues) in near-linear complexity. The implementation and complexity of the algorithm are discussed in Section \[secnumimple\] with numerical illustrations.
On the correspondence between statistical inference and numerical approximation {#subsecone3}
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As exposed by Diaconis [@Diaconis:1988], the investigation of the correspondence between statistical inference and numerical approximation can be traced back to Poincar[é]{}’s course in Probability Theory [@Poincare:1896]. It is useful to recall Diaconis’ compelling example [@Diaconis:1988] as an illustration of this conection. Let $f:[0,1]\rightarrow \R$ be a given function and assume that we are interested in the numerical approximation of $\int_0^1 f(t)\,dt$. The Bayesian approach to this quadrature problem is to (1) Put a prior (probability distribution) on continuous functions $\mathcal{C}[0,1]$ (2) Calculate $f$ at $x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n$ (to obtain the data $(f(x_1),\ldots,f(x_n))$) (3) Compute a posterior (4) Estimate $\int_0^1 f(t)\,dt$ by the Bayes rule. If the prior on $\mathcal{C}[0,1]$ is that of a Brownian Motion (i.e. $f(t)=B_t$ where $B_t$ is a Brownian motion and $B_0$ is normal), then $\E\big[f(x)\big|f(x_1),\ldots,f(x_n)\big]$ is the piecewise linear interpolation of $f$ between the points $x_1,\ldots,x_n$ and one re-discovers the trapezoidal quadrature rule. If the prior on $\mathcal{C}[0,1]$ is that of the first integral of a Brownian Motion (i.e. $f(t)\sim \int_0^t B_s\,ds$) then the posterior $\E\big[f(x)\big|f(x_1),\ldots,f(x_n)\big]$ is the cubic spline interpolant and integrating $k$ times yields splines of order $2k+1$.
Subsequent to Poincar[é]{}’s early discovery [@Poincare:1896], Sul’din [@Suldin1959] and (in particular) Larkin [@Larkin1972] initiated the systematic investigation of the correspondence between conditioning Gaussian measures/processes and numerical approximation. As noted by Larkin [@Larkin1972], despite Sard’s introduction of probabilistic concepts in the theory of linear approximation [@Sard1963], and Kimeldorf and Wahba’s exposition [@Kimeldorf70] of the correspondence between Bayesian estimation and spline smoothing/interpolation, the application of probabilistic concepts and techniques to numerical integration/approximation “attracted little attention among numerical analysts” (perhaps due to the counterintuitive nature of the process of randomizing a known function). However, a natural framework for understanding this process of randomization can be found in the pioneering works of Wo[ź]{}niakowski [@Woniakowski1986], Packel [@Packel1987], and Traub, Wasilkowski, and Woźniakowski [@Traub1988] on Information Based Complexity [@Nemirovsky1992; @Woniakowski2009], the branch of computational complexity that studies the complexity of approximating continuous mathematical operations with discrete and finite ones up a to specified level of accuracy. Indeed the concept that numerical implementation requires computation with partial information and limited resources emerges naturally from Information Based Complexity, where it is also augmented by concepts of contaminated and priced information associated with, for example, truncation errors and the cost of numerical operations. In this framework, the performance of an algorithm operating on incomplete information can be analysed in the usual worst case setting or the average case (randomized) setting [@Ritter2000; @Novak2010] with respect to the missing information. Although the measure of probability (on the solution space) employed in the average case setting may be arbitrary, as observed by Packel [@Packel1987], if that measure is chosen carefully (as the solution of a game theoretic problem) then the average case setting can be interpreted as lifting a (worst case) min max problem (where saddle points of pure strategies do not, in general, exist) to a min max problem over mixed (randomized) strategies (where saddle points do exist [@VNeumann28; @VonNeumann:1944]). As exposed by Diaconis [@Diaconis:1988] (see also Shaw [@Shaw:1988]) the randomized setting also establishes a correspondence between Numerical Analysis and Bayesian Inference providing a natural framework for the statistical description of numerical errors (in which confidence intervals can be derived from posterior distributions). Furthermore [@PalastiRenyi1956; @Diaconis:1988], classical min max numerical quadrature rules can be formulated as solutions of Bayesian inference problems with carefully chosen priors [@Diaconis:1988] and, as shown by O’Hagan [@Hagan:1991; @Hagan:1992], this correspondence can be exploited to discover new and useful numerical quadratures rules. As envisioned by Skilling [@Skilling1992], by placing a (carefully chosen) probability distribution on the solution space of an ODE and conditioning on quadrature points, one obtains a posterior distribution on the solution whose mean may coincide with classical numerical integrators such as Runge-Kutta methods [@schober2014nips]. As shown in [@ChkrebtiiCampbell2015] the statistical approach is particularly well suited for chaotic dynamical systems for which deterministic worst case error bounds may provide little information. While in [@Skilling1992; @schober2014nips; @ChkrebtiiCampbell2015] the probability distribution is directly placed on the solutions space, for PDEs [@Owhadi:2014] argues that the prior distribution must be placed on source terms (or on the image space of an integro-differential operator) and propagated/filtered through the inverse operator to reflect the structure of the solution space. In particular [@Owhadi:2014] shows that this process of filtering noise with the inverse operator, when combined with conditioning, produces accurate finite-element basis functions for the solution space whose deterministic worst case errors can be bounded by standard deviation errors using the reproducing kernel structure of the covariance function of the filtered Gaussian field. As already witnessed in [@ChkrebtiiCampbell2015; @schober2014nips; @Owhadi:2014; @Hennig2015; @Hennig2015b; @Briol2015; @Conrad2015], it is natural to expect that the possibilities offered by combining numerical uncertainties/errors with model uncertainties/errors in a unified framework will stimulate a resurgence of the statistical inference approach to numerical analysis.
Linear Algebra with incomplete information {#sec:problem}
==========================================
The recovery problem
--------------------
The problem of identifying interpolation operators for is equivalent (after discretization or in the algebraic setting) to that of recovering or approximating the solution of a linear system of equations from an incomplete set of measurements (coarse variables) given known norm constraints on the image of the solution.
Let $n\geq 2$ and $A$ be a known real invertible $n\times n$ matrix. Let $b$ be an unknown element of $\R^n$. Our purpose is to approximate the solution $x$ of $$\label{eqn:scalargeneral}
A x=b$$ based on the information that (1) $x$ solves $$\label{eq:ekiudiu3d}
\Phi x =y,$$ where $\Phi$ (the measurement matrix) is a known, rank $m$, $m\times n$ real matrix such that $m<n$ and $y$ (the measurement vector) is a known vector of $\R^m$, and (2) the norm $b^T T^{-1} b$ of $b$ is known or bounded by a known constant (e.g., $b^T T^{-1} b \leq 1$), where $T^{-1}$ is a known positive definite $n\times n$ matrix (with $T^{-1}$ being the identity matrix as a prototypical example). Observe that since $m<n$, the measurements are, a priori, not sufficient to recover the exact value $x$.
As described in Section \[secdt\], by formulating this recovery problem as a (non-cooperative) information game (where Player I chooses $b$ and Player II chooses an approximation $x^*$ of $x$ based on the observation $\Phi x$), one (Player II) is naturally lead to search for mixed strategy in the Bayesian class by placing a prior distribution on $b$. The purpose of this section is to analyze the resulting approximation error and select the prior distribution accordingly. To preserve the linearity (i.e. simplicity and computational efficiency) of calculations we will restrict Player II’s decision space to Gaussian priors.
Player I’s mixed strategy
-------------------------
We will therefore, in the first step of the analysis, replace $b$ in by $\xi$, a centered Gaussian vector of $\R^n$ with covariance matrix $Q$ (which may be distinct from $T$) and consider the following stochastic linear system $$\label{eqn:noisy}
A X=\xi\,.$$ The Bayesian answer (a mixed strategy for Player II) to the recovery problem of Section \[sec:problem\] is to approximate $x$ by the conditional expectation $\E[X|\Phi X=y]$.
\[thm:Gaussian\] The solution $X$ of is a centered Gaussian vector of $\R^n$ with covariance matrix $$\label{eqhbddjdhh}
K=A^{-1} Q (A^{-1})^T\,.$$ Furthermore, $X$ conditioned on the value $\Phi X=y$ is a Gaussian vector of $\R^n$ with mean $\E[X|\Phi X=y]= \Psi y$, and of covariance matrix $K^{\Phi}$, where $\Psi$ is the $n \times m$ matrix $$\label{eq:phiidef}
\Psi:=K \Phi^T (\Phi K \Phi^T)^{-1},$$ and $K^{\Phi}$ is the rank $n-m$ positive $n\times n$ symmetric matrix defined by $K^{\Phi}:= K - \Psi \Phi K$.
simply follows from $X=A^{-1}\xi$. Since $X$ is a Gaussian vector, $\E[X|\Phi X=y]= \Psi y$ where $\Psi$ is a $n\times m$ matrix minimizing the mean squared error $\E\big[|X- M\Phi X|^2\big]$ over all $n\times m$ matrices $M$. We have $\E\big[|X- M\Phi X|^2\big]= \Tr[K]+ \Tr[M \Phi K \Phi^T M^T] -2 \Tr[\Phi K M]$ whose minimum is achieved for $M=\Psi$ as defined by . The covariance matrix of $X$ given $\Phi X=y$ is then obtained by observing that for $v\in \R^n$, $v^T K^{\Phi} v=\E\big[|v^T X- v^T \Psi \Phi X|^2\big]= v^T K v - v^T \Psi \Phi K v$.
Variational/optimal recovery properties and approximation error {#subsecvarprop}
---------------------------------------------------------------
For a $n\times n$ symmetric positive definite matrix $M$ let $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_{M}$ be the (scalar) product on $\R^n$ defined by: for $u, v\in \R^n$, $ \<u, v\>_{M} := u^T M v$ and write $\|v\|_{M}:=\<v, v\>_M^\frac{1}{2}$ the corresponding norm. When $M$ is the identity matrix then we write $\<u, v\>$ and $ \|v\|$ the corresponding scalar product and norm. For a linear subspace $V$ of $\R^n$ we write $P_{V, M}$ for the orthogonal projections onto $V$ with respect to the scalar product $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_{M}$. For a (possibly rectangular) matrix $B$ we write $\Img(B)$ the image (range) of $B$ and $\Ker(B)$ the null space of $B$. For an integer $n$, let $I_n$ be the $n\times n$ identity matrix.
\[lem:minimizingproperty\] For $w\in \R^m$, $\Psi w$ is the unique minimizer of the following quadratic problem $$\label{eq:dueihdbis}
\begin{cases}
\text{Minimize } &\<v, v\>_{K^{-1}}\\
\text{Subject to } &\Phi v=w\text{ and } v \in \R^n\,.
\end{cases}$$ In particular, $v=\Psi y$, the Bayesian approximation of the solution of , is the unique minimizer of $\|A v\|_{Q^{-1}}$ under the measurement constraints $\Phi v=y$. Furthermore, it also holds true that (1) $\Phi \Psi=I_m$ (2) $\Img(\Psi)$ is the orthogonal complement of $\Ker(\Phi)$ with respect to the product $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_{K^{-1}}$ and (3) $\Psi\Phi=P_{\Img(K \Phi^T), K^{-1}}$ and $I_n-\Psi\Phi=P_{\Ker(\Phi), K^{-1}}$.
First observe that implies that $\Phi \Psi=I_m$ where $I_m$ is the identity $m\times m$ matrix. Therefore $\Phi (\Psi w)=w$. Note that implies that for all $z\in \R^m$, $\<\Psi z,v\>_{K^{-1}} =z^T \big(\Phi K \Phi^T\big)^{-1} \Phi v$. Therefore if $v\in \Ker(\Phi)$ then $\<\Psi z,v\>_{K^{-1}}=0$ for all $z\in \R^m$. Conversely if $\<\Psi z,v\>_{K^{-1}}=0$ for all $z\in \R^m$ then $v$ must belong to $\Ker(\Phi)$. Since the dimension of $\Img(\Psi)$ is $m$ and that of $\Ker(\Phi)$ is $n-m$ we conclude that $\Img(\Psi)$ is the orthogonal complement $\Ker(\Phi)$ with respect to the product $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_{K^{-1}}$ and in particular, $$\label{eqn:orthogonalitybis}
\<\Psi w,v\>_{K^{-1}} =0, \quad \forall w\in \R^m \text{ and } \forall v\in \R^n \text{ such that }\Phi v=0\,.$$ Let $w\in \R^m$ and $v\in \R^n$ such that $\Phi v=w$. Since $\Psi w -v \in \Ker(\Phi)$, it follows from that $ \<v,v\>_{K^{-1}} = \<\Psi w,\Psi w\>_{K^{-1}} +\<v-\Psi w,v-\Psi w\>_{K^{-1}}$. Therefore $\Psi w$ is the unique minimizer of $\<v,v\>_{K^{-1}}$ over all $v\in \R^n$ such that $\Phi v=w$. Now consider $f\in \R^n$, since $\Img(\Psi)=\Img(K\Phi^T)$ and $\Img(\Psi)$ is the orthogonal complement of $\Ker(\Phi)$ with respect to the product $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_{K^{-1}}$, there exists a unique $z\in \R^m$ and a unique $g\in \Ker(\Phi)$ such that $f=K \Phi^T z +g$. Since $\Psi \Phi =K \Phi^T (\Phi K \Phi^T)^{-1} \Phi$, it follows that $\Psi \Phi f= K \Phi^T z \text{ and }(I_n-\Psi \Phi)f=g$. We conclude by observing that $g=P_{\Ker(\Phi), K^{-1}} f$.
\[thm:gedgdgjdh\] For $v\in \R^n$, $w^*=\Phi v$ is the unique minimizer of $\|v- \Psi w\|_{K^{-1}}$ over all $w\in \R^m$. In particular, $\|v-\Psi \Phi v\|_{K^{-1}}=\min_{z\in \R^m} \|v-K\Phi^T z\|_{K^{-1}}$ and if $x$ is the solution of the original equation , then $\|x-\Psi y\|_{K^{-1}} =\min_{w\in \R^m} \|x-\Psi w\|_{K^{-1}} =\min_{z\in \R^m} \|x-K\Phi^T z\|_{K^{-1}}$.
The proof follows by observing that $v-\Psi \Phi v$ belongs to the null space of $\Phi$ which, from Theorem \[lem:minimizingproperty\], is the orthogonal complement of the image of $\Psi$ with respect to the scalar product defining the norm $\|\cdot\|_{K^{-1}}$. Observe also that the image of $\Psi$ is equal to that of $K\Phi^T$.
\[rmk:accurkm1\] Observe that, from Theorem \[lem:minimizingproperty\], $v-\Psi \Phi v$ spans the null space of $\Phi$, and $\|v\|_{K^{-1}}^2= \big\|v-\Psi \Phi v\big\|_{K^{-1}}^2+\big\|\Psi \Phi v\big\|_{K^{-1}}^2$. Therefore if $D$ is a symmetric positive definite $n\times n$ matrix then $\sup_{v \in \R^n} \big\|v-\Psi \Phi v\big\|_{D}/\|v\|_{K^{-1}}=\sup_{v\in \R^n,\, \Phi v=0}\|v\|_{D}/\| v\|_{K^{-1}}$. In particular, if $x$ is the solution of and $y$ the vector in , then $\big\|x-\Psi y\big\|_{D}/\|b\|_{Q^{-1}}\leq \sup_{v\in \R^n,\, \Phi v=0} \|v\|_{D}/\| v\|_{K^{-1}}$ and the right hand side is the smallest constant for which the inequality holds (for all $b$).
A simple calculation (based on the reproducing Kernel property $\<v,K_{\cdot,i}\>_{K^{-1}}=v_i$) shows that if $x$ is the solution of and $y$ the vector in , then\
$\Big|(x-\Psi y)_i\Big| \leq \big(K^\Phi_{i,i}\big)^\frac{1}{2} \|b\|_{Q^{-1}}$, i.e. the variance of the $i$th entry of the solution of the stochastic system conditioned on $\Phi X=y$, controls the accuracy of the approximation of the $i$th entry of the solution of the deterministic system . In that sense, the role of $K^\Phi$ is analogous to that of the power function in radial basis function interpolation [@Wendland:2005; @Fasshauer:2005] and that of the Kriging function [@WuSchback:93] in geostatistics [@Myers:1992].
Energy norm estimates and selection of the prior {#subsecpriorselection}
------------------------------------------------
We will from now on assume that $A$ is symmetric positive definite. Observe that in this situation the energy norm $\|\cdot\|_A$ is of practical significance for quantifying the approximation error and Theorem \[thm:gedgdgjdh\] leads to the estimate $\|x-\Psi y\|_{K^{-1}} =\min_{z\in \R^m} \|Q^{-\frac{1}{2}}b- Q^{-\frac{1}{2}} A^{\frac{1}{2}} K^\frac{1}{2}\Phi^T z\|$ which simplifies to the energy norm estimate expressed by Corollary under the choice $Q=A$ (note that $K^{-1}=A$ under that choice).
\[cor:geaaedgjdh\] If $A$ is symmetric positive definite and $Q=A$, then for $v\in \R^n$, $\|v-\Psi \Phi v\|_{A}=\min_{z\in \R^m} \|v-A^{-1}\Phi^T z\|_{A}$. Therefore, if $x$ is the solution of and $y$ the vector in , then $\|x-\Psi y\|_{A} =\min_{w\in \R^m} \|x-\Psi w\|_{A} =\min_{z\in \R^m} \|x-A^{-1}\Phi^T z\|_{A}$. In particular $$\label{eq:gdugeueydd}
\|x-\Psi y\|_{A} =\min_{z\in \R^m} \|A^{-\frac{1}{2}} b-A^{-\frac{1}{2}}\Phi^T z\|\,.$$
\[rmk:galerkinproj\] Therefore, according to Corollary \[cor:geaaedgjdh\], if $Q=A$, then $\Psi y$ is the Galerkin approximation of $x$, i.e. the best approximation of $x$ in $\|\cdot\|_A$-norm in the image of $\Psi$ (which is equal to the image of $A^{-1}\Phi^T$). This is interesting because $\Psi y$ is obtained without the prior knowledge of $b$.
Corollary \[cor:geaaedgjdh\] and Remark \[rmk:galerkinproj\] motivate us to select $Q=A$ as the covariance matrix of the Gaussian prior distribution (mixed strategy of Player II).
Impact and selection of the measurement matrix $\Phi$
-----------------------------------------------------
It is natural to wonder how good this recovery strategy is (under the choice $Q=A$) compared to the best possible function of $y$ and how the approximation error is impacted by the measurement matrix $\Phi$. If the energy norm is used to quantify accuracy, then the recovery problem can be expressed as finding the function $\theta$ of the measurements $y$ minimizing the (worst case) approximation error $\inf_{\theta}\sup_{\|b\|\leq 1} \|x - \theta(y)\|_A/\|b\|$ with $x=A^{-1}b$ and $y=\Phi A^{-1} b$. Writing $0<\lambda_1(A)\leq \cdots \leq \lambda_n(A)$, the eigenvalues of $A$ in increasing order, and $a_1,\ldots,a_n$, the corresponding eigenvectors, it is easy to obtain that (1) the best choice for $\Phi$ would correspond to measuring the projection of $x$ on $\operatorname{span}\{a_1,\ldots,a_m\}$ and would lead to the worst approximation error $1/\sqrt{\lambda_{m+1}}$ and (2) the worst choice would correspond to measuring the projection of $x$ on a subspace orthogonal to $a_1$ and would lead to the worst approximation error $1/\sqrt{\lambda_{1}}$. Under the decision $Q=A$ the minimal value of is also $1/\sqrt{\lambda_{m+1}}$ and achieved for $\Img(\Phi^T)=\operatorname{span}\{a_1,\ldots,a_m\}$ and the maximal value of is $1/\sqrt{\lambda_{1}}$ and achieved when $\Img(\Phi^T)$ is orthogonal to $a_1$. The following theorem, which is a direct application of and the estimate derived in [@HalkoMartinssonTropp:2011 p. 10] (see also [@MartinssonRokhlinTygert:2011]), shows that, the subset of measurement matrices that are not *nearly optimal* is of small measure if the rows of $\Phi^T$ are sampled independently on the unit sphere of $\R^n$.
\[thm:duihdi3dw\] If $\Phi$ is a $n\times m$ matrix with i.i.d. $\mathcal{N}(0,1)$ (Gaussian) entries, $Q=A$, $x$ is the solution of the original equation , and $2\leq p$ then with probability at least $1-3 p^{-p}$, $\|x-\Psi y\|_{A}/\|b\|\leq (1+9 \sqrt{m+p}\sqrt{n})/\sqrt{\lambda_{m+1}}.$
Although the randomization of the measurement matrix [@Frieze98fastmontecarlo; @LeParker99; @Gilbert2002; @OwhadiCandes2004] can be an efficient strategy in compressed sensing [@Tropp2005; @CandesTao2006; @CandesRombergTao2006; @Donoho:2006; @Gilbert:2007; @Chandrasekaran2011] and in Singular Value Decomposition/Low Rank approximation [@HalkoMartinssonTropp:2011], we will not use this strategy here because the design of the interpolation operator presents the (added) difficulty of approximating the eigenvectors associated with the smallest eigenvalues of $A$ rather than those associated with the largest ones. Furthermore, $\Psi$ has to be computed efficiently and the dependence of the approximation constant in Theorem \[thm:duihdi3dw\] on $n$ and $m$ can be problematic if sharp convergence estimates are to be obtained. We will instead select the measurement matrix based on the transfer property introduced in [@BeOw:2010] and given in a discrete context in the following theorem.
\[thm:geaaejhdgjvvggdh\] If $A$ is symmetric positive definite, $Q=A$ and $x$ is the solution of the original equation , then for any symmetric positive definite matrix $B$, we have $$\inf_{v\in \R^n}\sqrt{\frac{v^T B v}{v^T A v}}\min_{z\in \R^m} \|b-\Phi^T z\|_{B^{-1}} \leq \|x-\Psi y\|_{A} \leq \sup_{v\in \R^n}\sqrt{\frac{v^T B v}{v^T A v}}\min_{z\in \R^m} \|b-\Phi^T z\|_{B^{-1}}$$
Corollary \[cor:geaaedgjdh\] implies that if $x$ is the solution of the original equation , then $\|x-\Psi y\|_{A} =\min_{z\in \R^m} \|b-\Phi^T z\|_{A^{-1}}$. We finish the proof by observing that if $A$ and $B$ are symmetric positive definite matrices such that $\alpha_1 B \leq A \leq \alpha_2 B$ for some constants $\alpha_1,\alpha_2>0$ then $\alpha_2^{-1} B^{-1} \leq A^{-1} \leq \alpha_1^{-1} B^{-1}$.
Therefore according to Theorem \[thm:geaaejhdgjvvggdh\], once a good measurement matrix $\Phi$ has been identified for a symmetric positive definite matrix $B$ such that $\alpha_1 B \leq A $, the same measurement matrix can be used for $A$ at the cost of an increase of the bound on the error by the multiplicative factor $\alpha_1^{-1/2}$. As a prototypical example, one may consider a (stiffness) matrix $A$ obtained from a finite element discretization of the PDE and $B$ may be the stiffness matrix of the finite element discretization of the Laplace Dirichlet PDE $$\label{eqn:LapDir}
-\Delta u'(x)=g(x) \text{ on } \Omega \text{ with } u'=0 \text{ on }\partial \Omega,$$ obtained from the same finite-elements (e.g. piecewise-linear nodal basis functions over the same fine mesh $\T_h$). Using the energy norm , Theorem \[thm:geaaejhdgjvvggdh\] and Remark \[rmk:galerkinproj\] imply the following proposition
\[prop:guguyuyh\] Let $u_h$ (resp. $u_h'$) be the finite element approximation of the solution $u$ of (resp. the solution $u'$ of ) over the finite nodal elements of $\T_h$. Let $u_H$ (resp. $u_H'$) be the finite element approximation of the solution $u$ of (resp. the solution $u'$ of ) over linear space spanned by the rows of $A^{-1} \Phi^T$ (resp. over the linear space spanned by the rows of $B^{-1} \Phi^T$). It holds true that $$\label{eq:dgiegduygd}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(a)}} \|u_h'-u_H'\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq \|u_h-u_H\|_a\leq \frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)}} \|u_h'-u_H'\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)}$$
Observe that the right hand side of does not depend on $\lambda_{\max}(a)$, therefore if $\lambda_{\min}(a)=1$, then the error bound on $\|u_h-u_H\|_a$ does not depend on the contrast of $a$ (i.e. $\lambda_{\max}(a)/\lambda_{\min}(a)$).
Numerical homogenization and design of the interpolation operator in the continuous case {#sec:contcase}
========================================================================================
We will now generalize the results and continue the analysis of Section \[sec:problem\] in the continuous case and design the interpolation operator for in the context of numerical homogenization.
Information Game and Gamblets
-----------------------------
As in Section \[sec:problem\] we will identify the interpolation operator (that will be used for the multigrid algorithm) through a non cooperative game formulation where Player I chooses the source term $g$ and Player II tries to approximate the solution $u$ of based on a finite number of measurements $(\int_{\Omega} u\phi_i)_{1\leq i \leq m}$ obtained from linearly independent test functions $\phi_i\in L^2(\Omega)$. As in Section \[sec:problem\], this game formulation, motivates the search for a mixed strategy for Player II that can be expressed by replacing the source term $g$ with noise $\xi$. We will therefore consider the following SPDE
$$\label{eqn:scalarspde}
\begin{cases}
-\diiv \Big(a(x) \nabla v(x)\Big)=\xi(x) \quad x \in \Omega;\\
v=0 \quad \text{on}\quad \partial \Omega,
\end{cases}$$
where $\Omega$ and $a$ are the domain and conductivity of . As in Section \[sec:problem\], to preserve the computational efficiency of the interpolation operator we will assume that $\xi$ is a centered Gaussian field on $\Omega$. The decision space of Player II is therefore the covariance function of $\xi$. Write $\L$ the differential operator $-\diiv(a\nabla)$ with zero Dirichlet boundary condition mapping $H^1_0(\Omega)$ onto $H^{-1}(\Omega)$. Motivated by the analysis (Remark \[rmk:galerkinproj\]) of Subsection \[subsecpriorselection\] (which can be reproduced in the continuous case) we will select the covariance function of $\xi$ (Player II’s decision) to be $\L$. Therefore, under that choice, for all $f\in H^1_0(\Omega)$, $\int_{\Omega}f(x)\xi(x)\,dx$ is a Gaussian random variable with mean 0 and variance $\int_{\Omega} f\L f=\|f\|_a^2$ where $\|f\|_a$ is the energy norm of $f$ defined in . Introducing the scalar product on $H^1_0(\Omega)$ defined by $$\label{eqsp}
\<v,w\>_a:=\int_{\Omega} (\nabla v)^T a \nabla w\,,$$ recall that if $(e_1,e_2,\ldots)$ is an orthonormal basis of $(H^1_0(\Omega),\|\cdot\|_a)$ diagonalizing $\L$, then $\xi$ can formally be represented as $\xi=\sum_{i=1}^\infty (\L e_i) X_i$ (where the $X_i$ are i.i.d. $\mathcal{N}(0,1)$ random variables) and, therefore, $\xi$ can also be identified as the linear isometry mapping $H^1_0(\Omega)$ onto a Gaussian space and $f=\sum_{i=1}^\infty \<f,e_i\>_a e_i$ onto $\int_{\Omega}f(x)\xi(x)\,dx=\sum_{i=1}^\infty \<f, e_i\>_a X_i$.
Observe also that [@Owhadi:2014], if $\xi'$ is White Noise on $\Omega$ (i.e. a Gaussian field with covariance function $\delta(x-y)$) then $\xi$ can be represented as $\xi=\L^{-\frac{1}{2}}\xi'$. Furthermore [@Owhadi:2014 Prop. 3.1] the solution of is Gaussian field with covariance function $G(x,y)$ (where $G$ is the Green’s function of the PDE , i.e. $\L G(x,y)=\delta(x-y)$ with $G(x,y)=0$ for $y\in \partial \Omega$).
Let $\F$ be the $\sigma$-algebra generated by the random variables $\int_{\Omega}v(x)\phi_i$ for $i\in \{1,\ldots,m\}$ (with $v$ solution of ). We will identify the interpolation basis elements by conditioning the solution of on $\F$. Observe that the covariance matrix of the measurement vector $(\int_{\Omega}v(x)\phi_i)_{1\leq i \leq m}$ is the $m\times m$ symmetric matrix $\Theta$ defined by $$\label{eqtheta0}
\Theta_{i,j}:=\int_{\Omega^2}\phi_i(x)G(x,y) \phi_j(y)\,\dx\,dy$$ Note that for $l\in \R^m$, $l^T \Theta l=\|w\|_a^2$ where $w$ is the solution of with right hand side $g=\sum_{i=1}^m l_i \phi_i$. Therefore (since the test functions $\phi_i$ are linearly independent) $\Theta$ is positive definite and we will write $\Theta^{-1}$ its inverse. Write $\delta_{i,j}$ the Kronecker’s delta ($\delta_{i,i}=1$ and $\delta_{i,j}=0$ for $i\not=j$).
\[thmgufufg0\] Let $v$ be the solution of . It holds true that $$\label{eqmeanvspde0}
\E\big[v(x)\big| \F \big]=\sum_{i=1}^m \psi_i(x) \int_{\Omega} v(y)\phi_i (y)\,dy$$ where the functions $\psi_i \in H^1_0(\Omega)$ are defined by $$\label{eqgamblet}
\psi_i(x):=\E\Big[v(x)\Big| \int_{\Omega} v(y)\phi_j(y)\,dy=\delta_{i,j},\,j\in \{1,\ldots,m\}\Big]$$ and admit the following representation formula $$\label{eq:doehdd}
\psi_i(x)=\sum_{j=1}^m \Theta_{i,j}^{-1} \int_{\Omega}G(x,y)\phi_j(y)\,dy\,.$$ Furthermore, the distribution of $v$ conditioned on $\F$ is that of a Gaussian field with mean and covariance function $\Gamma(x,y)=G(x,y)+ \sum_{i,j=1}^m \psi_i(x) \psi_j(y) \Theta_{i,j}$\
$- \sum_{i=1}^m \psi_i(x) \int_{\Omega} G(y,z)\phi_i (z)\,dz- \sum_{i=1}^m \psi_i(y) \int_{\Omega} G(x,z)\phi_i (z)\,dz\,.$
The proof is similar to that of [@Owhadi:2014 Thm. 3.5]. The identification of the covariance function follows from the expansion of $\Gamma(x,y)=\E\Big[\big(v(x)-\E\big[v(x)\big| \F \big]\big)\big(v(y)-\E\big[v(y)\big| \F \big]\big) \Big]$. Note that proves that $\psi_i \in H^1_0(\Omega)$.
Since, according to and the discussion preceding , each $\psi_i$ is an elementary gamble (bet) on value of the solution of given the information $\int_{\Omega}\phi_j u=\delta_{i,j}$ for $j=1,\ldots,m$ we will refer to the basis functions $(\psi_i)_{1\leq i \leq m}$, as *gamblets*. According to , once gamblets have been identified, they form a basis for betting on the value of the solution of given the measurements $(\int_{\Omega}\phi_j u)_{1\leq i \leq m}$.
Optimal recovery properties
---------------------------
Although gamblets admit the representation formula , we will not use it for their practical (numerical) computation. Instead we will work with variational properties inherited from the conditioning of the Gaussian field $v$. To guide our intuition, note that since $\L$ is the precision function (inverse of the covariance function) of $v$, the conditional expectation of $v$ can be identified by minimizing $\int_{\Omega}\psi\L \psi $ given measurements constraints. This observation motivates us to consider, for $i\in \{1,\ldots, m\}$, the following quadratic optimization problem $$\label{eq:dueihdbewdaisq}
\begin{cases}
\text{Minimize } &\|\psi\|_a\\
\text{Subject to } &\psi \in H^1_0(\Omega)\text{ and }\int_{\Omega}\phi_j \psi=\delta_{i,j}\text{ for } j=1,\ldots,m
\end{cases}$$ where $\|\psi\|_a$ is the energy norm of $\psi$ defined in .
The following theorem shows that can be used to identify $\psi_i$ and that gamblets are characterized by optimal (variational) recovery properties.
\[thm:dkdehgjdhdgh0\] It holds true that (1) The optimization problem admits a unique minimizer $\psi_i$ defined by and (2) For $w\in \R^m$, $\sum_{i=1}^m w_i \psi_i$ is the unique minimizer of $\|\psi\|_a$ subject to $\int_{\Omega} \psi(x) \phi_j(x)=w_j$ for $j\in \{1,\ldots,m\}$ and (3) (using the scalar product defined in ) $\<\psi_i,\psi_j\>_a=\Theta_{i,j}^{-1}$.
Let $w\in \R^m$ and $\psi_w=\sum_{i=1}^m w_i \psi_i$ with $\psi_i$ defined as in . The definition of $\Theta$ implies that $\int_{\Omega} \psi_w(x) \phi_j(x)=w_j$ for $j\in \{1,\ldots,m\}$. Furthermore we obtain by integration by parts that for all $\varphi\in H^1_0(\Omega)$, $\<\psi_w,\varphi\>_a=\sum_{i,j=1}^m w_i \Theta_{i,j}^{-1} \int_{\Omega} \phi_j \varphi$. Therefore, if $\psi \in H^1_0(\Omega)$ is such that $\int_{\Omega} \psi(x) \phi_j(x)=w_j$ for $j\in \{1,\ldots,m\}$ then $\<\psi_w,\psi-\psi_w\>_a=0$ and $$\label{eq:hdkhdkjh33e}
\|\psi\|_a^2=\|\psi_w\|_a^2+\|\psi-\psi_w\|_a^2$$ which finishes the proof of optimality of $\psi_i$ and $\psi_w$.
Optimal accuracy of the recovery {#subsecoptaccuracy}
--------------------------------
Define $$\label{eqmawybdysedsd}
u^*(x):= \sum_{i=1}^m \psi_i(x) \int_{\Omega} u(y) \phi_i(y)\,dy$$ where $u$ is the solution of and $\psi_i$ are the gamblets defined by and . Note $u^*$ corresponds to Player II’s bet on the value of $u$ given the measurements $(\int_{\Omega} u(y) \phi_i(y)\,dy)_{1\leq i \leq m}$. In particular, if $v$ is the solution of then $$\label{eqmawybdyd}
u^*(x)=\E\big[v(x)\big| \int_{\Omega} v(y)\phi_i (y)\,dy=\int_{\Omega} u(y)\phi_i (y)\,dy \big]$$
For $\phi \in H^{-1}(\Omega)$ write $\L^{-1}\phi$ the solution of with $g=\phi$. The following Theorem shows that $u^*$ is the best approximation (in energy norm) of $u$ in $\operatorname{span} \{\L^{-1} \phi_i : i\in \{1,\ldots,m\}\}$.
\[thm:dkdehgjdhdgh02\] Let $u$ be the solution of , $u^*$ defined in and . It holds true that $$\label{sidasaeweddaud02}
\|u - u^*\|_{a}=\inf_{\psi \in \operatorname{span} \{\L^{-1} \phi_i : i\in \{1,\ldots,m\}\}}\|u-\psi\|_a$$
By Theorem \[thmgufufg0\] $\operatorname{span} \{\L^{-1} \phi_i : i\in \{1,\ldots,m\}\}=\operatorname{span}\{\psi_1,\ldots,\psi_m\}$ and follows from the fact that $\int_{\Omega}(u-u^*)\phi_j=0$ for all $j$ implies that $u-u^*$ is orthogonal to $\operatorname{span}\{\psi_1,\ldots,\psi_m\}$ with respect to the scalar product $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_a$.
Transfer property and selection of the measurement functions
------------------------------------------------------------
We will now select the measurement (test) functions $\phi_i$ by extending the result of Proposition \[prop:guguyuyh\] to the continuous case. For $V$, a finite dimensional linear subspace of $H^{-1}(\Omega)$, define $$\label{ksjjseddesel3}
(\diiv a \nabla)^{-1} V:=\operatorname{span} \{(\diiv a\nabla)^{-1} \phi \,:\, \phi\in V\}.$$ where $(\diiv a\nabla)^{-1} \phi$ is the solution of with $g=-\phi$. Similarly define $\Delta^{-1}V:=\operatorname{span} \{\Delta^{-1} \phi \,:\, \phi\in V\}$ where $\Delta^{-1}\phi$ is the solution of with $g=-\phi$.
\[prop:deihdidu\] If $u$ and $u'$ are the solutions of and (with the same r.h.s. $g$) and $V$ is a finite dimensional linear subspace of $H^{-1}(\Omega)$, then $$\label{sidasasedsssddaud}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(a)}}\inf_{v\in \Delta^{-1}V} \|u' - v\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq \inf_{v\in (\diiv a\nabla)^{-1} V} \|u - v\|_{a}\leq \frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)}}\inf_{v\in \Delta^{-1}V} \|u' - v\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)}$$
Write $G$ the Green’s function of and $G^*$ the Green’s function of . Observe that for $f\in V$ and $v=(\diiv a\nabla)^{-1}f$, $\|u - v\|_{a}^2=\int_{\Omega^2}(g(x)-f(x))G(x,y) (g(y)-f(y))\,dx\,dy$. The monotonicity of Green’s function as a quadratic form (see for instance [@BenarousOwhadi:2003 Lemma 4.13]), implies $ \int_{\Omega^2}(g(x)-f(x))G(x,y) (g(y)-f(y))\,dx\,dy \leq \frac{1}{\lambda_{\min}(a)} \int_{\Omega^2}(g(x)-f(x))G^*(x,y) (g(y)-f(y))\,dx\,dy$ (with a similar inequality on the l.h.s.) which concludes the proof.
This extension, which is also directly related to the transfer property of the flux-norm (introduced in [@BeOw:2010] and generalized in [@Sym12], see also [@Wang:2012]), allows us to select accurate finite dimensional bases for the approximation of the solution space of .
\[cons:odoehdduhd\] Let $(\tau_i)_{1\leq i \leq m}$ be a partition of $\Omega$ such that each $\tau_i$ is Lipschitz, convex and of diameter at most $H$. Let $(\phi_i)_{1\leq i \leq m}$ be elements of $L^2(\Omega)$ such that for each $i$, the support of $\phi_i$ is contained in the closure of $\tau_i$ and $\int_{\tau_i} \phi_i\not=0$.
\[prop:gegddgdjdef\] Let $(\phi_i)_{1\leq i \leq m}$ be the elements of Construction \[cons:odoehdduhd\] and let $u$ be the solution of . If $V=\operatorname{span} \{\phi_i\,:\, 1\leq i\leq m\}$ then $$\label{sidasaeweddaud2}
\inf_{v\in (\diiv a\nabla)^{-1} V} \|u - v\|_{a}\leq C H \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}$$ with $C=\big(\pi \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)}\big)^{-1} \Big(1+\max_{1 \leq i \leq m} \big(\frac{ \frac{1}{|\tau_i|}\int_{\tau_i} \phi_i^2}{(\frac{1}{|\tau_i|}\int_{\tau_i} \phi_i)^2})^\frac{1}{2}\Big)$ (writing $|\tau_i|$ the volume of $\tau_i$).
Using Proposition \[prop:deihdidu\] it is sufficient to complete proof when $a$ is the constant identity matrix. Let $u'$ be the solution of and $v\in \Delta^{-1} V$. Note that $\Delta v=\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \phi_i$, therefore $\|u' - v\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)}^2= -\int_{\Omega} (u'-v) (g-\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \phi_i)$. Taking $c_i=\int_{\tau_i} g/ \int_{\tau_i} \phi_i $ we obtain that $\int_{\tau_i} (g- \sum_{j=1}^m c_j \phi_j)=0$ and, writing $|\tau_i|$ the volume of $\tau_i$, $ \|u' - v\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)}^2=-\sum_{i=1}^m \int_{\tau_i} (u'-v-\frac{1}{|\tau_i|}\int_{\tau_i}(u'-v)) (g- \sum_{j=1}^m c_j \phi_j)$ which by Poincaré’s inequality (see [@PayneWeinberger:1960] for the optimal constant $1/\pi$ used here) lead to $ \|u' - v\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)}^2 \leq \frac{H}{\pi} \sum_{i=1}^m \big(\int_{\tau_i} |\nabla (u'-v)|^2\big)^\frac{1}{2}
\big(\int_{\tau_i} (g-\sum_{j=1}^m c_j \phi_j)^2\big)^\frac{1}{2}$. Therefore, by using Cauchy-Schwartz inequality and simplifying, $\|u' - v\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq \frac{H}{\pi} \|g-\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \phi_i\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\,.$ Now, since each $\phi_i$ has support in $\tau_i$ we have $ \|\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \phi_i\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2=\sum_{i=1}^m (\int_{\tau_i} g)^2 \frac{ \int_{\tau_i} \phi_i^2}{(\int_{\tau_i} \phi_i)^2}\leq \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2 \max_{1 \leq i \leq m} \frac{ \frac{1}{|\tau_i|}\int_{\tau_i} \phi_i^2}{(\frac{1}{\tau_i}\int_{\tau_i} \phi_i)^2}$, which concludes the proof.
The value of the constant $C$ in Proposition \[prop:gegddgdjdef\] motivates us to modify Construction \[cons:odoehdduhd\] as follows.
\[cons:odoehdduhdI\] Let $(\phi_i)_{1\leq i \leq m}$ be the elements constructed in \[cons:odoehdduhd\] under the additional assumptions that (a) each $\phi_i$ is equal to one on $\tau_i$ and zero elsewhere (b) there exists $\delta \in (0,1)$ such that for each $i\in \{1,\ldots,m\}$, $\tau_i$ contains a ball of diameter $\delta H$.
Let $(\phi_i)_{1\leq i \leq m}$ be as in Construction \[cons:odoehdduhdI\]. Note that the additional assumption (a) implies that the constant $C$ in Proposition \[prop:gegddgdjdef\] is equal to $2/(\pi \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)})$. Assumption (b) will be used for localization purposes in subsections \[subsec:expdecay\] and \[subsec:localization\] (and is not required for Theorem \[thm:dkdehgjdhdgh\]). The following theorem is a direct consequence of Proposition \[prop:gegddgdjdef\] and Theorem \[thm:dkdehgjdhdgh02\].
\[thm:dkdehgjdhdgh\] If $u$ is the solution of and $(\psi_i)_{i=1}^m$ are the gamblets identified in , and then $$\label{sidasaeweddaud}
\inf_{v\in \operatorname{span}\{\psi_1,\ldots,\psi_m\}} \|u - v\|_{a}\leq \frac{2}{\pi \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)}} H \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}$$ and the minimum in the l.h.s of is achieved for $v=u^*$ defined in and .
\[rmkiegudyg3\] The assumption of convexity of the subdomains $\tau_i$ is only used to derive sharper constants via Poincaré’s inequality for convex domains (without it, approximation error bounds remain valid after multiplication by $\pi$). Similarly, the transfer property can be used to derive constructions that are distinct from \[cons:odoehdduhd\] and \[cons:odoehdduhdI\].
Gamblets defined via the constrained energy minimization problems are analogous to the *energy minimizing bases* of [@Mandel1999; @wan2000; @Xu2004; @XuZhu2008] and in particular [@Vassilevski2010]. However they form a different set of basis functions when global constraints are added: the (total) *energy minimizing bases* of [@Mandel1999; @wan2000; @Xu2004; @XuZhu2008; @Vassilevski2010] are defined by minimizing the total energy $\sum_i \|\psi_i\|_a^2$ subject to the constraint $\sum_i \psi_i(x)=1$ related to the local preservation of constants. Numerical experiments [@Xu2004] suggest that total energy minimizing basis functions could lead to a $\mathcal{O}(\sqrt{H})$ convergence rate (with rough coefficients). Note that is also analogous to the constrained minimization problems associated with Polyharmonic Splines [@Harder:1972; @Duchon:1976; @Duchon:1977; @Duchon:1978; @OwhadiZhangBerlyand:2014], which can be recovered with a Gaussian prior (on $\xi$) with covariance function $\delta(x-y)$ (corresponding to exciting with white noise). We suspect that the basis functions obtained in the orthogonal decomposition of [@MaPe:2012] can also be recovered via the variational formulation by identifying the null space of the Clement quasi-interpolation operator with that of appropriately chosen measurement functions $\phi_i$.
Exponential decay of gamblets {#subsec:expdecay}
-----------------------------
Theorems \[thm:dkdehgjdhdgh0\] and \[thm:dkdehgjdhdgh02\] show that the gamblets $\psi_i$ have optimal recovery properties analogous to the discrete case of Theorem \[lem:minimizingproperty\] and Corollary \[cor:geaaedgjdh\]. However one may wonder why one should compute these gamblets rather than the elements $(\diiv a\nabla)^{-1} \phi_i$ since they span the same linear space (by the representation formula ). The answer lies in the fact that each gamblet $\psi_i$ decays exponentially as a function of the distance from the support of $\phi_i$ and its computation can therefore be localized to a subdomain of diameter $ \mathcal{O}(H \ln \frac{1}{H})$ without impacting the order of accuracy . Consider the construction \[cons:odoehdduhdI\]. Let $\psi_i$ be defined as in Theorem \[thm:dkdehgjdhdgh0\] and let $x_i$ be an element of $\tau_i$. Write $B(x,r)$ the ball of center $x$ and radius $r$.
\[thm:expdecay\][**Exponential decay of the basis elements $\psi_i$.**]{} It holds true that $$\int_{\Omega \cap (B(x_i,r))^c}(\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i\leq e^{1-\frac{ r}{l H}} \int_{\Omega}(\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i$$ with $l=1+ (e/\pi) \sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(a)/\lambda_{\min}(a)} (1+2^\frac{3}{2}(2/\delta)^{1+d/2})$ (where $e$ is Euler’s number).
Let $k,l \in \mathbb{N}^*$ and $i\in \{1,\ldots,m\}$. Let $S_0$ be the union of all the domains $\tau_j$ that are contained in the closure of $ B(x_i, k l H)\cap \Omega$, let $S_{1}$ be the union of all the domains $\tau_j$ that are contained in the closure of $(B(x_i, (k+1) l H))^c\cap \Omega$ and let $S^*=S_0^c \cap S_{1}^c \cap \Omega$ (be the union of the remaining elements $\tau_j$ not contained in $S_0$ or $S_{1}$). Let $\eta$ be the function on $\Omega$ defined by $\eta(x)=\operatorname{dist}(x,S_0)/(\operatorname{dist}(x,S_0)+\operatorname{dist}(x,S_1))$. Observe that (1) $0\leq \eta \leq 1$ (2) $\eta$ is equal to zero on $S_0$ (3) $\eta$ is equal to one on $S_{1}$ (4) $\|\nabla \eta \|_{L^\infty(\Omega)}\leq \frac{1}{ l H}$. Observe that $- \int_{\Omega}\eta \psi_i \diiv( a \nabla \psi_i)=\int_{\Omega}\nabla (\eta \psi_i) a \psi_i=\int_{\Omega} \eta (\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i+\int_{\Omega} \psi_i (\nabla \eta)^T a \nabla \psi_i$. Therefore $\int_{S_1} (\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i\leq I_1+I_2$ with $$\label{eqleldkdlkdjd}
I_1=\|\nabla \eta\|_{L^\infty(\Omega)}
\big(\sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*}\int_{\tau_j}\psi_i^2\big)^\frac{1}{2}
\big(\int_{S^*}(\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i\big)^\frac{1}{2} \sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(a)}$$ and $I_2=- \int_{\Omega}\eta \psi_i \diiv( a \nabla \psi_i)$. By , $- \diiv( a \nabla \psi_i)$ is piecewise constant and equal to $\Theta_{i,j}^{-1}$ on $\tau_j$. By the constraints of $\int_{\tau_j}\psi_i=0$ for $i\not=j$. Therefore (writing $\eta_j$ the volume average of $\eta$ over $\tau_j$) we have $$\label{eqkjkhkjhkejhccd}
I_2 \leq -\sum_{\tau_j \subset S_1 \cup S^*} \int_{\tau_j}(\eta-\eta_j) \psi_i \diiv( a \nabla \psi_i) \leq \frac{1}{l} \sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*} \|\psi_i\|_{L^2(\tau_j)} \|\diiv( a \nabla \psi_i)\|_{L^2(\tau_j)}.$$ We will now need the following lemma
\[lemdhkedjhdkjh\] If $v\in \operatorname{span}\{\psi_1,\ldots,\psi_m\}$ then $$\|\diiv( a \nabla v)\|_{L^2(\Omega)} \leq H^{-1} \|v\|_a (\lambda_{\max}(a) 2^{5+d}/\delta^{2+d})^\frac{1}{2}$$
Let $c\in \R^m$ and $v=\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \psi_i$. Observing that $-\diiv(a\nabla v)=\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \Theta_{i,j}^{-1}$ in $\tau_j$ and using the decomposition $ \|\diiv( a \nabla v)\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2 =\sum_{i=1}^m \|\diiv( a \nabla v)\|_{L^2(\tau_j)}^2$, we obtain that $$\label{eqhuhh7rfrtrd}
\|\diiv( a \nabla v)\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2 = \sum_{j=1}^m (\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \Theta_{i,j}^{-1})^2 |\tau_j|$$ Furthermore, $v$ can be decomposed over $\tau_j$ as $v=v_1+v_2$, where $v_1$ solves $-\diiv(a\nabla v_1)=\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \Theta_{i,j}^{-1}$ in $\tau_j$ with $v_1=0$ on $\partial\tau_j$, and $v_2$ solves $-\diiv(a\nabla v_2)=0$ in $\tau_j$ with $v_2=v$ on $\partial \tau_j$. Using the notation $|\xi|_a^2=\xi^T a \xi$, observe that $\int_{\tau_j} |\nabla v|_a^2=\int_{\tau_j} |\nabla v_1|_a^2+ \int_{\tau_j} |\nabla v_2|_a^2$. Furthermore, $\int_{\tau_j} |\nabla v_1|_a^2=\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \Theta_{i,j}^{-1} \int_{\tau_j} v_1$. Writing $G_j$ the Green’s function of the operator $-\diiv(a\nabla \cdot)$ with Dirichlet boundary condition on $\partial \tau_j$, note that $\int_{\tau_j} v_1= (\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \Theta_{i,j}^{-1}) \int_{\tau_j^2} G_j(x,y)\,dx\,dy$. Using the monotonicity of the Green’s function as a quadratic form (as in the proof of Proposition \[prop:deihdidu\]), we have $\int_{\tau_j^2} G_j(x,y)\,dx\,dy \geq \frac{1}{\lambda_{\max}(a)}\int_{\tau_j^2} G_j^*(x,y)\,dx\,dy $ where $G^*_j$ is the Green’s function of the operator $-\Delta$ with Dirichlet boundary condition on $\partial \tau_j$. Recall that $2\int_{\tau_j} G_j^*(x,y)\,dy$ is the mean exit time (from $\tau_j$) of a Brownian motion started from $x$ and the mean exit time of a Brownian motion started from $x$ to exit a ball of center $x$ and radius $r$ is $r^2$ (see for instance [@BenarousOwhadi:2003]). Since $\tau_j$ contains a ball of diameter $\delta H$, it follows that $2 \int_{\tau_j^2} G_j^*(x,y)\,dx\,dy \geq (\delta H/4)^{2+d} V_d$ (where $V_d$ is the volume of the $d$-dimensional unit ball). Therefore (after using $|\tau_j|\leq V_d (H/2)^d$ and simplification), $$\label{eqhhdhdgdjhdg3e}
\int_{\tau_j} |\nabla v_1|_a^2\geq (\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \Theta_{i,j}^{-1})^2 |\tau_j| H^2 \delta^{2+d}/(2^{5+d}\lambda_{\max}(a)),$$ which finishes the proof after taking the sum over $j$.
Now observe that since $\int_{\tau_j}\psi_i=0$ for $i\not=j$, we obtain, using Poincaré’s inequality (with the optimal constant of [@PayneWeinberger:1960]), that $\|\psi_i\|_{L^2(\tau_j)} \leq \|\nabla \psi_i\|_{L^2(\tau_j)} H/\pi$. Therefore, combining , and the result of Lemma \[lemdhkedjhdkjh\], we obtain after simplification $$\int_{S_1}(\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i\leq \frac{1}{\pi l} \sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(a)/\lambda_{\min}(a)} (1+2^\frac{3}{2}(2/\delta)^{1+d/2})\int_{S^*}(\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i$$ Taking $l\geq \frac{e}{\pi } \sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(a)/\lambda_{\min}(a)} (1+2^\frac{3}{2}(2/\delta)^{1+d/2}) $ and enlarging the integration domain on the right hand side we obtain $
\int_{S_{1}}(\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i\leq e^{-1} \int_{S^*\cup S_{1}}(\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i.
$ We conclude the proof via straightforward iteration on $k$.
Localization of the basis elements {#subsec:localization}
----------------------------------
Theorem \[thm:expdecay\] allows us to localize the construction of basis elements $\psi_i$ as follows. For $r>0$ let $S_r$ be the union of the subdomains $\tau_j$ intersecting $B(x_i,r)$ (recall that $x_i$ is an element of $\tau_i$) and let $\psi_i^{\loc,r}$ be the minimizer of the following quadratic problem $$\label{eq:dwehhsiuhssq}
\begin{cases}
\text{Minimize } &\int_{S_r} (\nabla \psi)^T a \nabla \psi\\
\text{Subject to } &\psi \in H^1_0(S_r)\text{ and }\int_{S_r}\phi_j \psi=\delta_{i,j}\text{ for }j \text{ such that } \tau_j \subset S_r.
\end{cases}$$ We will naturally identify $\psi_i^{\loc,r}$ with its extension to $H^1_0(\Omega)$ by setting $\psi_i^{\loc,r}=0$ outside of $S_r$. From now on, to simplify the expression of constants, we will assume without loss of generality that the domain is rescaled so that $\diam(\Omega)\leq 1$.
\[thm:hieuhdds\] It holds true that $$\|\psi_i-\psi_i^{\loc,r}\|_{a} \leq C e^{-\frac{r}{2l H}},$$ where $l$ is defined in Theorem \[thm:expdecay\], $C= (\lambda_{\max}(a)/\sqrt{ \lambda_{\min}(a)}) H^{-\frac{d}{2}-2} 2^{2d+9}/(\sqrt{V_d} \delta^{d+2})$ and $V_d$ is the volume of the $d$-dimensional unit ball.
We will need the following lemma.
\[lem:dihidue23\] It holds true that $$\label{eqgguguyg6}
\|\psi_i\|_a \leq (H \delta)^{-\frac{d}{2}-1} \sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(a)} 2^{\frac{3}{2}d+2} (V_d)^{-\frac{1}{2}}$$ where $V_d$ is the volume of the $d$-dimensional unit ball, and, $$\label{eqbbuybuybfcc}
|\<\psi_i,\psi_j\>_a|\leq e^{-\frac{ r_{i,j}}{2 l H}} H^{-2-d} \lambda_{\max}(a) 2^{\frac{5d+11}{2}}/(V_d \delta^{d+2})$$ where $l$ is the constant of Theorem \[thm:expdecay\] and $r_{i,j}$ is the distance between $\tau_i$ and $\tau_j$.
Since $\tau_i$ contains a ball $B(x_i,\delta H/2)$ of center $x_i\in \tau_i$ and diameter $\delta H/2$, there exists a piece-wise differentiable function $\eta$, equal to $1$ on $B(x_i,\delta H/4)$, equal to $0$ on $(B(x_i,\delta H/2))^c$ and such that $0\leq \eta \leq 1$ with $\|\nabla \eta\|_{L^\infty(\Omega)}\leq \frac{4}{H \delta}$. Since $\psi=\eta/ (\int_{\tau_i}\eta)$ satisfies the constrains of the minimization problem we have $\|\psi_i\|_a \leq \|\psi\|_a$, which proves . Theorem \[thm:dkdehgjdhdgh0\] implies that $\<\psi_i,\psi_j\>_a=\Theta_{i,j}^{-1}$. Observing that $-\diiv( a \nabla \psi_i)$ is piecewise constant and equal to $\Theta_{i,j}^{-1}$ on $\tau_j$ and applying (with $v=\psi_i$ and using $\int_{\tau_j} |\nabla v_1|_a^2\leq \int_{\tau_j} |\nabla v|_a^2$), we obtain that $$\label{equsiheiuhdihd}
|\Theta_{i,j}^{-1}| \leq \big(\lambda_{\max}(a) 2^{5+d}/(\delta^{2+d} |\tau_j|)\big)^\frac{1}{2} H^{-1} \big(\int_{\tau_j}(\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i\big)^\frac{1}{2}.$$ which leads to by the exponential decay obtained in Theorem \[thm:expdecay\] and .
Let us now prove Theorem \[thm:hieuhdds\]. Let $S_0$ be the union of the subdomains $\tau_j$ not contained in $S_r$ and let $S_1$ be the union of the subdomains $\tau_j$ that are at distance at least $H$ from $S_0$ (for $S_0=\emptyset$ the proof is trivial, so we may assume that $S_0\not=\emptyset$, similarly it is no restriction to assume that $S_1\not=\emptyset$). Let $\eta$ be the function on $\Omega$ defined by $\eta(x)=\operatorname{dist}(x,S_0)/(\operatorname{dist}(x,S_0)+\operatorname{dist}(x,S_1))$. Observe that is a piecewise differentiable function on $\Omega$ such that (1) $\eta$ is equal to one on $S_1$ and zero on $S_0$ (2) $\|\nabla \eta\|_{L^\infty(\Omega)}\leq \frac{1}{H}$ and (3) $0\leq \eta \leq 1$. Since $\psi_i^{\loc,r}$ satisfies the constraints of , we have from , $$\label{eqkjhdkjdhdkjh}
\|\psi_i-\psi_i^{\loc,r}\|_a^2 =\|\psi_i^{\loc,r}\|_a^2-\|\psi_i\|_a^2.$$ Let $\psi_k^{i,r}$ be the minimizer of $\int_{S_r} (\nabla \psi)^T a \nabla \psi$ subject to $\psi \in H^1_0(S_r)$ and $\int_{S_r}\phi_j \psi=\delta_{k,j}$ for $\tau_j \subset S_r$. Write $w_j=\int_{\Omega} \eta \psi_i \phi_j$. Let $\psi_w^{i,r}:=\sum_{j=1}^m w_j \psi_j^{i,r}$. Noting that $\psi_w^{i,r}=\psi_i^{\loc,r}+\sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*}w_j \psi_j^{i,r}$, where $S^*$ is the union of $\tau_j\subset S_r$ not contained in $S_1$, and using property (3) of Theorem \[thm:dkdehgjdhdgh0\] (with $\Theta^{i,-1}_{k,k'}=\int_{S_r} (\nabla \psi_k^{i,r})^T a \nabla \psi_{k'}^{i,r}$) it follows that $$\label{eqkswkjh}
\|\psi_w^{i,r}\|_a^2 =\|\psi_i^{\loc,r}\|_a^2+ \|\sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*}w_j \psi_j^{i,r}\|^2_a+2 \sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*} \Theta^{i,-1}_{i,j} w_j\,.$$ Noting that $\eta \psi_i \in H^1_0(S_r)$, Theorem \[thm:dkdehgjdhdgh0\] implies that $\|\psi_w^{i,r}\|_a \leq \|\eta \psi_i\|_a$, which, combined with and leads to $\|\psi_i-\psi_i^{\loc,r}\|_a^2 \leq \|\eta \psi_i\|_a^2-\|\psi_i\|_a^2-2 \sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*} \Theta^{i,-1}_{i,j} w_j$ and (using $\|\eta \psi_i\|_a^2-\|\psi_i\|_a^2\leq \int_{S*}\nabla (\eta \psi_i)^T a \nabla (\eta \psi_i)$) $$\label{eqkjhdkgygejdhdkjh}
\|\psi_i-\psi_i^{\loc,r}\|_a^2 \leq \int_{S*}\nabla (\eta \psi_i)^T a \nabla (\eta \psi_i)+2 |\sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*} \Theta^{i,-1}_{i,j} w_j|\,.$$ Now observe that $ \frac{1}{2}\int_{S*}\nabla (\eta \psi_i)^T a \nabla (\eta \psi_i)\leq \int_{\Omega \cap (B(x_i,r-2 H))^c}(\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i
+\frac{\lambda_{\max}(a)}{H^2} \int_{S^*}|\psi_i|^2$. Applying Poincaré’s inequality we obtain $\int_{S^*}|\psi_i|^2 \leq \frac{1}{\pi^2} H^2\sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*} \int_{\tau_j}|\nabla \psi_i|^2$ (since $\int_{\tau_j} \psi_i=0$ for $\tau_j \subset S^*$), and $\int_{S^*}|\psi_i|^2 \leq
\frac{H^2}{ \pi^2 \lambda_{\min}(a)} \int_{\Omega \cap (B(x_i,r-2 H))^c}(\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i$. Combining these equations with the exponential decay of Theorem \[thm:expdecay\] we deduce $$\label{eqkjhhggjdhdkjh}
\int_{S*}\nabla (\eta \psi_i)^T a \nabla (\eta \psi_i) \leq
2 \Big(1+\lambda_{\max}(a)/\big(\pi^2 \lambda_{\min}(a)\big) \Big) e^{1-\frac{ r-2H}{l H}} \|\psi_i\|_a^2\,.$$ Similarly, using Cauchy-Schwartz and Poincaré inequalities we have for $\tau_j \subset S^*$,\
$|w_j|\leq |\tau_j|^\frac{1}{2} \|\psi_i\|_{L^2(\tau_j)} \leq |\tau_j|^\frac{1}{2} (\int_{\tau_j} (\nabla \psi_i)^Ta(\nabla \psi_i))^\frac{1}{2} /\sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)}$ and\
$
|\sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*} \Theta^{i,-1}_{i,j} w_j|\leq |\sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*} (\Theta^{i,-1}_{i,j})^2|\tau_j| |^\frac{1}{2}
\big (\int_{S^*} (\nabla \psi_i)^Ta(\nabla \psi_i)/\lambda_{\min}(a)\big)^\frac{1}{2}.
$ Using we obtain that $
|\sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*} (\Theta^{i,-1}_{i,j})^2 |\tau_j| |^\frac{1}{2} \leq \big(\lambda_{\max}(a) 2^{5+d}/\delta^{2+d} \big)^\frac{1}{2} H^{-1} \big(\int_{S^*}(\nabla \psi_i^{i,r})^T a \nabla \psi_i^{i,r}\big)^\frac{1}{2},
$ which by the exponential decay of Theorem (and $\|\psi_i\|_a\leq \|\psi_i^{i,r}\|_a$) leads to $$\label{eqhgygjhhhh}
|\sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*} \Theta^{i,-1}_{i,j} w_j|\leq \big(\frac{\lambda_{\max}(a) 2^{5+d}}{\lambda_{\min}(a)\delta^{2+d}} \big)^\frac{1}{2} H^{-1}
\|\psi_i^{i,r}\|_a^2 e^{1-\frac{ r-2H}{l H}}\,.$$ Using to bound $\|\psi_i^{i,r}\|_a$ and combining with and concludes the proof.
The following theorem shows that gamblets preserve the $\mathcal{O}(H)$ rate of convergence (in energy norm) after localization to sub-domains of size $\mathcal{O}(H \ln(1/H))$. They can therefore be used as localized basis functions in numerical homogenization [@BaLip10; @OwZh:2011; @MaPe:2012; @OwhadiZhangBerlyand:2014]. Section \[sechnh\] will show that they can also be computed hierarchically at near linear complexity.
\[thm:dhfkdehgjdhdgh\] Let $u$ be the solution of and $(\psi_1^{\loc,r})_{1\leq i \leq m}$ the localized gamblets identified in , then for $r \geq H (C_1 \ln \frac{1}{H} + C_2) $ we have $$\label{sidasaeuyweddaud}
\inf_{v\in \operatorname{span}\{\psi_1^{\loc,r},\ldots,\psi_m^{\loc,r}\}} \|u - v\|_{a}\leq \frac{1}{ \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)}} H \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\,.$$ The constants are $C_1=(d+4)l$ and $C_2=2l \ln \Big(\frac{\lambda_{\max}(a)}{ \lambda_{\min}(a)}\frac{ 2^{\frac{3}{2}d+11} }{\delta^{d+2} }\Big)$ where $l$ is the constant of Theorem \[thm:hieuhdds\]. Furthermore, the inequality is achieved for $v=\sum_{i=1}^m \psi_i^{\loc,r}\int_{\Omega} u \phi_i$.
Let $v_1:=\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \psi_i$ and $v_2=\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \psi_i^{\loc,r}$ with $c_i=\int_{\Omega} u \phi_i$. Theorem \[thm:dkdehgjdhdgh\] implies that $\|u-v_1\|_a\leq 2/(\pi \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)}) H \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}$. Observe that $\|u - v_2\|_{a} \leq \|u - v_1\|_{a}+\|v_1 - v_2\|_{a}$ and $\|v_1 - v_2\|_{a}\leq \max_{i}\|\psi_i-\psi_i^{\loc,r}\|_{a} \sum_{i=1}^m |c_i|$. Using Poincaré’s inequality $\|u\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\leq \diam(\Omega) \|\nabla u\|_{L^2(\Omega)}$ (with $\diam(\Omega)\leq 1$) we obtain $\sum_{i=1}^m |c_i| \leq \int_{\Omega} |u| \leq \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)} 2^{-d/2}V_d^\frac{1}{2} /\lambda_{\min}(a) $. We conclude using Theorem \[thm:hieuhdds\] to bound $\max_{i}\|\psi_i-\psi_i^{\loc,r}\|_{a}$.
Multiresolution operator decomposition {#sechnh}
======================================
Building on the analysis of Section \[sec:contcase\], we will now gamble on the approximation of the solution of based on measurements performed at different levels of resolution. The resulting hierarchical (and nested) games will then be used to derive a multiresolution decomposition of (orthogonal across subscales) and a near-linear complexity multiresolution algorithm with a priori error bounds.
Hierarchy of nested measurement functions {#subsecdomdecomphi}
-----------------------------------------
In order to define the hierarchy of games we will first define a hierarchy of nested measurement functions.
\[defindextree\] We say that $\I$ is an index tree of depth $q$ if it is a finite set of $q$-tuples of the form $i=(i_1,\ldots,i_q)$ with $1\leq i_1 \leq m_0$ and $1\leq i_j \leq m_{(i_1,\ldots,i_{j-1})}$ for $j\geq 2$, where $m_0$ and $m_{(i_1,\ldots,i_{j-1})}$ are strictly positive integers. For $1\leq k \leq q$ and $i=(i_1,\ldots,i_q)\in \I$, we write $i^{(k)}:=(i_1,\ldots,i_k)$ and $\I^{(k)}:=\{i^{(k)}\,:\, i\in \I\}$. For $k\leq k'\leq q$ and $j=(j_1,\ldots,j_{k'})\in \I^{(k')}$ we write $j^{(k)}:=(j_1,\ldots,j_k)$. For $i\in \I^{(k)}$ and $k\leq k'\leq q$ we write $i^{(k,k')}$ the set of elements $j\in \I^{(k')}$ such that $j^{(k)}=i$.
\[defmulires\] Let $\I$ be an index tree of depth $q$. Let $\delta \in (0,1)$ and $0< H_q <\cdots <H_1<1$. Let $(\tau_i^{(k)}, k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}, i\in \I^{(k)})$ be a collection of subsets of $\Omega$ such that (1) for $1\leq k \leq q$, $(\tau_i^{(k)}, i\in \I^{(k)})$ is a partition of $\Omega$ such that each $\tau_i^{(k)}$ is a Lipschitz, convex subset of $\Omega$ of diameter at most $H_k$ and contains a ball of diameter $\delta H_k$ (2) the sequence of partitions is nested, i.e. for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$ and $i\in \I^{(k)}$, $\tau_i^{(k)}:=\cup_{j\in i^{(k,k+1)}} \,\tau_j^{(k+1)}$.
As in Remark \[rmkiegudyg3\], the assumption of convexity of the subdomains $\tau_i^{(k)}$ is not necessary to the results presented here and is only used to derive sharper/simpler constants. Let $\phi_i^{(k)}$ be the indicator function of the set $\tau_i^{(k)}$ (i.e. $\phi_i^{(k)}=1$ if $x\in \tau_i^{(k)}$ and $\phi_i^{(k)}=0$ if $x\not\in \tau_i^{(k)}$). Note that the nesting of the domain decomposition implies that of the measurement functions, i.e. for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$ and $i\in \I^{(k)}$, $$\label{eq:eigdeiud3dd}
\phi^{(k)}_i=\sum_{j\in \I^{(k+1)}}\pi^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j} \phi^{(k+1)}_j$$ where $\pi^{(k,k+1)}$ is the $\I^{(k)}\times \I^{(k+1)}$ matrix defined by $\pi^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j}=1$ if $j\in i^{(k,k+1)}$ and $\pi^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j}=0$ if $j\not\in i^{(k,k+1)}$. We will assume without loss of generality that $\|\phi_i^{(k)}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2=|\tau_i^{(k)}|$ is constant in $i$ (for the general case, rescale/renormalize each $\phi_i^{(k)}$ and the entries of $\pi^{(k,k+1)}$ by the corresponding multiplicative factors, we will keep track of the dependence of some of the constants on $\max_{i,j}|\tau_i^{(k)}|/|\tau_j^{(k)}|$).
Hierarchy of nested gamblets and multiresolution approximations
---------------------------------------------------------------
Let us now consider the problem of recovering the solution of based on the nested measurements $(\int_{\Omega} u \phi_i^{(k)})_{i\in \I^{(k)}}$ for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$. As in Section \[sec:contcase\] we are lead to investigate the mixed strategy (for Player II) expressed by replacing the source term $g$ with a centered Gaussian field with covariance function $\L=-\diiv(a\nabla)$. Under that mixed strategy, Player II’s bet on the value of the solution of , given the measurements $(\int_{\Omega} u(y)\phi^{(k)}_i(y)\,dy)_{i\in \I^{(k)}}$, is (see Subsection \[subsecoptaccuracy\]) $$\label{eqdefuk}
u^{(k)}(x):=\sum_{i\in \I^{(k)}} \psi^{(k)}_i(x) \int_{\Omega} u(y)\phi^{(k)}_i (y)\,dy,$$ where (see Theorem \[thm:dkdehgjdhdgh0\]), for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ and $i\in \I^{(k)}$, $\psi^{(k)}_i$ is the minimizer of $$\label{eq:dfddeytfewdaisq}
\begin{cases}
\text{Minimize } &\|\psi\|_a\\
\text{Subject to } &\psi \in H^1_0(\Omega)\text{ and }\int_{\Omega}\phi_j^{(k)} \psi=\delta_{i,j}\text{ for } j\in \I^{(k)}\,.
\end{cases}$$ Define $\V^{(q+1)}:=H^1_0(\Omega)$ and, for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$, $$\label{eqdefvk}
\V^{(k)}:=\operatorname{span}\{\psi^{(k)}_i \mid i\in \I^{(k)}\} .$$
By Theorem \[thmgufufg0\] $\operatorname{span}\{\psi_i^{(k)} \mid i\in \I^{(k)}\}=\operatorname{span} \{\L^{-1} \phi_i^{(k)} \mid i\in \I^{(k)}\}$, and the nesting of the measurement functions implies the nesting of the spaces $\V^{(k)}$. The following theorem is (which is a direct application of theorems \[thm:dkdehgjdhdgh02\] and \[thm:dkdehgjdhdgh\]) shows that $u^{(k)}$ is the best (energy norm) approximation of the solution of in $\V^{(k)}$.
\[thmgugyug0\] It holds true that (1) for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$, $\V^{(k)} \subset \V^{(k+1)}$ and $\V^{(k)}=\operatorname{span} \{\L^{-1} \phi_i^{(k)} \mid i\in \I^{(k)}\}$ and (2) If $u$ is the solution of and $u^{(k)}$ defined in then $$\label{eqdhekjddkjhdjk}
\|u - u^{(k)}\|_{a}=\inf_{v\in \V^{(k)}} \|u - v\|_{a}\leq \frac{2}{\pi \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)}} H_k \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}$$
Nested games and martingale/multiresolution decomposition {#subsecmaringaleopdecomposition}
---------------------------------------------------------
As in Section \[sec:contcase\] we consider the mixed strategy (for Player II) expressed by replacing the source term $g$ with a centered Gaussian field with covariance function $\L$. Under this mixed strategy, Player II’s bet on the value of the solution of , given the measurements $(\int_{\Omega} u(y)\phi^{(k)}_i(y)\,dy)_{i\in \I^{(k)}}$, can also be obtained by conditioning the solution $v$ of the SPDE (see ), i.e. $$\label{eqkdkjdkjdh}
u^{(k)}(x)=\E\Big[v(x)\Big| \int_{\Omega} v(y)\phi^{(k)}_i(y)\,dy=\int_{\Omega} u(y)\phi^{(k)}_i(y)\,dy ,\,i\in \I^{(k)}\Big]$$ Furthermore, each gamblet $\psi_i^{(k)}$ represents Player II’s bet on the value of the solution of given the measurements $\int_{\Omega} u(y)\phi^{(k)}_j(y)\,dy=\delta_{i,j}$, i.e. $$\label{eqrepphii}
\psi^{(k)}_i=\E\Big[v\Big| \int_{\Omega} v(y)\phi^{(k)}_j(y)\,dy=\delta_{i,j},\,j\in \I^{(k)}\Big]$$
Now consider the nesting of non-cooperative games where Player I chooses $g$ in and Player II is shown the measurements $(\int_{\Omega} u \phi_i^{(k)})_{i\in \I^{(k)}}$, step by step, in a hierarchical manner, from coarse ($k=1$) to fine ($k=q$) and must, at each step $k$ of the game, gamble on the value of solution $u$. The following theorem and show that the resulting sequence of approximations $u^{(k)}$ form the realization of a martingale with independent increments.
\[thmdgdjdgygugyd\] Let $\F_k$ be the $\sigma$-algebra generated by the random variables $(\int_{\Omega}v(x)\phi_i^{(k)})_{i\in \I^{(k)}}$ and $$\label{eqmdedeanvspde}
v^{(k)}(x):=\E\big[v(x)\big| \F_k \big]=\sum_{i\in \I^{(k)}} \psi^{(k)}_i(x) \int_{\Omega} v(y)\phi^{(k)}_i (y)\,dy$$ It holds true that (1) $\F_1,\ldots,\F_q$ forms a filtration, i.e. $\F_k\subset \F_{k+1}$ (2) For $x\in \Omega$, $v^{(k)}(x)$ is a martingale with respect to the filtration $(\F_k)_{k\geq 1}$, i.e. $v^{(k)}(x)=\E\big[v^{(k+1)}(x)\big| \F_{k}\big]$ (3) $v^{(1)}$ and the increments $(v^{(k+1)}-v^{(k)})_{k\geq 1}$ are independent Gaussian fields.
The nesting of the measurement functions implies $\F_k \subset \F_{k+1}$ and $(\F_k)_{k\geq 1}$ is therefore filtration. The fact that $v^{(k)}$ is a martingale follows from $v^{(k)}=\E\big[v\big| \F_k \big]$. Since $v^{(1)}$ and the increments $(v^{(k+1)}-v^{(k)})_{k\geq 1}$ are Gaussian fields belonging to the same Gaussian space their independence is equivalent to zero covariance, which follows from the martingale property, i.e. for $k\geq 1$ $\E\big[v^{(1)}(v^{(k+1)}-v^{(k)})\big]=\E\Big[\E\big[v^{(1)}(v^{(k+1)}-v^{(k)})\big|\F_k\big]\Big]=\E\Big[v^{(1)} \E\big[(v^{(k+1)}-v^{(k)})\big|\F_k\big]\Big]=0$ and for $k>j\geq 1$, $\E\big[(v^{(j+1)}-v^{(j)})(v^{(k+1)}-v^{(k)})\big]=\E\Big[(v^{(j+1)}-v^{(j)}) \E\big[(v^{(k+1)}-v^{(k)})\big|\F_k\big]\Big]=0$.
Theorem \[thmdgdjdgygugyd\] enables the application of classical results concerning martingales to the numerical analysis of $v^{(k)}$ (and $u^{(k)}$). In particular (1) Martingale (concentration) inequalities can be used to control the fluctuations of $v^{(k)}$ (2) Optimal stopping times can be used to derive optimal strategies for stopping numerical simulations based on loss functions mixing computation costs with the cost of imperfect decisions (3) Taking $q=\infty$ in the construction of the basis elements $\psi^{(k)}_i$ (with a sequence $H_k$ decreasing towards 0) and using the martingale convergence theorem imply that, for all $\varphi\in C_0^\infty(\Omega)$, $\int_{\Omega} v^{(k)}\varphi \rightarrow \int_{\Omega} v\varphi$ as $k\rightarrow \infty$ (a.s. and in $L^1$).
The independence of the increments $v^{(k+1)}-v^{(k)}$ is related to the following orthogonal multiresolution decomposition of the operator . For $\V^{(k)}$ defined as in and for $k\in \{2,\ldots,q+1\}$ let $\W^{(k)}$ be the orthogonal complement of $\V^{(k-1)}$ within $\V^{(k)}$ with respect to the scalar product $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_a$. Write $\oplus_a$ the orthogonal direct sum with respect to the scalar product $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_a$. Note that by Theorem \[thmgugyug0\], $u^{(k)}$ defined by is the finite element solution of in $\V^{(k)}$ (in particular we will write $u^{(q+1)}=u$).
\[thmgugyug2\] It holds true that (1) For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q+1\}$, $$\label{eqdedhhiuhe3}
\V^{(k)}=\V^{(1)}\oplus_a \W^{(2)} \oplus_a \cdots \oplus_a \W^{(k)},$$ (2) for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$, $u^{(k+1)}-u^{(k)}$ belongs to $\W^{(k+1)}$ and $$\label{equdecom}
u=u^{(1)}+(u^{(2)}-u^{(1)})+\cdots+(u^{(q)}-u^{(q-1)})+(u-u^{(q)})$$ is the orthogonal decomposition of $u$ in $H^1_0(\Omega)=\V^{(1)}\oplus_a \W^{(2)}\oplus_a \cdots \oplus_a \W^{(q)} \oplus_a \W^{(q+1)}$, and (3) $u^{(k+1)}-u^{(k)}$ is the finite element solution of in $\W^{(k+1)}$.
Observe that since the $\V^{(k)}$ are nested (Theorem \[thmgugyug0\]) $u^{(k+1)}-u^{(k)}$ belongs to $\V^{(k+1)}$. Furthermore (by Property (1) of Theorem \[thmgugyug0\] and integration by parts), for $i\in \I^{(k)}$, $\<u^{(k+1)}-u^{(k)}, \psi_i^{(k)}\>_a$ belongs to $\operatorname{span}\{\int_{\Omega}(u^{(k+1)}-u^{(k)}) \phi_i^{(k)}\mid i\in \I^{(k)} \}$. Finally, , the constraints of and the nesting property imply that for $i\in \I^{(k)}$, $\int_{\Omega}(u^{(k+1)}-u^{(k)}) \phi_i^{(k)}=\sum_{j\in \I^{(k+1)}}\pi^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j}\int_{\Omega}u \phi_{j}^{(k+1)} -\int_{\Omega}u \phi_i^{(k)}=0$ which implies that $u^{(k+1)}-u^{(k)}$ belongs to $\W^{(k+1)}$.
Interpolation and restriction matrices/operators
------------------------------------------------
Since the spaces $\V^{(k)}$ are nested there exists a $\I^{(k)}\times \I^{(k+1)}$ matrix $R^{(k,k+1)}$ such that for $1\leq k \leq q-1$ and $i\in \I^{(k)}$ $$\label{eq:ftfytftfx}
\psi^{(k)}_i=\sum_{j \in \I^{(k+1)}} R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)} \psi_j^{(k+1)}$$ We will refer to $R^{(k,k+1)}$ as the restriction matrix and to its transpose $R^{(k+1,k)}:=(R^{(k,k+1)})^T$ as the interpolation/prolongation matrix. The following theorem shows that (see Figure \[fig:bets\]) $R^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j}$ is Player II’s best bet on the value of $\int_{\Omega} u\phi^{(k+1)}_j$ given the information that $\int_{\Omega} u\phi^{(k)}_s=\delta_{i,s},\,s\in \I^{(k)}$).
\[eqhjgjhgjgjg\] It holds true that for $i\in \I^{(k)}$ and $j\in \I^{(k+1)}$,\
$R^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j}= \int_{\Omega} \psi^{(k)}_i \phi_j^{(k+1)}= \E\big[\int_{\Omega} v(y)\phi^{(k+1)}_j(y)\,dy\big| \int_{\Omega} v(y)\phi^{(k)}_l(y)\,dy=\delta_{i,l},\,l\in \I^{(k)}\big]$.
The first equality is obtained by integrating against $\phi_j^{(k+1)}$ and using the constraints satisfied by $\psi^{(k+1)}_j$ in . For the second equality, observe that since $\F_k$ is a filtration we can replace $v$ in the representation formula by $v^{(k)}$ (as defined by the r.h.s. of ) and obtain\
$
\psi^{(k)}_i(x) =\sum_{j\in \I^{(k+1)}} \psi^{(k+1)}_j(x) \E\big[\int_{\Omega} v(y)\phi^{(k+1)}_j(y)\,dy\big| \int_{\Omega} v(y)\phi^{(k)}_l(y)\,dy=\delta_{i,l},\,l\in \I^{(k)}\big]
$ which corresponds to .
Nested computation of the interpolation and stiffness matrices
--------------------------------------------------------------
Let $v$ be the solution of . Observe that $(\int_{\Omega}v(x)\phi_i^{(k)})_{i\in \I^{(k)}}$ is a Gaussian vector with (symmetric, positive definite) covariance matrix $\Theta^{(k)}$ defined by for $i,j \in \I^{(k)}$, $$\label{eq:kldldje34}
\Theta^{(k)}_{i,j}:=\int_{\Omega^2 }\phi^{(k)}_i(x) G(x,y) \phi^{(k)}_j(y)\,dx\,dy\,.$$ As in , $\Theta^{(k)}$ is invertible and we write $\Theta^{(k),-1}$ its inverse. Observe that, as in Theorem \[thm:dkdehgjdhdgh0\], $\psi_i^{(k)}$ admits the following representation formula $$\label{eq:doehddcasek}
\psi_i^{(k)}(x)=\sum_{j\in \I^{(k)}} \Theta_{i,j}^{(k),-1} \int_{\Omega}G(x,y)\phi_j^{(k)}(y)\,dy$$
Observe that, as in Theorem \[thm:dkdehgjdhdgh0\], $\Theta^{(k),-1}=A^{(k)}$ where $A^{(k)}$ is the (symmetric, positive definite) stiffness matrix of the elements $\psi^{(k)}_i$, i.e., for $i,j \in \I^{(k)}$, $$\label{eq:iwihud3de}
A^{(k)}_{i,j}:=\< \psi^{(k)}_i, \psi^{(k)}_j\>_a$$
Write $\pi^{(k+1,k)}$ the transpose of the matrix $\pi^{(k,k+1)}$ (defined below ) and $I^{(k)}$ the $\I^{(k)}\times \I^{(k)}$ identity matrix. The following theorem enables the hierarchical/nested computation of $A^{(k)}$ from $A^{(k+1)}$.
\[thmhggfees5\] For $b\in \R^{\I^{(k)}}$, $R^{(k+1,k)}b$ is the (unique) minimizer $c\in \R^{\I^{(k+1)}}$ of $$\label{eq:dfdytffdeytfewdaisq}
\begin{cases}
\text{Minimize } &c^T A^{(k+1)} c \\
\text{Subject to } &\pi^{(k,k+1)}c=b
\end{cases}$$ Furthermore $R^{(k,k+1)} \pi^{(k+1,k)}=\pi^{(k,k+1)}R^{(k+1,k)} =I^{(k)}$, $R^{(k,k+1)}=A^{(k)}\pi^{(k,k+1)}\Theta^{(k+1)}$, $\Theta^{(k)}=\pi^{(k,k+1)}\Theta^{(k+1)}\pi^{(k+1,k)}$ and $$\label{eqhuhiuv}
A^{(k)}= R^{(k,k+1)}A^{(k+1)}R^{(k+1,k)}\,.$$
Using the decompositions and in $\int_{\Omega}\phi_j^{(k)} \psi_i^{(k)}=\delta_{i,j}$ leads to\
$R^{(k,k+1)} \pi^{(k+1,k)}=I^{(k)}$. Using and to expand $\psi^{(k)}_i$ Theorem \[eqhjgjhgjgjg\] leads to $R^{(k,k+1)}=A^{(k)}\pi^{(k,k+1)}\Theta^{(k+1)}$. Using to expand $\phi_i^{(k)}$ and $\phi_j^{(k)}$ in leads to $\Theta^{(k)}=\pi^{(k,k+1)}\Theta^{(k+1)}\pi^{(k+1,k)}$. Using to expand $\psi^{(k)}_i$ and $\psi^{(k)}_j$ in leads to . Let $b\in \R^{\I^{(k)}}$. Theorem \[thm:dkdehgjdhdgh0\] implies that $\sum_{i\in \I^{(k)}}b_i \psi_i^{(k)}$ is the unique minimizer of $\|v\|_a^2$ subject to $v\in H^1_0(\Omega)$ and $\int_{\Omega}\phi_j^{(k)} v=b_j$ for $j\in \I^{(k)}$. Since $\V^{(k)}\subset \V^{(k+1)}$ and since the minimizer is in $\V^{(k)}$, the minimization over $v\in H^1_0(\Omega)$ can be reduced to $v\in \V^{(k+1)}$ of the form $v=\sum_{i\in \I^{(k+1)}}c_i \psi_i^{(k+1)}$, which after using to expand the constraint $\int_{\Omega}\phi_j^{(k)} v=b_j$, corresponds to .
Multiresolution gamblets {#subsecmultiresbasis}
------------------------
The interpolation and restriction operators are sufficient to derive a multigrid method for solving . To design a multiresolution algorithm we need to continue the analysis and identify basis functions for the subspaces $\W^{(k)}$. For $k=2,\ldots,q$ let $\J^{(k)}$ be the finite set of $k$-tuples of the form $i=(i_1,\ldots,i_k)$ with $1\leq i_1 \leq m_0$, $1\leq i_j \leq m_{(i_1,\ldots,i_{j-1})}$ for $ 2\leq j \leq k-1$ and $1\leq i_k \leq m_{(i_1,\ldots,i_{k-1})}-1$. Where the integers $m_\cdot$ are the same as those defining the index tree $\I$. For a matrix $M$ write $\Img(M)$ and $\Ker(M)$ its image and kernel.
\[lemwk\] For $k=2,\ldots,q$ let $W^{(k)}$ be a $\J^{(k)}\times \I^{(k)}$ matrix such that $\Img(W^{(k),T})=\Ker(\pi^{(k-1,k)})$. It holds true that the elements $(\chi_i^{(k)})_{i\in \J^{(k)}}\in \V^{(k)}$ defined as $$\label{eqjkhdkdh}
\chi^{(k)}_i:=\sum_{j \in \I^{(k)}} W_{i,j}^{(k)} \psi_j^{(k)}$$ form a basis of $\W^{(k)}$.
Since $\L \V^{(k-1)}=\operatorname{span}\{\phi^{(k-1)}_i\mid i\in \I^{(k-1)}\}$, $w\in \V^{(k)}$ belongs to $\W^{(k)}$ if and only if $\int_{\Omega} \phi^{(k-1)}_j w =0$ for all $j\in \I^{(k-1)}$, which, taking $w=\chi^{(k)}_i$ and using , translates into $(\pi^{(k-1,k)}W^{(k),T})_{j,i}=0$. Writing $|\J^{(k)}|$ the number of elements of $\J^{(k)}$ (which is equal to the dimension of $\W^{(k)}$), observe that $|\J^{(k)}|=|I^{(k)}|-|I^{(k-1)}|$. Therefore $\Img(W^{(k),T})=\Ker(\pi^{(k-1,k)})$ also implies that the $|\J^{(k)}|$ elements $\chi^{(k)}_i$ are linearly independent and, therefore, form a basis of $\W^{(k)}$.
\[rmkljdlkdjiji\] Observe that since $0=\<\psi_i^{(k-1)}, \chi_j^{(k)}\>_a=(R^{(k-1,k)} A^{(k)}W^{(k),T})_{i,j}$, it also holds true that $\Img(W^{(k),T})=\Ker(R^{(k-1,k)}A^{(k)})$ and $\Img(A^{(k)} W^{(k),T})= \Ker(R^{(k-1,k)})$ .
From now on we choose, for each $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$, a $\J^{(k)}\times \I^{(k)}$ matrix $W^{(k)}$ as in Lemma \[lemwk\]. This choice is not unique and to enable fast multiplication by $W^{(k)}$ (or its transpose) we require that for $(j,i)\in \J^{(k)}\times \I^{(k)}$, $W^{(k)}_{j,i}=0$ if $j^{(k-1)}\not=i^{(k-1)}$. Therefore, the construction of $W^{(k)}$ requires, for each $s\in \I^{(k-1)}$, to specify a number $m_s-1$ of $m_s$-dimensional vectors $W^{(k)}_{(s,1),(s,\cdot)},\ldots, W^{(k)}_{(s,m_s-1),(s,\cdot)}$ that are linearly independent and orthogonal to the $m_s$-dimensional vector $(1,1,\ldots,1,1)$. We propose two simple constructions.
\[const1\] For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$, choose $W^{(k)}$ such (1) $W^{(k)}_{j,i}=0$ for $(j,i)\in \J^{(k)}\times \I^{(k)}$ with $j^{(k-1)}\not=i^{(k-1)}$ and (2) for $s\in \I^{(k-1)}$, $t\in \{1,\ldots,m_s-1\}$ and $t'\in \{1,\ldots,m_s\}$, $W^{(k)}_{(s,t),(s,t')}=\delta_{t,t'}-\delta_{t+1,t'}$.
For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ and $i=(i_1,\ldots,i_{k-1},i_k)\in \J^{(k)}$ define $i^+:=(i_1,\ldots,i_{k-1},i_k+1)$ and observe that under construction \[const1\], $$\label{eqchipsi}
\chi^{(k)}_i=\psi^{(k)}_{i}-\psi^{(k)}_{i^+}$$ whose game-theoretic interpretation is provided in Figure \[fig:bets\].
![If $(\tau_s^{(k)}, s\in \I^{(k)})$ is a nested rectangular partition of $\Omega$ then (a) $\psi_i^{(k)}$ is Player II’s best bet on the value of the solution $u$ of given $\int_{\tau^{(k)}_j}u=\delta_{i,j}$ for $j\in \I^{(k)}$ (b) $\chi_i^{(k)}$ is Player II’s best bet on $u$ given $\int_{\tau^{(k)}_j}u=\delta_{i,j}-\delta_{i^+,j}$ for $j\in \I^{(k)}$ (c) $R^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j}$ is Player II’s best bet on $\int_{\tau^{(k+1)}_j} u$ given $\int_{\tau^{(k)}_j}u=\delta_{i,j}$ for $j\in \I^{(k)}$.[]{data-label="fig:bets"}](./fig/bets){width="\textwidth"}
For the second construction we need the following lemma whose proof is trivial.
\[const0\] Let $U^{(n)}$ be the sequence of $n\times n$ matrices defined (1) for $n=2$ by $U^{(2)}_{1,\cdot}=(1,-1)$ and $U^{(2)}_{2,\cdot}=(1,1)$ and (2) iteratively for $n\geq 2$ by $U^{(n+1)}_{i,j}=U^{(n)}_{i,j}$ for $1\leq i,j \leq n$, $U^{(n+1)}_{n+1,j}=1$ for $1\leq j \leq n+1$, $U^{(n+1)}_{i,n+1}=0$ for $1\leq i\leq n-1$ and $U^{(n+1)}_{n,n+1}=-n$. Then for $n\geq 2$, the rows of $U^{(n)}$ are orthogonal, $U^{(n)}_{n,j}=1$ for $1\leq j \leq n$ and we write $\bar{U}^{(n)}$ the corresponding orthonormal matrix obtained by renormalizing the rows of $U^{(n)}$.
\[const2\] For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$, choose $W^{(k)}$ such (1) $W^{(k)}_{j,i}=0$ for $(j,i)\in \J^{(k)}\times \I^{(k)}$ with $j^{(k-1)}\not=i^{(k-1)}$ and (2) for $s\in \I^{(k-1)}$ and $t\in \{1,\ldots,m_s-1\}$ and $t' \in \{1,\ldots,m_s\}$ $W^{(k)}_{(s,t),(s,t')}=\bar{U}^{(m_s)}_{t,t'}$ (where $\bar{U}^{(m_s)}$ is defined in Lemma \[const0\]).
Observe that under Construction \[const2\] (1) the complexity of constructing $W^{(k)}$ is $|\I^{(k-1)}|\times m_s^2$ and (2) $W^{(k)}W^{(k),T}=J^{(k)}$ where $J^{(k)}$ is the $\J^{(k)}\times \J^{(k)}$ identity matrix.
Multiresolution operator inversion {#subsecmultiresoperatorinversion}
----------------------------------
We will now use the basis functions $\psi_i^{(1)}$ and $\chi^{(k)}_i$ to perform the multiresolution inversion of . Let $B^{(k)}$ be the $\J^{(k)}\times \J^{(k)}$ (stiffness)matrix $B^{(k)}_{i,j}=\<\chi_i^{(k)},\chi_j^{(k)}\>_a$ and observe that $$\label{eqjgfytfjhyyyg}
B^{(k)}= W^{(k)}A^{(k)}W^{(k),T}$$ Observe that $B^{(k)}$ is positive, symmetric, definite and write $B^{(k),-1}$ its inverse. Let $\bar{\pi}^{(k,k+1)}$ be the $\I^{(k)}\times \I^{(k+1)}$ matrix defined by $$\bar{\pi}^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j}=\pi^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j}/ (\pi^{(k,k+1)} \pi^{(k+1,k)})_{i,i}$$ Using the notations of Definition \[defindextree\] note that $(\pi^{(k,k+1)} \pi^{(k+1,k)})_{i,i}=m_{i}$. Let $D^{(k,k-1)}$ be the $\J^{(k)}\times \I^{(k-1)}$ matrix defined as $$\label{eqdkdjhdkhse}
D^{(k,k-1)}:=- B^{(k),-1}W^{(k)}A^{(k)}\bar{\pi}^{(k,k-1)}$$ and write $D^{(k-1,k)}:=D^{(k,k-1),T}$ its transpose.
It holds true that for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$ and $i\in \I^{(k)}$, $$\label{eqdidhduhh}
\psi_i^{(k)}= \sum_{l\in \I^{(k+1)}}\bar{\pi}^{(k,k+1)}_{i,l}\psi^{(k+1)}_l+ \sum_{j\in \J^{(k+1)}} D^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j} \chi^{(k+1)}_j\,.$$ In particular, $$\label{eqhuhiddeuv}
R^{(k,k+1)}= \bar{\pi}^{(k,k+1)}+D^{(k,k+1)}W^{(k+1)}$$
For $s\in \I^{(k)}$ write $\bar{\psi}_s^{(k)}:= \sum_{l\in \I^{(k+1)}}\bar{\pi}^{(k,k+1)}_{s,l}\psi^{(k+1)}_l$ and $\bar{\V}^{(k)}:=\Span\{\bar{\psi}_s^{(k)}\mid s\in \I^{(k)} \}$. Let $x\in \R^{I^{(k)}}$, $y\in \R^{\J^{(k+1)}}$ and $$\label{eqdhdihedu65c}
\psi =\sum_{s\in \I^{(k)}} x_s \bar{\psi}_s^{(k)} + \sum_{j\in \J^{(k+1)}}y_j \chi_j^{(k+1)}\,.$$ If $\psi=0$ then integrating $\psi$ against $\phi_i^{(k)}$ for $i\in \I^{(k)}$ (and observing that $\int_{\Omega}\phi_i^{(k)} \bar{\psi}_s^{(k)}= \delta_{i,s}$) implies $x=0$ and $y=0$. Therefore the elements $\bar{\psi}_s^{(k)}, \chi_j^{(k+1)}$ form a basis for $\bar{\V}^{(k)}+\W^{(k+1)}$. Observing that $\operatorname{dim}(\V^{(k+1)})=\operatorname{dim}(\bar{\V}^{(k)})+\operatorname{dim}(\W^{(k+1)})$ we deduce that $\V^{(k+1)}=\bar{\V}^{(k)}+\W^{(k+1)}$. Therefore, since $\V^{(k)}\subset \V^{(k+1)}$, $\psi_i^{(k)}$ can be decomposed as in . The constraints $\int_{\Omega} \phi_s^{(k)}\psi_i^{(k)}=\delta_{i,s}$ lead to $x_s= \delta_{i,s}$. The orthogonality between $\psi$ and $\W^{(k+1)}$ leads to the equations $\<\psi,\chi^{(k+1)}_j\>_a=0$ for $j\in \J^{(k+1)}$, i.e.\
$\sum_{l\in \I^{(k+1)}}\bar{\pi}^{(k,k+1)}_{i,l}\<\psi^{(k+1)}_l,\chi^{(k+1)}_j\>_a+\sum_{j'\in \J^{(k+1)}} y_{j'} \<\chi^{(k+1)}_{j'},\chi^{(k+1)}_j\>_a=0$, which translates into $ W^{(k+1)} A^{(k+1)} \bar{\pi}^{(k+1,k)}_{\cdot,i} + B^{(k+1)} y$, that is . Plugging in and comparing with leads to .
Let $g$ be the r.h.s of . For $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ let $g^{(k)}$ be the $|\I^{(k)}|$-dimensional vector defined by $g^{(k)}_i=\int_{\Omega}\psi_i^{(k)}g \text{ for }i\in \I^{(k)}$. Observe that $g^{(k)}$ can be computed iteratively using $$\label{eqyguugy6t}
g^{(k)}=R^{(k,k+1)} g^{(k+1)}\,.$$
For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$, let $w^{(k)}$ be $|\J^{(k)}|$-dimensional vector defined as the solution of $$\label{eqsdjoejddi1}
B^{(k)} w^{(k)}=W^{(k)} g^{(k)}$$ Furthermore let $U^{(1)}$ be the $|\I^{(1)}|$-dimensional vector defined as the solution of $$\label{eqsdjoejddi2}
A^{(1)} U^{(1)}=g^{(1)}$$ According to following theorem, which is a direct consequence of Theorem \[thmgugyug2\], the solution of can be computed at any scale by solving the decoupled linear systems and .
\[thddwedmgugyug\] For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$, let $u^{(k)}$ be the finite element solution of in $\V^{(k)}$. It holds true that $u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)}=\sum_{i\in \J^{(k)}}w^{(k)}_i \chi^{(k)}_i$ and, in particular, $$u^{(k)}=\sum_{i \in \I^{(1)}} U^{(1)}_i \psi^{(1)}_i+\sum_{k'=2}^k \sum_{i\in \J^{(k')}}w^{(k')}_i \chi^{(k')}_i$$
Uniformly bounded condition numbers across subscales/subbands {#subsecmultires}
-------------------------------------------------------------
Taking $q=\infty$ in Theorem \[thmgugyug2\], the construction of the basis elements $\psi^{(k)}_i$ leads to the multiresolution orthogonal decomposition, $$H^1_0(\Omega)=\V^{(1)}\underset{i=2}{\overset{\infty}{\oplus_a}} \W^{(i)}.$$ In that sense the basis elements $\psi^{(k)}_i$ and $\chi^{(k)}_i$ could be seen as a generalization of wavelets to the orthogonal decomposition of $H^1_0(\Omega)$ (rather than $L^2(\Omega)$) adapted to the solution space of the PDE . We will now show that this orthogonal decomposition induces a subscale decomposition of the operator $-\diiv(a\nabla)$ into layered subbands of increasing frequencies. Moreover the condition number of the operator $-\diiv(a\nabla)$ restricted to each subspace $\W^{(k)}$ will be shown to be uniformly bounded if $H_{k-1}/H_{k}$ is uniformly bounded (e.g. if $H_k$ is a geometric sequence). Write $H_0:=1$ and let $\delta$ be defined as in Construction \[defmulires\].
\[thmuuhiuhddu\] If $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ and $v\in \V^{(k)}$ then $$\label{eqguygugu68lhs}
\frac{\delta^{1+d/2}}{\sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(a)} 2^{5/2+d/2}} H_{k} \leq \frac{\|v\|_a}{\|\diiv(a\nabla v)\|_{L^2(\Omega)}}\,.$$ If $(k=1$ and $v\in \V^{(1)})$ or $(k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ and $v\in \W^{(k)})$ then $$\label{eqguygugu68}
\frac{\|v\|_a}{\|\diiv(a\nabla v)\|_{L^2(\Omega)}} \leq \frac{1}{ \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)}} H_{k-1}\,.$$
is a direct consequence of Lemma \[lemdhkedjhdkjh\]. For $k=1$ is a simple consequence of Poincaré’s inequality. Let $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$. $\V^{(k)}=\V^{(k-1)}\oplus_a \W^{(k)}$ and Theorem \[thmgugyug0\] imply\
$
\sup_{v\in \W^{(k)}} \frac{\|v\|_a}{\|\diiv(a\nabla v)\|_{L^2(\Omega)}} \leq \sup_{v\in \V^{(k)}} \inf_{v' \in \V^{(k-1)}} \frac{\|v-v'\|_a}{\|\diiv(a\nabla v)\|_{L^2(\Omega)}} \leq \frac{2}{\pi \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)}} H_{k-1}.
$\
Write $|c|$ the Euclidean norm of $c$ and for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ let $$\label{eqgam1}
{\underaccent{\bar}{\gamma}}_k:=\inf_{c\in \R^{\I^{(k)}}} \frac{\| \sum_{i\in \I^{(k)}} c_i \, \phi_i^{(k)} \|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2}{|c|^2} \text{ and }\bar{\gamma}_k:=\sup_{c\in \R^{\I^{(k)}}} \frac{\| \sum_{i\in \I^{(k)}} c_i \, \phi_i^{(k)} \|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2}{|c|^2}$$ Write $|\tau|$ the volume of a set $\tau$ and note that $\bar{\gamma}_k\leq \max_{i\in \I^{(k)}} |\tau_i^{(k)}|$ and ${\underaccent{\bar}{\gamma}}_k\geq \min_{i\in \I^{(k)}} |\tau_i^{(k)}|$, therefore $\bar{\gamma}_k/{\underaccent{\bar}{\gamma}}_k \leq \delta^{-d}$.
For a given matrix $M$, write $\operatorname{Cond}(M):=\sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(M^T M)}/\sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(M^T M)}$ its condition number.
\[thmodhehiudhehd\] It holds true that $$\label{eqcond1}
\operatorname{Cond}(A^{(1)})\leq \frac{1}{H_{1}^2}\frac{\lambda_{\max}(a) 2^{5+d}}{\lambda_{\min}(a) \delta^{2+2 d} },$$ and for $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$, $$\label{eqcond2}
\operatorname{Cond}(B^{(k)})\leq \big(\frac{ H_{k-1}}{ H_{k}}\big)^{2} \big(\frac{\lambda_{\max}(a)}{\lambda_{\min}(a)}\big)^2
\frac{ 2^{11+2d}}{\delta^{4+7d} \pi^2 } \operatorname{Cond}(W^{(k)}W^{(k),T})\,.$$ Furthermore, $\operatorname{Cond}(W^{(k)}W^{(k),T})=1$ under Construction \[const2\] and $\operatorname{Cond}(W^{(k)}W^{(k),T})\leq 2 \big(H_{k-1}/(\delta H_k)\big)^{2d}$ under Construction \[const1\].
Let $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ and $c\in \R^{\I^{(k)}}$. Write $v=\sum_{i\in \I^{(k)}} c_i \psi_i^{(k)}$. Observing that $\|v\|_a^2=c^T A^{(k)} c$ and $\|\diiv(a\nabla v)\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2=\|\sum_{i\in \I^{(k)}} (A^{(k)} c)_i \phi_i^{(k)}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2 \geq {\underaccent{\bar}{\gamma}}_k |A^{(k)} c|^2$, implies that ${\underaccent{\bar}{\gamma}}_k H_k^2 \delta^{2+d}/(\lambda_{\max}(a) 2^{5+d}) \leq c^T A^{(k)}c/ |A^{(k)} c|^2$, which, after taking the minimum in $c$ leads to (for $k\geq 1$) $$\label{eqkhiduhdf7d}
\lambda_{\max}(A^{(k)})\leq \lambda_{\max}(a) 2^{5+d}/(H_{k}^2 \delta^{2+d} {\underaccent{\bar}{\gamma}}_k ),$$ and for $k\geq 2$ (using ) $$\label{eqkhiduhde2df7d}
\lambda_{\max}(B^{(k)})\leq \lambda_{\max}(W^{(k)}W^{(k),T}) \lambda_{\max}(a) 2^{5+d}/(H_{k}^2 \delta^{2+d} {\underaccent{\bar}{\gamma}}_k )\,.$$ Similarly for $k=1$ leads to $\lambda_{\min}(A^{(1)})\geq \lambda_{\min}(a)/\bar{\gamma}_1$. Now let us consider $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ and $c\in \R^{\J^{(k)}}$. Write $w=\sum_{i\in \J^{(k)},\,j \in \I^{(k)}} c_i W_{i,j}^{(k)} \psi_j^{(k)}$. and imply that $\|w\|_a^2=c^T B^{(k)} c$ and (using )\
$\|\diiv(a\nabla w) \|_{L^2(\Omega)}=\| \sum_{i\in \J^{(k)},\,j \in \I^{(k)}} (A^{(k)} W^{(k),T} c)_{j} \phi_j^{(k)}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\leq \bar{\gamma}_k |A^{(k)} W^{(k),T} c|^2$. Observing that $w\in \W^{(k)}$, implies that $\frac{c^T B^{(k)} c}{c^T W^{(k)} (A^{(k)})^2 W^{(k),T} c} \leq \bar{\gamma}_k\,\frac{1}{ \lambda_{\min}(a)} H_{k-1}^2$. Taking $c=B^{(k),-1} y$ for $y\in \R^{\J^{(k)}}$ we deduce that $ \frac{y^T B^{(k),-1} y}{|A^{(k)} W^{(k),T} B^{(k),-1} y|^2 } \leq \bar{\gamma}_k\,\frac{1}{ \lambda_{\min}(a)} H_{k-1}^2$. Writing $N^{(k)}=-A^{(k)} W^{(k),T} B^{(k),-1}$, we have obtained that $$\label{eqjgjhdjhgdy}
\lambda_{\min}(a)/\big(H_{k-1}^2 \bar{\gamma}_k\lambda_{\max}(N^{(k),T}N^{(k)})\big) \leq \lambda_{\min}(B^{(k)})\,.$$ For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ let $P^{(k)}:=\pi^{(k,k-1)} R^{(k-1,k)}$. Using $R^{(k-1,k)}=A^{(k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}\Theta^{(k)}$ and $\pi^{(k-1,k)}\Theta^{(k)}\pi^{(k,k-1)}=\Theta^{(k-1)}$ (Theorem \[thmhggfees5\]) we obtain that $(P^{(k)})^2=P^{(k)}$, i.e. $P^{(k)}$ is a projection. Write $\|P^{(k)}\|_{\Ker(\pi^{(k-1,k)})}:=\sup_{x\in \Ker(\pi^{(k-1,k)})} |P^{(k)} x|/|x|$.
\[lemfdhgdf\] It holds true that for $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$, $$\lambda_{\max}(N^{(k),T}N^{(k)})\leq \frac{1+\|P^{(k)}\|_{\Ker(\pi^{(k-1,k)})}^2}{\lambda_{\min}(W^{(k)} W^{(k),T})}\,.$$
Since $\Img(W^{(k),T})$ and $\Img(\pi^{(k,k-1)})$ are orthogonal and $\dim(\R^{\I^{(k)}})=\dim\big(\Img(W^{(k),T})\big)+\dim\big(\Img(\pi^{(k,k-1)})\big)$, for $x\in \R^{\I^{(k)}}$ there exists a unique $y\in \R^{\J^{(k)}}$ and $z\in \R^{\I^{(k-1)}}$ such that $x=W^{(k),T}y+\pi^{(k,k-1)} z$ and $
|x|^2=|W^{(k),T}y|^2+|\pi^{(k,k-1)} z|^2.
$ Observe that $W^{(k)} x=W^{(k)}W^{(k),T}y$ (since $W^{(k)}\pi^{(k,k-1)}=0$) and $R^{(k-1,k)}x =R^{(k-1,k)} W^{(k),T}y+z$ (since $R^{(k-1,k)}\pi^{(k,k-1)}=I^{(k-1)}$ from Theorem \[thmhggfees5\]). Therefore, $
|x|^2=|W^{(k),T} y|^2+|P^{(k)} (x-W^{(k),T}y)|^2
$ with $y=(W^{(k)} W^{(k),T})^{-1}W^{(k)} x$. Let $v\in \R^{\J^{(k)}}$. Taking $x=A^{(k)}W^{(k),T}v$ and observing that $P^{(k)}x=0$ (since $R^{(k-1,k)}A^{(k)}W^{(k),T}=0$ from the $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_a$-orthogonality between $\V^{(k-1)}$ and $\W^{(k)}$) leads to $
|A^{(k)}W^{(k),T}v|^2=|W^{(k),T} y |^2+ |P^{(k)} W^{(k),T}y |^2
$ with $y=(W^{(k)} W^{(k),T})^{-1} B^{(k)} v$. Therefore $
|A^{(k)}W^{(k),T}v|^2\leq (1+\|P^{(k)}\|_{\Ker(\pi^{(k-1,k)})}^2)\frac{|B^{(k)}v|^2}{\lambda_{\min}(W^{(k)} W^{(k),T})},
$ which concludes the proof after taking $v=B^{(k),-1}v'$ and maximizing the l.h.s. over $|v'|=1$.
\[lemdjoidjdi\] Writing $\|M\|_2:=sup_x |M x|/x$ the spectral norm, we have $$\|P^{(k)}\|_{\Ker(\pi^{(k-1,k)})}^2 \leq \|\pi^{(k,k-1)}A^{(k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}\|_2 \sup_{x\in \Ker(\pi^{(k-1,k)})}\frac{x^T \Theta^{(k)} x}{x^T x}$$
Let $x\in \Ker(\pi^{(k-1,k)})$. Using $P^{(k)}=\pi^{(k,k-1)}A^{(k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}\Theta^{(k)}$ we obtain that $
|P^{(k)}x|=\|\pi^{(k,k-1)}A^{(k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}(\Theta^{(k)})^\frac{1}{2}\|_2 |(\Theta^{(k)})^\frac{1}{2} x|
$. Observing that for\
$M=\pi^{(k-1,k)}(\Theta^{(k)})^\frac{1}{2}$ we have $M M^T=\Theta^{(k-1)}$ and for $N=\pi^{(k,k-1)}A^{(k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}(\Theta^{(k)})^\frac{1}{2}$ we have $\lambda_{\max}(N^T N)=\lambda_{\max}(N N^T)$ we deduce\
$\|\pi^{(k,k-1)}A^{(k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}(\Theta^{(k)})^\frac{1}{2}\|_2^2=\|\pi^{(k,k-1)}A^{(k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}\|_2$ and conclude by taking the supremum over $x\in \Ker(\pi^{(k-1,k)})$.
\[lemddjoj3ir\] It holds true that $$\sup_{x\in \Ker(\pi^{(k-1,k)})}\frac{x^T \Theta^{(k)} x}{x^T x} \leq H_{k-1}^2 \frac{\bar{\gamma}_k^2}{{\underaccent{\bar}{\gamma}}_k\pi^2 \lambda_{\min}(a)}$$
Let $y\in \R^{\J^{(k)}}$ and $\alpha \in \R$. Let $x=\alpha W^{(k),T} y$. Write $\phi=\sum_{i\in \I^{(k)}} x_i \phi_i^{(k)}$ and $\psi=(-\diiv(a\nabla \cdot))^{-1} \phi$. Observe that $ \|\psi\|^2_a=x^T \Theta^{(k)} x \geq \alpha y^T W^{(k)}\Theta^{(k)} W^{(k),T}y $. Using $\int_{\Omega}\phi_i^{(k)} \phi_l^{(k)} =0$ for $i\not=l$ and selecting $\alpha=\|\phi_i^{(k)}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^{-2}$ (assuming, without loss of generality, that $\|\phi_i^{(k)}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2=|\tau_i^{(k)}|$ is constant in $i$, for the general case, rescale each $\phi_i^{(k)}$ by a multiplicative constant) we obtain that for $j\in \I^{(k-1)}$, $\int_{\Omega}\phi \phi_j^{(k-1)} =\sum_{i\in \I^{(k)}} x_i \|\phi_i^{(k)}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2 \pi^{(k-1,k)}_{j,i}=(\pi^{(k-1,k)} W^{(k),T} y)_j=0
$. Therefore, since $\|\psi\|^2_a=\int_{\Omega}\phi \psi$, we have for $\psi'\in \operatorname{span}\{\phi_i^{(k-1)}\mid i\in \I^{(k-1)}\}$ $
\|\psi\|^2_a =\int_{\Omega}\phi (\psi-\psi') \leq \|\phi\|_{L^2(\Omega)} \|\psi-\psi'\|_{L^2(\Omega)}
$. Choosing $\psi'= \sum_{i\in \I^{(k-1)}} \phi_i^{(k-1)} \int_{\Omega}\psi \phi_i^{(k-1)}/ \|\phi_i^{(k-1)}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2$ we obtain (via Poincaré and Cauchy-Schwartz inequalities as in the proof of Proposition \[prop:gegddgdjdef\]) that $\|\psi-\psi'\|_{L^2(\Omega)} \leq H_{k-1} \|\psi\|_a/(\pi \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)})$ and deduce $\|\psi\|_a \leq H_{k-1} \|\phi\|_{L^2(\Omega)} /(\pi \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)})$. Observing that $\|\phi\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2\leq |x|^2 \bar{\gamma}_k$ and $ {\underaccent{\bar}{\gamma}}_k \leq \alpha^{-1} \leq \bar{\gamma}_k$ we summarize and obtain that\
$
y^T W^{(k)}\Theta^{(k)} W^{(k),T}y \leq H_{k-1}^2 |x|^2 \bar{\gamma}_k^2 /(\pi^2 \lambda_{\min}(a)) \leq H_{k-1}^2 |W^{(k),T}y|^2 \bar{\gamma}_k^2 /({\underaccent{\bar}{\gamma}}_k\pi^2 \lambda_{\min}(a))
$, which concludes the proof of the lemma (since $\Ker(\pi^{(k-1,k)})=\Img(W^{(k),T})$).
Observing that $ \|\pi^{(k,k-1)}A^{(k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}\|_2 \leq \lambda_{\max}(\pi^{(k,k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}) \lambda_{\max}(A^{(k-1)})$ and using , we derive from lemmas \[lemdjoidjdi\] and \[lemddjoj3ir\] that $$\label{eqdihduhuq2he}
\|P^{(k)}\|_{\Ker(\pi^{(k-1,k)})}^2 \leq \lambda_{\max}(\pi^{(k,k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}) \frac{ \bar{\gamma}_k^2 2^{5+d} \lambda_{\max}(a)}{ {\underaccent{\bar}{\gamma}}_k {\underaccent{\bar}{\gamma}}_{k-1} \delta^{2+d} \pi^2 \lambda_{\min}(a)}\,.$$ Observing that $\pi^{(k,k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}$ is block-diagonal and using the notations of Definition \[defindextree\] we have $\lambda_{\max}(\pi^{(k,k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)})=\max_{j\in \I^{(k-1)}}\sup_{x\in \R^{m_j}} |\sum_{i=1}^{m_j} x_i|^2/|x|^2=\max_{j\in \I^{(k-1)}} m_j$. Noting that a set $\tau_j^{(k-1)}$ can contain at most $(\max_{j\in \I^{(k-1)}} |\tau_j^{(k-1)}|)/ (\min_{i\in \I^{(k)}} |\tau_i^{(k)}|)$ subsets $\tau_i^{(k)}$ we have $$\label{eqddkhjji}
\max_{j\in \I^{(k-1)}} m_j \leq \big(H_{k-1}/(\delta H_k)\big)^d$$ and conclude that $\lambda_{\max}(\pi^{(k,k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}) \leq \big(H_{k-1}/(\delta H_k)\big)^d$. Therefore and Lemma \[lemfdhgdf\] imply, after simplification, that $$\label{eqjgjhdjghgfhgdy}
\lambda_{\min}(B^{(k)}) \geq \frac{\lambda_{\min}(a)}{H_{k-1}^2 \bar{\gamma}_k} \lambda_{\min}(W^{(k)} W^{(k),T}) \frac{ H_{k}^{d} {\underaccent{\bar}{\gamma}}_{k-1} {\underaccent{\bar}{\gamma}}_k \delta^{2+2d} \pi^2 \lambda_{\min}(a)}{ H_{k-1}^{d} \bar{\gamma}_k^2 2^{6+d} \lambda_{\max}(a)}\,.$$ Recalling that $\bar{\gamma}_k/{\underaccent{\bar}{\gamma}}_k \leq \delta^{-d}$, using $\bar{\gamma}_k/{\underaccent{\bar}{\gamma}}_{k-1}\leq H_k^d/ (H_{k-1} \delta)^d$, and summarizing we conclude the proof of and . Recall that under construction \[const2\] we have $W^{(k)}W^{(k),T}=J^{(k)}$ which implies $\operatorname{Cond}(W^{(k)}W^{(k),T})=1$. Under construction \[const1\], $W^{(k)}W^{(k),T}$ is block diagonal with for $j\in \I^{(k-1)}$, diagonal blocks corresponding to $(m_j-1)\times (m_j-1)$ matrices $M^{(m_j-1)}$ such that (1) for $n=1$ and $x\in \R$, $x^T M^{(1)}x=2 x^2$ (2) for $n=2$ and $x\in \R^2$, $x^T M^{(2)}x=x_1^2+(x_2-x_1)^2+x_2^2$ and (3) for for $n\geq 3$, and $x\in \R^n$, $x^T M^{(n)} x=x_1^2+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2} (x_{i}-x_{i+1})^2+ x_{n}^2$. Note that for all $n\geq 1$, $\lambda_{\max}(M^{(n)})\leq 3$. Furthermore, for $n\geq 3$ ($n\leq 2$ is trivial), introducing the variables $y_2=x_2-x_1,\ldots,y_n=x_n-x_{n-1}$ we obtain that $x^T M^{(n)} x=x_1^2+y_2^2+\cdots+y_n^2+ x_n^2$ and $|x|^2=x_1^2+(x_1+y_2)^2+\cdots+(x_1+y_2+\cdots+y_n)^2 \leq (x^T M^{(n)} x) n(n+1)/2$. Therefore, $\lambda_{\min}(M^{(n)})\geq 2/(n(n+1))$. We conclude that under construction \[const1\] $\operatorname{Cond}(W^{(k)}W^{(k),T})\leq \max_{j\in \I^{(k-1)}} 3 (m_j-1)m_j/2$ and bound $m_j$ as in .
Well conditioned relaxation across subscales {#subseccg}
--------------------------------------------
If $H_k$ is a geometric sequence or if $H_{k-1}/H_k$ is uniformly bounded, then, by Theorem , the linear systems ( and ) entering in the calculation of the gamblets $\chi^{(k)}_i$ (and therefore $\psi_i^{(k)}$) and the subband/subscale solutions $u^{(1)}$ and $u^{(k+1)}-u^{(k)}$ have uniformly bounded condition numbers (in particular, these condition numbers are bounded independently from mesh size/resolution and the regularity of $a(x)$). Therefore these systems can be solved efficiently using iterative methods. One such methods is the Conjugate Gradient (CG) method [@HestenesStiefel1952]. Recall [@Shewchuk1994] that the application of the CG method to a linear system $A x=b$ (where $A$ is a $n\times n$ symmetric positive definite matrix) with initial guess $x^{(0)}$, yields a sequence of approximations $x^{(l)}$ satisfying (writing $|e|_A^2:=e^T A e$) $|x-x^{(l)}|_A \leq 2 \Big(\frac{\sqrt{\Cond(A)}-1}{\sqrt{\Cond(A)}+1}\Big)^l|x-x^{(0)}|_A$ where $\Cond(A):=\lambda_{\max}(A)/\lambda_{\min}(A)$. Recall [@Shewchuk1994] also that the maximum number of iterations required to reduce the error by a factor $\epsilon$ ($|x-x^{(l)}|_A \leq \epsilon |x-x^{(0)}|_A$) is bounded by $\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\Cond(A)}\ln \frac{2}{\epsilon}$ and has complexity (number of required arithmetic operations) $\mathcal{O}(\sqrt{\Cond(A)} N_A)$ (writing $N_A$ the number of non-zero entries of $A$).
Hierarchical localization and error propagation across scales {#sechierarloc}
-------------------------------------------------------------
Although the multi-resolution decomposition presented in this section leads to well conditioned linear systems, the resulting matrices $B^{(k)}$ and $A^{(k)}$ are dense and to achieve near-linear complexity in the resolution of these matrices must be truncated by localizing the computation of the basis functions $\psi_i^{(k)}$ (and therefore $\chi_i^{(k)}$). The approximation error induced by these localization/truncation steps is controlled by the exponential decay of gamblets and the uniform bound on the condition numbers of the matrices $B^{(k)}$. To make this control explicit and derive a bound the size of the localization sub-domains we need to quantify the propagation of truncation/localization errors across scales and this is the purpose of this subsection.
For $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$, $\rho\geq 1$ and $i\in \I^{(k)}$ we define (1) $i^{\rho}$ as the subset of indices $j\in \I^{(k)}$ whose corresponding subdomains $\tau_j^{(k)}$ are at distance at most $H_k \rho$ from $\tau_i^{(k)}$ and (2) $S^i_\rho:=\cup_{j\in i^{\rho}}\tau_j^{(k)}$. Let $\rho_1,\ldots,\rho_q\geq 1$. For $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$ and $i\in \I^{(k)}$, write $i^{\rho,k+1}$ as the subset of indices $j\in \I^{(k+1)}$ such that $j^{(k)}\in i^{\rho}$. For $i\in \I^{(q)}$ let $\V^{(q+1),\loc}_i:=H^1_0(S^i_{\rho_q})$. For $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ and $i\in \I^{(k)}$, let $\psi^{(k),\loc}_i$ be the minimizer of $$\label{eqpsiikloc}
\text{Minimize } \|\psi\|_a \text{ subject to } \psi\in \V^{(k+1),\loc}_i \text{ and } \int_{\Omega}\psi \phi_j^{(k)}=\delta_{i,j} \text{ for }j\in i^{\rho_k}$$ where for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$ and $i\in \I^{(k)}$, $\V^{(k+1),\loc}_i$ is defined (via induction) by $\V^{(k+1),\loc}_i:=\Span\{\psi_j^{(k+1),\loc}\mid j\in i^{\rho_k,k+1}\}$.
From now on we will assume that $H_k=H^k$ for some $H\in (0,1)$ (or simply that $H_k$ is uniformly bounded from below and above by $H^k$). To simplify the presentation, we will also, from now on, write $C$ any constant that depends only $d, \Omega, \lambda_{\min}(a), \lambda_{\max}(a), \delta$ (e.g., $2 C \lambda_{\max}(a)$ will still be written $C$). The following theorem allows us to control the localization error propagation across scales. For $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$, let $A^{(k),\loc}$ be the $\I^{(k)}\times \I^{(k)}$ matrix defined by $A^{(k),\loc}_{i,j}:=\<\psi^{(k),\loc}_i,\psi^{(k),\loc}_j\>_a$ and let $\er(k)$ be the (localization) error $\er(k):=\big(\sum_{i\in \I^{(k)}} \|\psi_i^{(k)}-\psi_i^{(k),\loc}\|_a^2\big)^\frac{1}{2}$.
\[thmerrorpropagation\] For $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$, we have $$\er(k)\leq C H^{-\frac{d}{2}} \er(k+1)+ C e^{-\rho_{k}/C} H^{\frac{d}{2}-(k+1)(d+1)}.$$
We will need the following lemma summarizing and simplifying some results obtained in Theorem \[thmuuhiuhddu\] when $H_k=H^k$.
\[lembase\] Let $H_k=H^{k}$ and $W^{(k)}$ be as in Construction \[const1\] or Construction \[const2\]. It holds true that for $k\in \{q,\ldots,2\}$ (1) $\|W^{(k)}\|_2\leq \sqrt{3}$ (2) $1/\lambda_{\min}(W^{(k)} W^{(k),T}) \leq C H^{-2d}$ (3) $\|\bar{\pi}^{(k-1,k)}\|_2\leq C H^\frac{d}{2}$ (4) $\|\pi^{(k-1,k)}\|_2 \leq C H^{-d/2}$ (5) $\|R^{(k-1,k)}\|_2 \leq C H^{-d/2}$ (6) $\Cond(B^{(k)})\leq C H^{-2-2d}$ (7) $ \lambda_{\max}(B^{(k)})\leq C H^{-k(2+d)}$\
(8) $ 1/\lambda_{\min}(B^{(k)})\leq C H^{k (2+d)-2-2d}$. Furthermore, (9) $\operatorname{Cond}(A^{(1)})\leq C H^{-2}$ (10) $1/\lambda_{\min}(A^{(1)})\leq C H^d$ and for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ (11) $\lambda_{\max}(A^{(k)})\leq C H^{-k(2+d)}$.
From the proof of Theorem \[thmodhehiudhehd\] we have (1) and $1/\lambda_{\min}(W^{(k)} W^{(k),T})\leq$\
$ \max_{i\in \I^{(k-1)}} (m_i-1)m_i/2$, which implies (2). For (3), noting that $\bar{\pi}^{(k-1,k)}_{i,j}=0$ if $j^{(k-1)}\not=i$ and $\bar{\pi}^{(k-1,k)}_{i,j}=1/m_i$ otherwise, we have $\|\bar{\pi}^{(k-1,k)}\|_2=\max_{i\in \I^{(k-1)}}1/\sqrt{m_i}\leq C H^\frac{d}{2}$. (4) follows from $\lambda_{\max}(\pi^{(k,k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)})= \max_{i\in \I^{(k-1)}} m_i\leq C H^{-d}$. Let us now prove (5). Using , and defining $N^{(k)}=-A^{(k)} W^{(k),T} B^{(k),-1}$ as in Lemma \[lemfdhgdf\], we have $R^{(k-1,k)}= \bar{\pi}^{(k-1,k)}+ \bar{\pi}^{(k-1,k)}N^{(k)} W^{(k)}$, which leads to $\|R^{(k-1,k)}\|_2 \leq \|\bar{\pi}^{(k-1,k)}\|_2 (1+ \|N^{(k)}\|_2 \|W^{(k)}\|_2)$. Using Lemma \[lemfdhgdf\] and we obtain that $\lambda_{\max}(N^{(k),T}N^{(k)})\leq \big(1+C \lambda_{\max}(\pi^{(k,k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}) H^{d}\big)/\lambda_{\min}(W^{(k)} W^{(k),T})$ and therefore $\|N^{(k)}\|_2 \leq C H^{-d}$. Summarizing we have obtained (5). (6), (7), (8) and (11) follow from Theorem \[thmuuhiuhddu\] and in particular , and . See and the proof of Theorem \[thmodhehiudhehd\] for (9) and (10).
We will also need the following lemma.
\[lemfyfyfyvh\] Let $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$ and let $R$ be the $\I^{(k)}\times \I^{(k+1)}$ matrix defined by and $R_{i,j}=0$ for $j \in i^{\rho_k,k+1}$ and $R_{i,j}=R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)}$ for $j \in \I^{(k+1)}/i^{\rho_k,k+1}$. It holds true that $\|R\|_2 \leq C H^{d/2} e^{- \rho_k/C }$.
Observe that $\|R\|_2^2 \leq |\I^{(k)}| \max_{i\in \I^{(k)}}\sum_{j\in \I^{(k+1)}/i^{\rho_k,k+1}} |R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)}|^2$ with $|\I^{(k)}|\leq C H_k^{-d}$. Let $i\in \I^{(k)}$. Using Theorem \[eqhjgjhgjgjg\] and Cauchy-Schwartz inequality we have $|R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)}|\leq \|\psi^{(k)}_i\|_{L^2(\tau_j^{(k+1)})} \|\phi_j^{(k+1)}\|_{L^2(\tau_j^{(k+1)})}$. Therefore $\sum_{j\in \I^{(k+1)}/i^{\rho_k,k+1}} |R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)}|^2 \leq C H_{k+1}^d \sum_{j\in \I^{(k+1)}/i^{\rho_k,k+1}} \|\psi^{(k)}_i\|_{L^2(\tau_j^{(k+1)})}^2$. Observe that $\sum_{j\in \I^{(k+1)}/i^{\rho_k,k+1}} \|\psi^{(k)}_i\|_{L^2(\tau_j^{(k)})}^2=\sum_{s\in \I^{(k)}/i^{\rho_k}} \|\psi^{(k)}_i\|_{L^2(\tau_s^{(k)})}^2$. Since $\int_{\tau_s^{(k)}}\psi^{(k)}_i =0$ for $s\not=i$ we obtain from Poincaré’s inequality that $\|\psi^{(k)}_i\|_{L^2(\tau_s)}\leq C \|\nabla \psi^{(k)}_i\|_{L^2(\tau_s^{(k)})} H_k $. Therefore $\sum_{j\in \I^{(k+1)}/i^{\rho_k,k+1}} |R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)}|^2 \leq C H_{k+1}^d H_k^2 \sum_{s\in \I^{(k)}/i^{\rho_k}} \|\nabla \psi^{(k)}_i\|_{L^2(\tau_s^{(k)})}^2$. Using Theorem \[thm:expdecay\] we obtain that\
$\sum_{s\in \I^{(k)}/i^{\rho_k}} \|\nabla \psi^{(k)}_i\|_{L^2(\tau_s^{(k)})}^2 \leq C e^{-C^{-1} \rho_k} \|\psi_i^{(k)}\|_a^2$. Using we have $\|\psi_i^{(k)}\|_a^2\leq C H_k^{-d-2}$, therefore $\sum_{j\in \I^{(k+1)}/i^{\rho_k,k+1}} |R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)}|^2 \leq C H^d e^{-C^{-1} \rho_k}$.
Let us now prove Theorem \[thmerrorpropagation\]. We obtain by induction (using the constraints in ) that for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ and $i\in \I^{(k)}$, $\psi_i^{(k),\loc}$ satisfies the constraints of . Moreover implies that if $\psi$ satisfies the constraints of then $\|\psi\|_a^2= \|\psi_i^{(k)}\|_a^2+\|\psi- \psi_i^{(k)}\|_a^2$. Therefore, for $k\in \{2,\ldots,q-1\}$, $\psi_i^{(k),\loc}$ is also the minimizer of $\|\psi- \psi_i^{(k)}\|_a$ over functions $\psi$ of the form $\psi=\sum_{j \in i^{\rho_k,k+1}} c_j \psi_j^{(k+1),\loc}$ satisfying the constraints of . Thus, writing $\psi^*:= \sum_{j \in i^{\rho_k,k+1}} R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)} \psi_j^{(k+1),\loc} $, we have (since $\psi^*$ satisfies the constraints of ) $\| \psi_i^{(k),\loc}-\psi_i^{(k)}\|_a\leq \| \psi^*-\psi_i^{(k)}\|_a$. Write $\psi_1:= \sum_{j \in \I^{(k+1)}} R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)} \psi_j^{(k+1),\loc} $ and $\psi_2:=\sum_{j \in \I^{(k+1)}/i^{\rho_k,k+1}} R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)} \psi_j^{(k+1),\loc}$. Observing that $\psi^*=\psi_1-\psi_2$ we deduce that $\| \psi_i^{(k),\loc}-\psi_i^{(k)}\|_a^2 \leq 2 \| \psi_1-\psi_i^{(k)}\|_a^2 + 2 \| \psi_2\|_a^2$ and after summing over $i$, $\big(\er(k)\big)^2\leq 2(I_1+I_2)$ with $I_1= \sum_{i \in \I^{(k)}} \|\sum_{j \in \I^{(k+1)}} R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)} (\psi_j^{(k+1)}-\psi_j^{(k+1),\loc})\|_a^2$ and $I_2=\sum_{i \in \I^{(k)}} \|\sum_{j \in \I^{(k+1)}/i^{\rho_k,k+1}} R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)} \psi_j^{(k+1),\loc}\|_a^2$. Writing $S$ the $\I^{(k+1)}\times \I^{(k+1)}$ symmetric positive matrix with entries $S_{i,j}=\<\psi_i^{(k+1)}-\psi_i^{(k+1),\loc},\psi_j^{(k+1)}-\psi_j^{(k+1),\loc}\>_a$, note that $I_1=\Tr[R^{(k,k+1)}S R^{(k+1,k)}]$. Writing $S^\frac{1}{2}$ the matrix square root of $S$, observe that for a matrix $U$, using the cyclic property of the trace, $\Tr[U S U^T]=\Tr[S^\frac{1}{2} U^T U S^\frac{1}{2}]\leq \lambda_{\max}(U^T U) \Tr[S]$, which (observing that $\Tr[S]=(\er(k+1))^2$ and $\lambda_{\max}(U^T U)=\|U\|_2^2$) implies $I_1 \leq \|R^{(k,k+1)}\|_2^2 \big(\er(k+1)\big)^2$. Therefore (using Lemma \[lembase\]) we have $\sqrt{I_1} \leq C H^{\frac{d}{2}} \er(k+1)$. Let us now bound $I_2$. Let $R$ be defined as in Lemma \[lemfyfyfyvh\]. Noting that $\<\psi_i^{(k+1),\loc},\psi_j^{(k+1),\loc}\>_a=A^{(k+1),\loc}_{i,j}$ we have (as above) $I_2=\Tr[R A^{(k+1),\loc} R^T]\leq \lambda_{\max}(R^T R) \Tr[A^{(k+1),\loc}]$. Summarizing and using Lemma \[lemfyfyfyvh\] we deduce that $\er(k)\leq C H^{\frac{d}{2}} \er(k+1)+ C H^{\frac{d}{2}} e^{-\rho_{k}/C} \sqrt{\Tr[A^{(k+1),\loc}]}$. Observing that $\sqrt{\Tr[A^{(k+1),\loc}]}\leq \er(k+1)+\sqrt{\Tr[A^{(k+1)}]}$ and using $\Tr[A^{(k+1)}]\leq C H_{k+1}^{-d} \max_{i\in \I^{(k+1)}}\|\psi_i^{(k+1)}\|_{a}^2 $ and (Lemma \[lem:dihidue23\]) $\|\psi_i^{(k+1)}\|_a \leq C H_{k+1}^{-\frac{d}{2}-1}$, we conclude the proof of the theorem.
Let $u^{(1),\loc}$ be the finite element solution of in $\V^{(1),\loc}:=\Span\{\psi_j^{(k),\loc}\mid j\in \I^{(1)}\}$. For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$, let $W^{(k)}$ be defined as in Construction \[const1\] or Construction \[const2\]. For $i\in \J^{(k)}$, let $\chi^{(k),\loc}_i:=\sum_{j \in \I^{(k)}} W_{i,j}^{(k)} \psi_j^{(k),\loc}$. For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ let $u^{(k),\loc}-u^{(k-1),\loc}$ be the finite element solution of in $\W^{(k),\loc}:=\Span\{\chi_j^{(k),\loc}\mid j\in \J^{(k)}\}$. For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$, write $u^{(k),\loc}:=u^{(1),\loc}+\sum_{j=2}^k (u^{(j),\loc}-u^{(j-1),\loc})$. Let $B^{(k),\loc}$ be the $\J^{(k)}\times \J^{(k)}$ matrix defined by $B^{(k),\loc}_{i,j}:=\<\chi^{(k),\loc}_i,\chi^{(k),\loc}_j\>_a$. Observe that $B^{(k),\loc}= W^{(k)}A^{(k),\loc}W^{(k),T}$. Write for $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$, $\er(k,\chi):=\big(\sum_{j\in \J^{(k)}} \|\chi_j^{(k)}-\chi_j^{(k),\loc}\|_a^2\big)^\frac{1}{2}$. The following theorem allows us to control the effect of the localization error on the approximation of the solution of .
\[thmdhdjh3\] It holds true that for $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ (1) $\er(k,\chi) \leq C H^{-d/2}\er(k)$. Furthermore for $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ and $\er(k,\chi)\leq C^{-1} H^{-k (1+d/2)+1+d}$ we have\
(2) $\Cond(B^{(k),\loc})\leq C H^{-2-2d}$, and (3) $\|u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)}-(u^{(k),\loc}-u^{(k-1),\loc})\|_a \leq$\
$ C \er(k,\chi) \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}
H^{k (1+d/2)-3d-3}$. Similarly for $\er(1)\leq C^{-1}H^{-d/2} $, we have\
(4) $\Cond(A^{(1),\loc})\leq C H^{-2}$, and (5) $\|u^{(1)}-u^{(1),\loc}\|_a \leq C \er(1) \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)} H^{-2+d/2}$.
We will need the following lemma.
\[lemshgjhgdhg3e\] Let $\chi_1,\ldots,\chi_m$ be linearly independent elements of $H^1_0(\Omega)$. Let $\chi_1',\ldots,\chi_m'$ be another set of linearly independent elements of $H^1_0(\Omega)$. Write $\er:=\big(\sum_{i=1}^m \|\chi_i-\chi_i'\|_a^2\big)^\frac{1}{2}$. Let $B$ (resp. $B'$) be the $m\times m$ matrix defined by $B_{i,j}=\<\chi_i,\chi_j\>_a$ (resp. $B_{i,j}'=\<\chi_i',\chi_j'\>_a$). Let $u_m$ (resp. $u_m'$) be the solution of in $\Span\{\chi_i\mid i=1,\ldots,m\}$ (resp. $\Span\{\chi_i'\mid i=1,\ldots,m\})$. It holds true that for $\er \leq \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(B)} /2$ (1) $\Cond(B')\leq 8 \Cond(B)$ (2) $\|B-B'\|_2 \leq 3 \sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(B)} \er$ (3) $\|B^{-1}-(B')^{-1}\|_2 \leq 12 \sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(B)} \big(\lambda_{\min}(B)\big)^{-2} \er$ and (4) $\|u_m-u_m'\|_a\leq C \er \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)} \frac{\Cond(B)}{\sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(B)}}$.
For (1) observe that $\sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(B')}=\sup_{|x|=1}\|\sum_{i=1}^m x_i \chi_i'\|_a\leq \sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(B)}+ \er$ and $\sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(B')}=\inf_{|x|=1}\|\sum_{i=1}^m x_i \chi_i'\|_a\geq \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(B)}
- \er$. For (2) observe that for $x,y\in \R^m$ with $|x|=|y|=1$ we have $y^T(B-B')x=\<\sum_{i=1}^m y_i (\chi_i-\chi_i'),\sum_{i=1}^m x_i \chi_i\>_a-\<\sum_{i=1}^m y_i \chi_i',\sum_{i=1}^m x_i (\chi_i'-\chi_i)\>_a\leq (\sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(B')}+\sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(B)})\er$. (3) follows from (2) and $\|B^{-1}-(B')^{-1}\|_2 \leq \|B-B'\|_2/\big(\lambda_{\min}(B) \lambda_{\min}(B')\big)$. For (4) observe that $u_m=\sum_{i=1}^m w_i\chi_i$ (resp. $u_m'=\sum_{i=1}^m w_i'\chi_i'$) where $w=B^{-1} b$ with $b_i=\int_{\Omega} g \chi_i$ (resp. $w'=(B')^{-1} b'$ with $b_i'=\int_{\Omega} g \chi_i'$). Therefore $\|u_m-u_m'\|_a\leq |w| \er+|w-w'|\sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(B)}$. $w-w'=B^{-1}(b-b')-B^{-1}(B-B')w'$ leads to $|w-w'|\leq C (\|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}\er +\|B-B'\|_2 |w'|)/\lambda_{\min}(B)$. Using (2), $\lambda_{\min}(B) |w|^2\leq \|\sum_{i=1}^m w_i\chi_i\|_a^2 \leq \|u\|_a^2 \leq C \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}^2$, and $\lambda_{\min}(B') |w'|^2\leq C \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}^2$ we conclude the proof of (4) after simplification.
Let us now prove Theorem \[thmdhdjh3\]. Using $\chi_j^{(k)}-\chi_j^{(k),\loc}=\sum_{i\in \I^{(k)}} W^{(k)}_{j,i} (\psi_i^{(k)}-\psi_i^{(k),\loc})$ and noting that $W^{(k)}_{j,i}=0$ for $i^{(k-1)}\not=j^{(k-1)}$ we have $\big(\er(k,\chi)\big)^2 \leq \sum_{j\in \J^{(k)}}$\
$\big(\sum_{i\in \I^{(k)}} (W^{(k)}_{j,i})^2 \sum_{i\in \I^{(k)}, i^{(k-1)}=j^{(k-1)}} \|\psi_i^{(k)}-\psi_i^{(k),\loc}\|_a^2\big)$. Therefore, $\big(\er(k,\chi)\big)^2 \leq$\
$\big(\er(k)\big)^2 \max_{i\in \I^{(k-1)}}m_i \max_{j\in \J^{(k)}} \sum_{i\in \I^{(k)}} (W^{(k)}_{j,i})^2 $. Observing that (see )\
$\max_{i\in \I^{(k-1)}}m_i \leq 1/(H \delta)^d$ and $\sum_{i\in \I^{(k)}} (W^{(k)}_{j,i})^2 \leq \lambda_{\max}(W^{(k)}W^{(k),T})\leq 3$ (see Lemma \[lembase\]) we conclude that (1) holds true with $C=(3/\delta^d)^\frac{1}{2}$. (2) and (3) are a direct application of lemmas \[lemshgjhgdhg3e\] and \[lembase\]. For (3), observe that $u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)}$ (resp. $u^{(k),\loc}-u^{(k-1),\loc}$) is the finite element solution of in $\W^{(k)}$ (resp. $\W^{(k),\loc}:=\Span\{\chi_j^{(k),\loc}\mid j\in \J^{(k)}\}$). The proof of (4) and (5) is similar to that of (2) and (3).
\[thmdjjuud\] Let $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$. We have, $\er(k)\leq C \sum_{j=k}^q e^{-\rho_{j}/C} C^{j-k}H^{-\frac{d}{2}+k\frac{d}{2}-j3\frac{d}{2}}$.
By Theorem \[thmerrorpropagation\], for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$, we have $\er(k)\leq a_k+b_k \er(k+1)$ with $a_k=C e^{-\rho_{k}/C} H^{\frac{d}{2}-(k+1)(d+1)}$ and $b_k=C H^{-\frac{d}{2}}$. Therefore we obtain by induction that $\er(k) \leq a_k + b_k a_{k+1}+ b_k b_{k+1} a_{k+2}+\cdots + b_k \cdots b_{q-2}a_{q-1}+ b_k \cdots b_{q-1} \er(q)$. Using Theorem \[thm:hieuhdds\] we have $\er(q)\leq C H^{-d/2-q(2+d/2)}e^{-\rho_q/C}$ and obtain the result after simplification.
\[tmshjgeydg\] Let $\epsilon \in (0,1)$. It holds true that if $\rho_k\geq C \big((1+\frac{1}{\ln(1/H)})\ln \frac{1}{H^k}+\ln \frac{1}{\epsilon}\big)$ for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ then (1) for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ we have $\|u^{(k)} - u^{(k),\loc}\|_a \leq \epsilon \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}$\
and $\|u - u^{(k),\loc}\|_a \leq C (H^k+\epsilon) \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}$ (2) $\Cond(A^{(1),\loc})\leq C H^{-2}$, and for $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ we have (3) $\Cond(B^{(k),\loc})\leq C H^{-2-2d}$ and (4) $\|u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)}-(u^{(k),\loc}-u^{(k-1),\loc})\|_a \leq \frac{\epsilon}{2 k^2} \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}$.
Theorems \[thmgugyug0\] and \[thmdhdjh3\] imply that the results of Theorem \[tmshjgeydg\] hold true if for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ $\er(k) \leq C^{-1} H^{-k (1+d/2)+7d/2+3} \epsilon/k^2$. Using Theorem \[thmdjjuud\] we deduce that the results of Theorem \[tmshjgeydg\] hold true if for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ and $k\leq j \leq q$ we have $C e^{-\rho_{j}/C} C^{j-k}H^{-\frac{d}{2}+k\frac{d}{2}-j3\frac{d}{2}} \leq H^{-k (1+d/2)+7d/2+3} \epsilon/(k^2 j^2)$. We conclude after simplification.
The algorithm, its implementation and complexity {#secnumimple}
================================================
The initialisation of the algorithm {#subsechierarlocnested}
-----------------------------------
To describe the practical implementation of the algorithm we consider the (finite-element) discretized version of . Let $\T_h$ be a regular fine mesh discretization of $\Omega$ of resolution $h$ with $0<h \ll 1$. Let $\N$ be the set of interior nodes $z_i$ and $N=|\mathcal{N}|$ be the number of interior nodes ($N= \mathcal{O}(h^{-d})$) of $\T_h$. Write $(\varphi_i)_{i\in \N}$ a set of regular nodal basis elements (of $H^1_0(\Omega)$) constructed from $\T_h$ such that for each $i\in \N$, $\supp(\varphi_i)\subset B(z_i, C_0 h)$ and for $y\in \R^N$, $$\label{eqhhgfff65f}
{\underaccent{\bar}{\gamma}} h^d |y|^2 \leq \|\sum_{i\in \N} y_i \varphi_i \|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2 \leq \bar{\gamma} h^d |y|^2$$ for some constants ${\underaccent{\bar}{\gamma}}, \bar{\gamma}, C_0\approx \mathcal{O}(1)$. In addition to the regularity of the finite elements is used to ensure the availability of the inverse Poincaré inequality $$\label{eqinvpoincdiscrete}
\|\nabla v\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\leq C_1 h^{-1} \| v\|_{L^2(\Omega)}$$ for $v\in \Span\{\varphi_i\mid i\in \N\}$ and some constant $C_1 \approx \mathcal{O}(1)$, used to generalize the proof of Theorem \[thmuuhiuhddu\] to the discrete case.
Given $g=\sum_{i\in \N} g_i \varphi_i$ we want to find $u\in \Span\{\varphi_i \mid i\in \N\}$ such that for all $j\in \N$, $$\label{eqhuiuhiuhuiu}
\<\varphi_j,u\>_a=\int_{\Omega} \varphi_j g \text{ for all } j\in \N$$ In practical applications $a$ is naturally assumed to be piecewise constant over the fine mesh (e.g. of constant value in each triangle or square of $\T_h$) and one purpose of the algorithm is the fast resolution of the linear system up to accuracy $\epsilon \in (0,1)$.
![The (fine) mesh $\T_h$, $a$ (in $\log_{10}$ scale) and $u$.[]{data-label="fig:tau"}](./fig/tau){width="\textwidth"}
\[ex1\] We will illustrate the presentation of the algorithm with a numerical example in which $\T_h$ is a square grid of mesh size $h=(1+2^{q})^{-1}$ with $q=6$ and $64\times 64$ interior nodes (Figure \[fig:tau\]). $a$ is piecewise constant on each square of $\T_h$ and given by $a(x)=\prod_{k=1}^6 \Big(1+0.5 \cos\big(2^k \pi (\frac{i}{2^q+1}+\frac{j}{2^q+1})\big)\Big) \Big(1+0.5 \sin\big(2^k \pi (\frac{j}{2^q+1}-3\frac{i}{2^q+1})\big)\Big)$ for $x\in [\frac{i}{2^q+1},\frac{i+1}{2^q+1})\times [\frac{j}{2^q+1},\frac{j+1}{2^q+1})$. The contrast of $a$ (i.e., when $a$ is scalar, the ratio between its maximum and minimum value) is $1866$. The finite-element discretization is obtained using continuous nodal basis elements $\varphi_i$ spanned by $\{1,x_1,x_2,x_1 x_2\}$ in each square of $\T_h$. Writing $z_i$ the positions of the interior nodes of $\T_h$, we choose, for our numerical example, $g(x)=\sum_{i\in \N} \big(\cos(3z_{i,1}+z_{i,2})+\sin(3z_{i,2})+\sin(7z_{i,1}-5z_{i,2})\big) \varphi_i(x)$.
![$\I^{(1)}$, $\I^{(2)}$ and $\I^{(3)}$.[]{data-label="fig:Pi"}](./fig/Pi){width="\textwidth"}
The first step of the proposed algorithm is the construction of the index tree $\I$ of Definition \[defmulires\] describing the domain decomposition of Definition \[defmulires\]. To ensure a uniform bound on the condition numbers of the stiffness matrices one must select the resolutions $H_k$ to form a geometric sequence (or simply such that $H_{k-1}/H_k$ is uniformly bounded), i.e. $H_k=H^k$ for some $H\in (0,1)$ [*(for our numerical example $H=1/2$, $q=6$ and we identify $\I^{(k)}$ as the indices of the interior nodes of a square grid of resolution $(1+2^{k})^{-1}$ as illustrated in Figure \[fig:Pi\])*]{}. In this construction $H^q=h$ corresponds to the resolution of the fine mesh and each subset $\tau_i^{(q)}$ ($i\in \I^{(q)}$) contains one and only one element of $\N$ (interior node of the fine mesh). Using this one to one correspondence we use the elements of $\I=\I^{q}$ to (re)label the nodal elements $(\varphi_i)_{i\in \N}$ as $(\varphi_i)_{i\in \I}$.
![The functions $\phi^{k}_i$ with $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ and $q=6$.[]{data-label="fig:phi"}](./fig/phi){width="\textwidth"}
The measurement functions $(\phi_i^{(k)})_{i\in \I^{(k)}}$ are then identified (1) by selecting $\phi_i^{(q)}=\varphi_i$ for $i\in \I^{(q)}$ and (2) via the nested aggregation of the nodal elements (as commonly done in AMG), i.e. $\phi^{(k)}_i=\sum_{j\in \I^{(k+1)}}\pi^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j} \phi^{(k+1)}_j=\sum_{j \in i^{(k,k+1)}} \phi^{(k+1)}_j$ for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$ and $i\in \I^{(k)}$.
We refer to Figure \[fig:phi\] for an illustration of these measurement functions for our numerical example. Note that the support of each $\phi^{(k)}_i$ is only approximatively (and not exactly) $\tau^{(k)}_i$ and that the $\phi^{(k)}_i$ are only approximate set functions (and not exact ones). This does not affect the design, accuracy and localization of the algorithm presented here because the frame inequalities , and the Poincaré inequalities $\|\sum_{i\in \I^{(k)}}x_i \phi_i^{(k)}\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}\leq C\,H^{k-1}\|\phi_i^{(k)}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}$ for $x\in \Ker(\pi^{(k-1,k)})$, hold true. Indeed, and Construction \[defmulires\] imply that the frame inequalities with $\bar{\gamma}_k\leq \bar{\gamma}\delta^{-d}$ and ${\underaccent{\bar}{\gamma}}_k\geq {\underaccent{\bar}{\gamma}}\delta^{d}$, and the Poincaré inequalities are regularity/homogeneity conditions on the mesh and the aggregated elements. Although a fine mesh has been used to facilitate the presentation of the algorithm, the proposed method is meshless (it only requires the specification of the basis elements $(\varphi_i)_{i\in \I}$).
\[step1\] For $i,j\in \I^{(q)}$, $M_{i,j}=\int_{\Omega} \varphi_i \varphi_j$ \[step2\] For $i,j\in \I^{(q)}$, $A_{i,j}=\int_{\Omega} (\nabla \varphi_i)^T a \nabla \varphi_j$ \[step2a\] Compute $M^{-1}$ \[step3\] For $i\in \I^{(q)}$, $\psi^{(q)}_i=\sum_{j \in \I^{(q)}} M^{-1}_{i,j} \varphi_j$ \[step4\] For $i\in \I^{(q)}$, $g^{(q)}_i=g_i$ \[step5\] For $i,j\in \I^{(q)}$, $A^{(q)}_{i,j}= \int_{\Omega} (\nabla \psi_i^{(q)})^T a \nabla \psi_j^{(q)}$ \[step7\] $B^{(k)}= W^{(k)}A^{(k)}W^{(k),T}$ \[step8\] $w^{(k)}=B^{(k),-1} W^{(k)} g^{(k)}$ \[step9\] For $i\in \J^{(k)}$, $\chi^{(k)}_i=\sum_{j \in \I^{(k)}} W_{i,j}^{(k)} \psi_j^{(k)}$ \[step10\] $u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)}=\sum_{i\in \J^{(k)}}w^{(k)}_i \chi^{(k)}_i$ \[step11\] $ D^{(k,k-1)}= -B^{(k),-1}W^{(k)}A^{(k)}\bar{\pi}^{(k,k-1)}$ \[step12\] $R^{(k-1,k)}=\bar{\pi}^{(k-1,k)}+D^{(k-1,k)}W^{(k)}$ \[step13\] $A^{(k-1)}= R^{(k-1,k)}A^{(k)}R^{(k,k-1)}$ \[step14\] For $i\in \I^{(k-1)}$, $\psi^{(k-1)}_i=\sum_{j \in \I^{(k)}} R_{i,j}^{(k-1,k)} \psi_j^{(k)}$ \[step15\] $g^{(k-1)}=R^{(k-1,k)} g^{(k)}$ \[step16\] $ U^{(1)}=A^{(1),-1}g^{(1)}$ \[step17\] $u^{(1)}=\sum_{i \in \I^{(1)}} U^{(1)}_i \psi^{(1)}_i$ \[step18\] $u=u^{(1)}+(u^{(2)}-u^{(1)})+\cdots+(u^{(q)}-u^{(q-1)})$
Exact gamblet transform and multiresolution operator inversion
--------------------------------------------------------------
The near-linear complexity of the proposed multi-resolution algorithm (Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\]) is based on three properties (i) nesting (ii) uniformly bounded condition numbers (iii) localization/truncation based on exponential decay. Truncation/localization levels/subsets are, a priori, functions of the desired level of accuracy $\epsilon \in (0,1)$ in approximating the solution of and to distinguish the implementation of localization/truncation (and its consequences) we will first describe this algorithm in its *zero approximation error version* (i.e. $\epsilon=0$ and without using localization/truncation, Algorithm \[gambletsolve\]). Although this *error-free* version (Algorithm \[gambletsolve\]) performs the decomposition of the resolution of the linear system (whose condition number is of the order of $h^{-d-2}\gg 1$) into the resolutions of a nesting of linear systems with uniformly bounded condition numbers, it is not of near linear complexity due to the presence of dense matrices. Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\] achieves near-linear complexity by truncating/localizing the dense matrices appearing in Algorithm \[gambletsolve\] ($\epsilon$-accuracy is ensured using the off-diagonal exponential decay of these dense matrices). Let us now describe Algorithm \[gambletsolve\] in detail. Lines \[step1\] and \[step2\] correspond to the computation of the (sparse) mass and stiffness matrices of . Line \[step3\] corresponds to the calculation of level $q$ gamblets $\psi_i^{(q)}$ defined as the minimizer of $\|\psi\|_a$ subject to $\int_{\Omega} \psi \phi_j^{(q)}=\delta_{i,j}$ and $\psi \in \Span\{\varphi_l \mid l \in \I\}$, note that since the number of constraints is equal to the number of degrees of freedom of $\psi$, and since $\int_{\Omega} \varphi_l \phi_j^{(q)}=M_{l,j}$, level $q$ gamblets do not depend on $a$ and are obtained by inverting the mass matrix in Line \[step2a\] (note that by , the mass matrix is of $\mathcal{O}(1)$ condition number). Although not done here, one can also initialize the algorithm (and its fast version) with $\psi_i^{(q)}=\varphi_i$ (which is equivalent to using $\sum_{j\in \I^{(q)}}M^{-1}_{i,j}\varphi_j^{(q)}$ as level $q$ measurement functions). Line \[step4\] corresponds to initialization of the vector $g^{(q)}$ introduced above . Line \[step5\] corresponds to the initialization of the stiffness matrix $A^{(q)}$ introduced in . The core of the algorithm is the nested computation performed (iteratively from $k=q$ down to $k=2$) in lines \[step7\] to \[step15\]. Note that this nested computation takes $A^{(k)}, g^{(k)}$ and $(\psi_i^{(k)})_{i\in \I^{(k)}}$ as inputs and produces (1) $A^{(k-1)}, g^{(k-1)}$ and $(\psi_i^{(k-1)})_{i\in \I^{(k)}}$ as outputs for the next iteration and (2) the subband $u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)}$ of the solution and subband gamblets $(\chi_i^{(k)})_{i\in \J^{(k)}}$ (which, do not need to be explicitly computed/stored since Line \[step10\] is equivalent to $u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)}=\sum_{i\in \I^{(k)}}(W^{(k),T} w^{(k)})_i \psi^{(k)}_i$). Note also that the gamblets $(\psi_i^{(k)})_{i\in \I^{(k)}}$ and $(\chi_i^{(k)})_{i\in \J^{(k)}}$ can be stored and displayed using the hierarchical structure . Through this section and the remaining part of the paper we assume that the matrices $W^{(k)}$ are obtained as in Construction \[const1\] or \[const2\]. Note that the number of non-zero entries of $\pi^{(k-1,k)}$ and $W^{(k)}$ is $\mathcal{O}( |\I^{(k)}|)$ (proportional to $H^{-k}$ in our numerical example). Lines \[step8\] corresponds to solving the well conditioned linear system $B^{(k)} w^{(k)}=W^{(k)} g^{(k)}$ and the $|\I^{(k-1)}|$ well conditioned linear systems $B^{(k)} D^{(k,k-1)}=-W^{(k)}A^{(k)}\pi^{(k,k-1)}$. Note that by Theorem \[thmodhehiudhehd\] the matrices $B^{(k)}$ have uniformly bounded condition numbers and these linear systems can be solved efficiently using iterative methods (such as the Conjugate Gradient method recalled in Subsection ). $u^{(1)}$ is computed in lines \[step17\] and \[step18\] (recall that $A^{(1)}$ is also of uniformly bounded condition number) and the last step of the algorithm, is to obtain $u$ via simple addition of the subband/subscale solution $u^{(1)}$ and $(u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)})_{2\leq k \leq q}$. Observe that the operating diagram of Algorithm \[gambletsolve\] is not a V or W but an inverted pyramid (or a comb). More precisely, the basis functions $\psi_i^{(k)}$ are computed hierarchically from fine to coarse scales. Furthermore as soon as the elements $\psi_i^{(k)}$ have been computed, they can be applied (independently from the other scales) to the computation of $u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)}$ (the projection of $u$ onto $\W^{(k)}$ corresponding to the bandwidth $[H^k,H^{k-1}]$).
![The basis elements $\psi^{k}_i$ with $k\in \{1,\ldots,6\}$.[]{data-label="fig:psi"}](./fig/psi){width="\textwidth"}
![Exponential Decay.[]{data-label="fig:expdecay"}](./fig/expdecay){width="\textwidth"}
![The basis elements $\psi^{1}_i$ and $\chi^{k}_i$ with $k\in \{2,\ldots,6\}$.[]{data-label="fig:chi"}](./fig/chi){width="\textwidth"}
![Condition numbers of $A^{(k)}$ and $B^{(k)}$.[]{data-label="fig:conditionnumbers"}](./fig/conditionnumbers){width="\textwidth"}
![$u^{(1)}$, $u^{(2)}-u^{(1)}$,…, and $u^{(q)}-u^{(q-1)}$.[]{data-label="fig:udiff"}](./fig/udiff){width="\textwidth"}
![The coefficients of $u$ in the expansion $u=\sum_{i} c^{(1)}_i \frac{\psi^{(1)}_i}{\|\psi_i^{(1)}\|_a }+\sum_{k=2}^q \sum_j c^{(k)}_j \frac{\chi^{(k)}_j}{\|\chi_j^{(k)}\|_a }$.[]{data-label="fig:coeffnormalized"}](./fig/coeffnormalized){width="\textwidth"}
![$u^{(1)}$, …, $u^{(q)}$. Relative approximation error in energy norm in $\log_{10}$ scale. Compression of $u$ over the basis functions $\psi_i^{(1)}, \chi_i^{(2)}, \ldots, \chi_i^{(q)}$ by setting $99$% of the smallest coefficients to zero in the decomposition of Figure \[fig:coeffnormalized\].[]{data-label="fig:uk"}](./fig/uk){width="\textwidth"}
We refer to figures \[fig:psi\] and \[fig:chi\] for an illustration of the gamblets $\psi_i^{(k)}$ and $\chi_j^{(k)}$ corresponding to Example \[ex1\] with $W^{(k)}$ defined by Construction \[const1\]. We refer to Figure \[fig:expdecay\] for an illustration of the exponential decay of the gamblets $\psi_i^{(k)}$. We refer to Figure \[fig:conditionnumbers\] for an illustration of the condition numbers of $A^{(k)}$ and $B^{(k)}$ (with $W^{(k)}$ still defined by Construction \[const1\]). Observe that the bound on the condition numbers of $B^{(k)}$ depends on the contrast and the saturation of that bound occurs for smaller values of $k$ under low contrast. We refer to Figure \[fig:udiff\] for an illustration of the subband solutions $u^{(1)}, u^{(2)}-u^{(1)},\ldots,u^{(q)}-u^{(q-1)}$ corresponding to Example \[ex1\]. Observe that these (subband) solutions form a multiresolution decomposition of $u$ as a sum of functions characterising the behavior of $u$ at subscales $[H,1]$, $[H^2,H]$,…,$[H^q,H^{q-1}]$. Once the components $u^{(1)}$, $u^{(2)}-u^{(1)}$,…, and $u^{(q)}-u^{(q-1)}$ have been computed one obtains, via simple summation, $u^{(1)}$, …, $u^{(q)}$, the finite-element approximation of $u$ at resolutions $H$, $H^2$, …, $H^q$ illustrated in Figure \[fig:uk\]. As described in Theorem \[thmgugyug0\] the error of the approximation of $u$ by $u^{(k)}$ is proportional to $H^k$ for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$. For $k=q$, as illustrated in Figure \[fig:uk\], this approximation error drops down to zero because there is no gap between $H^q$ and the fine mesh (i.e., $\psi^{(q)}_i$ and $\varphi_i$ span the same linear space in the discrete case). Moreover, as illustrated in Figure \[fig:coeffnormalized\], the representation of $u$ in the basis formed by the functions $\frac{\psi^{(1)}_i}{\|\psi_i^{(1)}\|_a}$ and $\frac{\chi^{(k)}_j}{\|\chi_j^{(k)}\|_a}$ is sparse. Therefore, as illustrated in Figure \[fig:uk\] one can compress $u$, in this basis, by setting the smallest coefficients to zero without loss in energy norm.
\[line1\] For $i,j\in \I^{(q)}$, $M_{i,j}=\int_{\Omega} \varphi_i \varphi_j$ \[line2\] For $i,j\in \I^{(q)}$, $A_{i,j}=\int_{\Omega} (\nabla \varphi_i)^T a \nabla \varphi_j$ \[line2a\] $M^{i,\rho_q} M^{-1,\rho_q}_{\cdot,i}=\delta_{\cdot,i}$ \[line3\] For $i\in \I^{(q)}$, $\psi^{(q),\loc}_i=\sum_{j \in i^{\rho_q}} M^{-1,\rho_q}_{j,i} \varphi_j$ \[line4\] For $i\in \I^{(q)}$, $g^{(q),\loc}_i=\int_{\Omega} \psi^{(q),\loc}_i g$ \[line5\] For $i,j\in \I^{(q)}$, $A^{(q),\loc}_{i,j}= \int_{\Omega} (\nabla \psi_i^{(q),\loc})^T a \nabla \psi_j^{(q),\loc}$ \[line7\] $B^{(k),\loc}= W^{(k)}A^{(k),\loc}W^{(k),T}$ \[line8\] $ w^{(k),\loc}= (B^{(k),\loc})^{-1} W^{(k)} g^{(k),\loc}$ \[line9\] For $i\in \J^{(k)}$, $\chi^{(k),\loc}_i=\sum_{j \in \I^{(k)}} W_{i,j}^{(k)} \psi_j^{(k),\loc}$ \[line10\] $u^{(k),\loc}-u^{(k-1),\loc}=\sum_{i\in \J^{(k)}} w^{(k),\loc}_i \chi^{(k),\loc}_i$ \[line11\] $\Inv(B^{(k),\loc} D^{(k,k-1),\loc}= -W^{(k)}A^{(k),\loc}\bar{\pi}^{(k,k-1)},\rho_{k-1})$ \[line12\] $R^{(k-1,k),\loc}=\bar{\pi}^{(k-1,k)}+D^{(k-1,k),\loc}W^{(k)}$ \[line13\] $A^{(k-1),\loc}= R^{(k-1,k),\loc}A^{(k),\loc}R^{(k,k-1),\loc}$ \[line14\] For $i\in \I^{(k-1)}$, $\psi^{(k-1),\loc}_i=\sum_{j \in \I^{(k)}} R_{i,j}^{(k-1,k),\loc} \psi_j^{(k),\loc}$ \[line15\] $g^{(k-1),\loc}=R^{(k-1,k),\loc} g^{(k),\loc}$ \[line16\] $ U^{(1),\loc}=A^{(1),\loc,-1}g^{(1),\loc}$ \[line17\] $u^{(1),\loc}=\sum_{i \in \I^{(1)}} U^{(1)}_i \psi^{(1)}_i$ \[line18\] $u^{\loc}=u^{(1),\loc}+(u^{(2),\loc}-u^{(1),\loc})+\cdots+(u^{(q),\loc}-u^{(q-1),\loc})$
Fast Gamblet transform/solve
----------------------------
Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\] achieves near linear complexity (1) in approximating the solution of to a given level of accuracy $\epsilon$ and (2) in performing an approximate Gamblet transform (sufficient to achieve that level of accuracy). This fast algorithm is obtained by localizing/truncating the linear systems corresponding to lines \[line2a\] and \[line11\] in Algorithm \[gambletsolve\]. We define these localization/truncation steps as follows. For $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ and $i\in \I^{(k)}$ define $i^{\rho}$ as in Subsection \[sechierarloc\] (i.e. as the subset of indices $j\in \I^{(k)}$ whose corresponding subdomains $\tau_j^{(k)}$ are at distance at most $H_k \rho$ from $\tau_i^{(k)}$).
\[deflocinvm\] For $i\in \I^{(q)}$, let $M^{(i,\rho_q)}$ be the $i^{\rho_q} \times i^{\rho_q}$ matrix defined by $M^{(i,\rho_q)}_{l,j}=M_{l,j}$ for $l,j\in i^{\rho_q}$. Let $e^{(i,\rho_q)}$ be the $|i^{\rho_q}|$-dimensional vector defined by $e_j^{(i,\rho_q)}=\delta_{j,i}$ for $j\in i^{\rho_q}$. Let $y^{(i,\rho_q)}$ be the $|i^{\rho_q}|$-dimensional vector solution of $M^{(i,\rho_q)} y^{(i,\rho_q)}=e^{(i,\rho_q)}$. We define the solution $M^{-1,\rho_q}_{\cdot,i}$ of the localized linear system $M^{i,\rho_q} M^{-1,\rho_q}_{\cdot,i}=\delta_{\cdot,i}$ (Line \[line2a\] of Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\]) as the $i^{\rho_q}$-vector given by $M^{-1,\loc}_{j,i}= y_j^{(i,\rho_q)}$ for $j\in i^{\rho_q}$.
Note that the associated gamblet $\psi^{(q),\loc}_i$ (Line \[line3\] of Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\]) is also the solution of the problem of finding $\psi\in \Span\{\varphi_j \mid j\in i^{\rho_q}\}$ such that $\int_{\Omega}\psi \varphi_j=\delta_{i,j}$ for $j\in i^{\rho_q}$ (i.e. localizing the computation of the gamblet $\psi_i^{(q)}$ to a subdomain of size $H_q \rho_q$). Line \[line4\] can be replaced by $g^{(q),\loc}_i=g_i$ without loss of accuracy ($g^{(q),\loc}_i=\int_{\Omega} \psi^{(q),\loc}_i g$ simplifies the presentation of the analysis). Line \[line11\] of Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\] is defined in a similar way as follows.
\[defb\] Let $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ and $B$ be the positive definite $\J^{(k)}\times \J^{(k)}$ matrix $B^{(k),\loc}$ computed in Line \[line7\] of Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\]. For $i\in \I^{(k-1)}$, let $\rho=\rho_{k-1}$ and let $i^\chi$ be the subset of indices $j\in \J^{(k)}$ such that $j^{(k-1)}\in i^{\rho}$ (recall that if $j=(i_1,\ldots,i_k)\in \J^{(k)}$ then $j^{(k-1)}:=(j_1,\ldots,j_{k-1})\in \I^{(k-1)}$). $B^{(i,\rho)}$ be the $i^{\chi}\times i^{\chi}$ matrix defined by $B^{(i,\rho)}_{l,j}=B_{l,j}$ for $l,j \in i^{\chi}$. Let $b^{(i,\rho)}$ be the $|i^{\chi}|$-dimensional vector defined by $b_j^{(i,\rho)}=-(W^{(k)}A^{(k),\loc}\bar{\pi}^{(k,k-1)})_{j,i}$ for $j\in i^{\chi}$. Let $y^{(i,\rho)}$ be the $|i^{\chi}|$-dimensional vector solution of $B^{(i,\rho)} y^{(i,\rho)}=b^{(i,\rho)}$. We define the solution $D^{(k,k-1),\loc}$ of the localized linear system $\Inv(B^{(k),\loc} D^{(k,k-1),\loc}= -W^{(k)}A^{(k),\loc}\bar{\pi}^{(k,k-1)},\rho_{k-1})$ as the $\J^{(k)}\times \I^{(k-1)}$ sparse matrix given by $D^{(k,k-1),\loc}_{j,i}=0$ for $j\not \in i^{\chi}$ and $D^{(k,k-1),\loc}_{j,i}= y_j^{(i,\rho)}$ for $j\in i^{\chi}$. $D^{(k-1,k),\loc}$ (Line \[line12\] of Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\]) is then defined as the transpose of $D^{(k,k-1),\loc}$.
\[rmklocalgfast\] Definition \[defb\] (Line \[line7\] of Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\]) is equivalent to localizing the computation of each gamblet $\psi_i^{(k-1)}$ to a subdomain of size $H_{k-1} \rho_{k-1}$, i.e., the gamblet $\psi^{(k-1),\loc}_i$ computed in Line \[line14\] of Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\] is the solution of (1) the problem of finding $\psi$ in the affine space $\sum_{j\in \I^{(k)}}\bar{\pi}_{i,j}^{(k-1,k)}\psi_j^{(k),\loc}+\Span\{\chi_j^{(k),\loc} \mid j^{(k-1)}\in i^{\rho_{k-1}}\}$ such that $\psi$ is $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_a$ orthogonal to $\Span\{\chi_j^{(k),\loc} \mid j^{(k-1)}\in i^{\rho_{k-1}}\}$, and (2) the problem of minimizing $\|\psi\|_a$ in $\Span\{\psi_l^{(k),\loc} \mid l^{(k-1)}\in i^{\rho_{k-1}}\}$ subject to constraints $\int_{\Omega} \phi_j^{(k-1)} \psi=\delta_{i,j}$ for $j\in i^{\rho_{k-1}}$.
Complexity vs accuracy of Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\] and choice of the localization radii $\rho_k$ {#subseccomplexity}
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The sizes of the localization radii $\rho_k$ (and therefore the complexity of Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\]) depend on whether Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\] is used as a pre-conditioner (as done with AMG) or as a direct solver. Although it is natural to expect the complexity of Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\] to be significantly smaller if used as pre-conditioner (since pre-conditioning requires lower accuracy and therefore smaller localization radii) we will restrict our analysis and presentation to using Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\] as a direct solver. Note that, when used as a direct solver, Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\] is parallel both in space (via localization) and in bandwith/subscale (subscales can be computed independently from each other and $\psi^{(k-1),\loc}_i$ and $u^{(k),\loc}-u^{(k-1),\loc}$ can be resolved in parallel). We will base our analysis on the results of Subsection \[sechierarloc\] and in particular Theorem \[tmshjgeydg\]. Although obtained in a continuous setting, these results can be generalized to the discrete setting without difficulty. Two small differences are worth mentioning. (1) In this discrete setting, an alternative approach for obtaining localization error bounds in the first step of the algorithm (the computation of the localized gamblets $\psi_i^{(q),\loc}$) is to use the exponential decay property of the inverse of symmetric well-conditioned banded matrices [@Demko1984]: since $M$ is banded and of uniformly bounded condition number [@Demko1984] (see also [@Bebendorf:2008 Thm 4.10]) implies that $M_{i,j}^{-1}$ decays like $\exp\big(-\dist(\tau_i^{(q)},\tau_j^{(q)})/C\big)$ which guarantees that the bound $\er(q)\leq C H^{-d/2-q(2+d/2)}e^{-\rho_q/C}$ (used in Theorem \[thmdjjuud\]) remains valid in the discrete setting. (2) Since the basis functions $\varphi_i$ are not exact set functions, neither are the resulting aggregates $\phi_i^{(k)}$. This implies that, in the discrete setting, $\int_{\Omega}\psi_i^{(k),\loc} \phi_j^{(k)}$ is not necessarily equal to zero if $\tau_j^{(k)}$ is adjacent to $S^i_{\rho_k}$ (with $j\not\in i^{\rho_k}$, using the notation of Subsection \[sechierarloc\]). This, however does not prevent the generalization of the proof because the value of $\int_{\Omega}\psi_i^{(k),\loc} \phi_j^{(k)}$ (when $\tau_j^{(k)}$ is adjacent to $S^i_{\rho_k}$) can be controlled via the exponential decay of the basis functions (e.g. as done in the proof of Theorem \[thm:hieuhdds\]). We will summarize this generalization in the following theorem (where the constant $C$ depends on the constants $C_1, C_0, \bar{\gamma}$ and ${\underaccent{\bar}{\gamma}}$ associated with the finite elements $(\varphi_i)$ in , in addition to $d, \Omega, \lambda_{\min}(a), \lambda_{\max}(a), \delta$).
\[tmdiscrete\] Let $u$ be the solution of the discrete system . Let $u^{(1),\loc}$, $u^{(k),\loc}-u^{(k-1),\loc}$, $u^{\loc}$, $A^{(k),\loc}$ and $B^{(k),\loc}$ be the outputs of Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\]. Let $u^{(1)}$ and $u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)}$ be the outputs of Algorithm \[gambletsolve\]. For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$, write $u^{(k),\loc}:=u^{(1),\loc}+\sum_{j=2}^k (u^{(j),\loc}-u^{(j-1),\loc})$. Let $\epsilon \in (0,1)$. It holds true that if $\rho_k\geq C \big((1+\frac{1}{\ln(1/H)})\ln \frac{1}{H^k}+\ln \frac{1}{\epsilon}\big)$ for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ then (1) for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$ we have $\|u^{(k)} - u^{(k),\loc}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq \epsilon \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}$ and $\|u^{(k)} - u^{(k),\loc}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq C (H^k+\epsilon) \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}$ (2) $\Cond(A^{(1),\loc})\leq C H^{-2}$, and for $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ we have (3) $\Cond(B^{(k),\loc})\leq C H^{-2-2d}$ and (4) $\|u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)}-(u^{(k),\loc}-u^{(k-1),\loc})\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq \frac{\epsilon}{2 k^2} \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}$. Finally, (6) $\|u - u^{\loc}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq \epsilon \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}$.
Therefore, according to Theorem \[tmdiscrete\] if the localization radii $\rho_k$ are chosen so that $\rho_k=\mathcal{O}\big(\ln \max(1/\epsilon, 1/H_k)\big)$ for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ then the condition numbers of the matrices $B^{(k),\loc}$ and $A^{(1),\loc}$ remain uniformly bounded and the algorithm achieves accuracy $\epsilon$ in a direct solve. The following theorem shows that the linear systems appearing in lines \[line2a\], \[line8\] and \[line11\] of Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\] do not need to be solved exactly and provide bounds on the accuracy requirements (to simplify notations, we will from now on drop the superscripts of the vectors $y$ and $b$ appearing in definitions \[deflocinvm\] and \[defb\]).
\[tmdiscreteaccuracy\] The results of Theorem \[tmdiscrete\] remain true if (1) $\rho_k\geq C \big((1+\frac{1}{\ln(1/H)})\ln \frac{1}{H^k}+\ln \frac{1}{\epsilon}\big)$ for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ (2) For each $i\in \I^{(q)}$ the localized linear system $M^{i,\rho_q} y=\delta_{\cdot,i}$ of Definition \[deflocinvm\] and Line \[line2a\] of Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\] is solved up to accuracy $|y-y^{\app}|_{M^{i,\rho_q}}\leq C^{-1} H^{7d/2+3} \epsilon/q^2$ (using the notations of Subsection \[subseccg\], i.e. $|e|_A^2:=e^T A e$, and writing $y^{\app}$ the approximation of $y$) (3) For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ and each $i\in \I^{(k-1)}$, the localized linear system $B^{(i,\rho)} y=b$ of Definition \[defb\] and Line \[line11\] of Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\] is solved up to accuracy $|y-y^{\app}|_{B^{(i,\rho)}} \leq C^{-1} H^{-k+7d/2+4}\epsilon/(k-1)^2$. (4) For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ the linear system $ B^{(k),\loc}y= W^{(k)} g^{(k),\loc}$ of Line \[line8\] of Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\] is solved up to accuracy $|y-y^{\app}|_{B^{(k),\loc}}\leq \epsilon \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}/(2q)$.
From the proof of Theorem we need $\er(k) \leq C^{-1} H^{-k (1+d/2)+7d/2+3} \epsilon/k^2$ for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$. By the inverse Poincaré inequality this inequality is satisfied for $k=q$ for $\|\psi_i^{(q)}-\psi_i^{(q),\loc}\|_{L^2(\Omega)} \leq C^{-1} H^{7d/2+3} \epsilon/q^2 $ for each $i\in \I^{(q)}$, which by the definition of $M^{i,\rho_q}$ and Line \[line3\] of Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\] leads to (2). For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ the inequality $\er(k-1) \leq C^{-1} H^{-(k-1) (1+d/2)+7d/2+3} \epsilon/(k-1)^2$ is satisfied if for $i\in \I^{(k-1)}$, $\|\psi_i^{(k-1)}-\psi_i^{(k-1),\loc}\|_{a} \leq C^{-1} H^{-(k-1) +7d/2+3}\epsilon/(k-1)^2$. Using the notations of Definition \[defb\] we have, $\psi^{(k-1),\loc}_i=\sum_{j\in \I^{(k)}}\bar{\pi}^{(k-1,k)}_{i,j}\psi_j^{(k),\loc} + \sum_{j \in i^\chi} D_{i,j}^{(k-1,k),\loc} \chi_j^{(k),\loc}$ with $\<\chi_j^{(k),\loc},\chi_l^{(k),\loc}\>_a=B^{(i,\rho)}_{j,l}$ which leads to (3) by lines \[line14\], \[line12\], \[line9\] and \[line7\] of Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\]. For (4) we simply observe that for $y\in \J^{(k)}$, $\|\sum_{i\in \J^{(k)}} (y-y^\app)_i\chi_i^{(k),\loc}\|_a=|y-y^\app|_{B^{(k),\loc}}$.
Let us now describe the complexity of Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\]. This complexity depends on the desired accuracy $\epsilon \in (0,1)$. Lines \[line1\] and \[line2\] correspond to the computation of the (sparse) mass and stiffness matrices of . Note since $A$ and $M$ are sparse and banded (of bandwidth $2d=4$ in our numerical example) this computation is of $\mathcal{O}(N)$ complexity. Line \[line2a\] corresponds to the resolution of the localized linear system introduced in Definition \[deflocinvm\] using $M^{i,\rho_q}$, the $i^{\rho_q}\times i^{\rho_q}$ sub-matrix of $M$. According to Theorem \[tmdiscrete\], the accuracy of each solve must be $|y-y^{\app}|_{M^{i,\rho_q}}\leq C^{-1} H^{7d/2+3} \epsilon/q^2$. Since $|i^{\rho_q}|=\mathcal{O}(\rho_q^d)$ and since $M^{i,\rho_q}$ is of condition number bounded by that of $M$, for each $i$ the linear system of Line \[line2a\] can be solved efficiently (to accuracy $\mathcal{O}(C^{-1} H^{7d/2+3} \epsilon/q^2)$ using $\mathcal{O}(\rho_q)=\mathcal{O}\big(\ln \max( \frac{1}{\epsilon},q)\big)$ iterations of the CG method (reminded in Subsection \[subseccg\]) with a cost of $\mathcal{O}(\rho_q^d)$ per iteration, which results in a total cost of $\mathcal{O}\big(N \rho_q^{d} \ln \max( \frac{1}{\epsilon},q )\big)$. Lines \[line3\] and \[line4\] are naturally of complexity $\mathcal{O}(N \rho_q^d)$. Since $A^{(q),\loc}_{i,j}=0$ if $\tau_i^{(q)}$ and $\tau_j^{(q)}$ are at a distance larger than $2 H^q \rho_q$ the complexity of Line \[line5\] is $\mathcal{O}(N \rho_q^{2d})$. Note that $A^{(k),\loc}$ and $B^{(k),\loc}$ are banded and of bandwidth $\mathcal{O}(N \rho_k^{d})$. It follows that Line \[line7\] is of complexity $\mathcal{O}(|\I^{(k)}| \rho_k^{d})$. According to Theorem \[tmdiscreteaccuracy\] the linear system of Line \[line8\] needs to be solved up to accuracy $|y-y^{\app}|_{B^{(k),\loc}}\leq \epsilon \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}/2$. Since $B^{(k),\loc}$ is of uniformly bounded condition number this can be done using $\mathcal{O}(\ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})$ iterations of the CG method with a cost of $\mathcal{O}(|\I^{(k)}| \rho_k^d)$ per iteration (using $\mathcal{O}(|\J^{(k)}|)=\mathcal{O}(|\I^{(k)}|)$), which results in a total cost of $\mathcal{O}(|\I^{(k)}| \rho_k^{d} \ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})$ for Line \[line8\]. Storing the fine mesh values of $u^{(k),\loc}-u^{(k-1),\loc}$ in Line \[line10\] costs $\mathcal{O}(N \rho_k^{d})$ (since for each node $x$ on the fine mesh only $\mathcal{O}(\rho_k^{d})$ localized basis functions contribute to the value of $u^{(k),\loc}-u^{(k-1),\loc}$). According to Theorem \[tmdiscreteaccuracy\], for each $i\in \I^{(k-1)}$ the linear system $B^{(i,\rho)} y=b$ of Line \[line11\] needs to be solved up to accuracy $|y-y^{\app}|_{B^{(i,\rho)}} \leq C^{-1} H^{-k+7d/2+4}\epsilon/(k-1)^2$. Since the matrix $B^{(i,\rho)}$ inherits the uniformly bounded condition number from $B^{(k),\loc}$ this can be done using $\mathcal{O}(\ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})$ iterations of the CG method with a cost of $\mathcal{O}(H^{-d}\rho_{k-1}^d \rho_k^d)=\mathcal{O}(\rho_{k-1}^d \rho_k^d)$ per iteration. This results in a total cost of $\mathcal{O}(|\I^{(k)}| \rho_{k-1}^{d} \rho_k^d \ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})$ for Line \[line11\]. We obtain, using the sparsity structures of $D^{(k-1,k),\loc}$ and $R^{(k-1,k),\loc}$ that the complexity of Line \[line12\] is $\mathcal{O}(|\I^{(k-1)}| \rho_{k-1}^{d} H^{-d})=\mathcal{O}(|\I^{(k-1)}| \rho_{k-1}^{d} )$ and that of Line \[line13\] is $\mathcal{O}(|\I^{(k-1)}| \rho_{k-1}^{2d} \rho_{k}^{d})$. The complexity of lines \[line14\] to \[line15\] is summarized in the display of Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\] and a simple consequence of the sparsity structure of $R^{(k-1,k),\loc}$. Line \[line16\] is complexity $\mathcal{O}(|\I^{(1)}| \rho_{1}^{d} \ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})$ (using CG as in Line \[line8\]). As in Line \[line10\], storing the values of $u^{(1),\loc}$ costs $\mathcal{O}(N \rho_{1}^{d} )$. Finally, obtaining $u^{\loc}$ in Line \[line18\] costs $\mathcal{O}(N q)$ (observe that $q=\mathcal{O}(\ln N)$).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------
Compute and store $\psi_i^{(k),\loc}$, $\chi_i^{(k),\loc}$, $A^{(k),\loc}$, $B^{(k),\loc}$ $\epsilon\leq H^{q}$ $\epsilon\geq H^{q}$
and $u^{\loc}$ s.t. $\|u - u^{\loc}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq \epsilon \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}$
First solve $N \ln^{3d} \frac{1}{\epsilon} $ $N \ln^{3d} N$
Subsequence solves $N \ln^{d+1} \frac{1}{\epsilon}$ $N \ln^d N \ln \frac{1}{\epsilon} $
Subsequent solves to compute $u^{(k),\loc}$ s.t. $N \ln^{d+1} \frac{1}{\epsilon}$
$\|u - u^{(k),\loc}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq C \epsilon \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}$
Subsequent solves to compute the coefficients $c_i^{(k)}$
of $u^{(k),\hom}=\sum_{i\in \I^{(k)}} c_i^{(k)} \psi_i^{(k)}$ $\epsilon^{-d} \ln^{d+1} \frac{1}{\epsilon}$
s.t. $\|u - u^{(k),\loc}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq C \epsilon (\|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}+\|g\|_{\textrm{Lip}})$
Subsequent solves to compute $u^{(k),\hom}$ s.t. $\epsilon^{-d} \ln^{d+1} \frac{1}{\epsilon}$
$\|u-u^{(k),\homo}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\leq C \epsilon (\|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}+\|g\|_{\textrm{Lip}})$
$a$ periodic/ergodic with mixing length $H^p\leq \epsilon$, $(N (\ln^{3d} N) H^p$
first solve of $u^{(k),\hom}$ s.t. $+\epsilon^{-d})$
$\|u-u^{(k),\homo}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\leq C \epsilon (\|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}+\|g\|_{\textrm{Lip}})$ $ \ln^{d+1} \frac{1}{\epsilon}$
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------
: Complexity of Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\].[]{data-label="tabcomplexity"}
#### Total computational complexity, first solve.
Summarizing we obtain that the complexity of Algorithm \[fastgambletsolve\], i.e. the cost of computing the gamblets $(\psi_i^{(k),\loc})$, $(\chi_j^{(k),\loc})$, their stiffness matrices $(A^{(k),\loc},B^{(k),\loc})$, and the approximation $u^{\loc}$ such that $\|u - u^{\loc}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq \epsilon \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}$ is $\mathcal{O}\big(N \big(\ln \max (\frac{1}{\epsilon},N^\frac{1}{d})\big)^{3d}\big)$ (with Line \[line13\] being the corresponding complexity bottleneck). The complexity of storing the gamblets $(\psi_i^{(1),\loc})$, $(\chi_j^{(k),\loc})$ and their stiffness matrices $(A^{(1),\loc},B^{(k),\loc})$ is $\mathcal{O}\big(N \big(\ln \max (\frac{1}{\epsilon},N^\frac{1}{d})\big)^{d}\big)$.
#### Computational complexity of subsequent solves with $g\in H^{-1}(\Omega)$.
If (i.e. ) needs to be solved for more than one $g$ then the gamblets $\psi_i^{(k),\loc}, \chi^{(k),\loc}_i$ and the stiffness matrices $B^{(k),\loc}$ do not need to be recomputed. The cost of subsequent solves is therefore that of Line \[line8\] i.e. $\mathcal{O}\big(N \big(\ln \max (\frac{1}{\epsilon},N^\frac{1}{d})\big)^{d} \ln \frac{1}{\epsilon}\big)$ to achieve the approximation accuracy $\|u - u^{\loc}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq \epsilon \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}$.
#### Computational complexity of subsequent solves with $g\in L^2(\Omega)$ and $\epsilon \geq H^q$.
If $g\in L^2(\Omega)$ (i.e. if $\|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}$ is used to express the accuracy of the approximation) and $\epsilon \in [H^k,H^{k-1}]$ then, by Theorem \[tmdiscrete\], $u^{(k),\loc}$ achieves the approximation accuracy $\|u - u^{(k),\loc}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq C \epsilon \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}$ (i.e. $u^{(j+1),\loc}-u^{(j),\loc}$ does not need to be computed for $j\geq k$) and the corresponding complexity is $\mathcal{O}\big(N (\ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})^{d+1}\big)$ (if $g\in H^{-1}(\Omega)$ then the energy of the solution can be in the fine scales and $u^{(j+1),\loc}-u^{(j),\loc}$ do need to be computed for $j\geq k$).
#### Computational complexity of subsequent solves with $g$ Lipschitz continuous and $\epsilon \geq H^q$.
Note that the computational complexity bottleneck for computing the coefficients of $u^{(k),\loc}$ in the basis $(\psi_i^{(k),\loc})$ when $g\in \L^2(\Omega)$ and $\epsilon \in [H^k,H^{k-1}]$ is in the computation of the vectors $g^{(j),\loc}$ for $j>k$. If $g$ is Lipschitz continuous then $g^{(k),\loc}_i$ be approximated $g(x_i^{(k)})$ where $x_i^{(k)}$ is any point in $\tau_i^{(k)}$ without loss of accuracy. Note that this approximation requires (only) $\mathcal{O}(H^{-kd})$ evaluations of $g$ and leads to a corresponding $u^{(k),\loc}$ satisfying $\|u - u^{(k),\loc}\|_a \leq C \epsilon (\|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}+\|g\|_{\textrm{Lip}})$ (with $\|g\|_{\textrm{Lip}}=\sup_{x,y\in \Omega}|g(x)-g(y)|/|x-y|$). Therefore the computational complexity of subsequent solves to obtain the coefficients $c_i^{(k)}$ in the decomposition $u^{(k),\loc}=\sum_{i\in \I^{(k)}}c_i^{(k)} \psi_i^{(k),\loc}$ is $\mathcal{O}\big(\epsilon^{-d} (\ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})^{d+1}\big)$ (i.e. independent from $N$ if $g$ is Lipschitz continuous). Of course, obtaining an $H^1_0(\Omega)$-norm approximation of $u$ with accuracy $H^k$ requires expressing the values of $\psi_i^{(k),\loc}$ (and therefore $u^{(k),\loc}$) on the fine mesh, which leads to a total cost of $\mathcal{O}(N (\ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})^d )$. However if one is only interested expressing the values of $u^{(k),\loc}$ on the fine mesh in a sub-domain of diameter $\epsilon$ then the resulting complexity is $\mathcal{O}((N \epsilon^d+\epsilon^{-d}) (\ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})^d )$
#### Computational complexity of subsequent $L^2$-approximations with $g$ Lipschitz continuous and $\epsilon \geq H^q$.
Let $(x_i^{(k)})_{i\in \I^{(k)}}$ be points of $(\tau_i^{(k)})_{i\in \I^{(k)}}$ forming a regular coarse mesh of $\Omega$ of resolution $H^k$ and write $\varphi_i^{(k)}$ the corresponding (regular and coarse) piecewise linear nodal basis elements. If (as in classical homogenization or HMM) one is only interested in an $L^2$-norm approximation of $u$ with accuracy $H^k$ then the coefficients $c_i^{(k)}$ defined above are sufficient to obtain the approximation $u^{\homo}=\sum_{i\in \I^{(k)}} \frac{c_i^{(k)}}{\int_{\Omega}\phi_i^{(k)}} \varphi_i^{(k)}$ that satisfies $\|u^{(k),\loc}-u^{\homo}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\leq C H^k \|u^{(k),\loc}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)}$ ($\int_{\Omega}u^{\homo}\phi_i^{(k)}=\int_{\Omega}u^{(k),\loc}\phi_i^{(k)}$) and therefore $\|u-u^{(k),\homo}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\leq C \epsilon (\|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}+\|g\|_{\textrm{Lip}})$. Note that the computational complexity of subsequent solves to obtain $u^{\homo}$ is $\mathcal{O}\big(\epsilon^{-d} (\ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})^{d+1}\big)$.
#### Total computational complexity if $a$ is periodic or ergodic with mixing length $H^p$ and $\epsilon \approx H^{k}$ with $k\geq p$.
Under the assumptions of classical homogenization or HMM [@EEngquist:2003] (e.g. $a$ is of period $H^p$ or $a$ is ergodic with $H^p$ as mixing length), if the sets $\tau_i^{(k)}$ are chosen to match the period of $a$ and the domain is rescaled so that $1/H$ is an integer, then the entries of $A^{(k)}$ are invariant under periodic translations (or stationary if the medium is ergodic). Therefore, under these assumptions, as in classical homogenization, it sufficient to limit the computation of gamblets to periodicity cells (or ergodicity cells with a tight control on mixing as in [@GloriaNeukmanOtto2015]). The resulting cost of obtaining $u^{(k),\homo}$ (in a first solve) such that $\|u^{(k),\loc}-u^{(k),\homo}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\leq C \epsilon (\|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}+\|g\|_{\textrm{Lip}})$, is $\mathcal{O}\big(N \ln^{3d}N \,H^p+\epsilon^{-d}) \ln^{d+1} \frac{1}{\epsilon}\big)$.
#### Acknowledgements.
The author gratefully acknowledges this work supported by the Air Force Office of Scientific Research and the DARPA EQUiPS Program under awards number FA9550-12-1-0389 (Scientific Computation of Optimal Statistical Estimators) and number FA9550-16-1-0054 (Computational Information Games) and the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science, Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research, through the Exascale Co-Design Center for Materials in Extreme Environments (ExMatEx, LANL Contract No DE-AC52-06NA25396, Caltech Subcontract Number 273448). The author also thanks C. Scovel, L. Zhang, P. B. Bochev, P. S. Vassilevski, J.-L. Cambier, B. Suter, G. Pavliotis and an anonymous referee for valuable comments and suggestions.
[^1]: California Institute of Technology, Computing & Mathematical Sciences , MC 9-94 Pasadena, CA 91125, [email protected]
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
We present a densely-sampled, homogeneous set of light curves of ${64}$ low redshift ($z\la0.05$) stripped-envelope supernovae (SN of type IIb, Ib, Ic and Ic-bl). These data were obtained between 2001 and 2009 at the Fred L. Whipple Observatory (FLWO) on Mt. Hopkins in Arizona, with the optical FLWO 1.2-m and the near-infrared PAIRITEL 1.3-m telescopes. Our dataset consists of ${4543}$ optical photometric measurements on ${61}$ SN, including a combination of ${\protect\hbox{$U\!BV\!RI$} }$, ${\protect\hbox{$U\!BV\!r'i'$} }$, and ${\protect\hbox{$u'\!BV\!r'i'$} }$, and ${2142}$ $JHK_s$ near-infrared measurements on ${25}$ SN.
This sample constitutes the most extensive *multi-color* data set of stripped-envelope SN to date. Our photometry is based on template-subtracted images to eliminate any potential host galaxy light contamination. This work presents these photometric data, compares them with data in the literature, and estimates basic statistical quantities: date of maximum, color, and photometric properties. We identify promising color trends that may permit the identification of stripped-envelope SN subtypes from their photometry alone. Many of these SN were observed spectroscopically by the CfA SN group, and the spectra are presented in a companion paper [@Modjaz14]. A thorough exploration that combines the CfA photometry and spectroscopy of stripped-envelope core-collapse SN will be presented in a follow-up paper.
author:
- 'F. B. Bianco , M. Modjaz, M. Hicken, A. Friedman, R. P. Kirshner, J. S. Bloom, P. Challis, G.H. Marion, W. M. Wood-Vasey'
title: 'Multi-color Optical and NIR Light Curves of [64]{} Stripped-Envelope Core-Collapse Supernovae '
---
Introduction {#sec:intro_sec}
============
Stripped-envelope core-collapse supernovae (stripped SN) arise from the spectacular death of massive stars that have been stripped of their outer layers of hydrogen and helium. In this paper we present photometric data in optical and near infra-red (NIR) wavelengths for 64 stripped SN, data that we collected between 2001 and 2009 at the Fred L. Whipple Observatory (FLWO) on Mt. Hopkins in Arizona.
Stripped SN include SN of types Ib, Ic, and IIb. Type Ib (SN Ib) and Type Ic SN (SN Ic) are SN that do not show hydrogen lines (thus Type I), but do not exhibit the strong absorption lines characteristic of SN Ia (@Uomoto_Kirshner_1986, @Clocchiatti97). SN Ib show conspicuous lines of , while SN Ic do not. SN IIb change as they age: initially they show strong hydrogen features (hence the Type II classification), but over time the Balmer series decreases in strength, while the series of lines characteristic of SN Ib grows stronger (e.g., @Filippenko_Matheson_Ho_1993). Finally, broad-lined SN Ic (SN Ic-bl) exhibit broad and blended lines in a SN Ic-like spectrum, indicative of very high expansion velocities [@onzalez_Leibundgut_et_al__1998; @r_Gonzalez_Hainaut_et_al__2001; @y_Kouveliotou_Deng_et_al__2006; @Diamond-Stanic_Hao_et_al__2006; @2012ApJ...756..184S]. SN Ic-bl are the only type of SN that have been observed in conjunction with long-duration GRBs (e.g., @onzalez_Leibundgut_et_al__1998 [@Schild_Krisciunas_et_al__2003; @rsen_Castro-Tirado_et_al__2003; @Diamond-Stanic_Hao_et_al__2006]). See , @2011AN....332..434M, and @2012grbu.book..169H for reviews of GRB-SN connections. For a review of SN spectroscopic classification, see @Filippenko_1997.
Stripped SN have been studied less than SN Ia. These SN, however, are intrinsically almost as common per volume as SN Ia [@2011MNRAS.412.1441L], and they hold vital clues about the death and explosion properties of very massive stars [@Uomoto_Kirshner_1986], and their nucleosynthesis products that contribute to the Universe’s chemical enrichment [@dge_Burbidge_Fowler_Hoyle_1957; @aga_Umeda_Kobayashi_Maeda_2006]. The characteristics of the progenitor channels, and their link to each SN class and subclass are not yet well understood. Nor do we know which is the dominant process responsible for stripping these massive stars of their outer layers: models propose stripping may occur through strong winds [@Woosley_Langer_Weaver_1993], or binary interaction [@Nomoto_Iwamoto_Suzuki_1995; @nds_Rappaport_Heger_Pfahl_2004].
Several stripped SN have been studied in detail individually, beginning with the SN Ic 1994I in the nearby galaxy M 51 (e.g., @Treffers_Filippenko_Paik_1996 [@1995ApJ...450L..11F]). Because of its proximity, it was well observed over many wavelengths and it is commonly referred to as the “prototypical” normal SN Ic (e.g., @Leibundgut_Baron_Kirshner_2006 and @2006MNRAS.369.1939S).
However, in order to assess the peculiarities of these explosions and to understand the characteristics of stripped SN, well observed SN must be evaluated in the context of a sample large enough to be studied with a statistical approach. For example, SN 1994I appears to be *non-typical*: @Richardson_Branch_Baron_2006 and @rd_Sand_Moon_Arcavi_Green_2011 showed that SN 1994I had a faster light curve than any other SN Ic in the literature and is a 2$\sigma$ outlier of the overall distribution of light curves of SN Ib and SN Ic.
@Richardson_Branch_Baron_2006 compiled light curves of 27 stripped-envelope SN from the literature, of which one-third had been found or observed with photographic plates. However, photographic plate surveys are strongly biased against dim SN or SN near the nucleus of the host galaxy. Modern CCD surveys, analyzed with image subtraction techniques (@gensen_Uomoto_Gunn_et_al__2002) should instead be nearly complete, barring large amounts of host galaxy dust extinction.
A sample of stripped SN was presented in @rd_Sand_Moon_Arcavi_Green_2011 – D11 henceforth: 25 SN Ib, Ic and Ic-bl, observed in 2 bands. Eighteen of these objects were also observed within our program. D11 concluded that SN Ib and Ic are indistinguishable photometrically. Furthermore, from the peak luminosity D11 sets constraints to the [$^{56}$[Ni]{}]{} mass generated in the explosion, and assuming that SN Ib and SN Ic have the same photospheric velocities, D11 derives constraints on the ejecta mass from the light curve shape. This pioneering study of stripped SN, however, presents data in just two bands and does not employ galaxy subtraction. As we show in [Section \[sec:litdata\]]{}, galaxy subtraction can be important for producing accurate light curves.
@2011MNRAS.412.1441L presented unfiltered light curves of SN that were discovered as part of the Lick Observatory SN Search (LOSS, @2001LOSS), including about 30 stripped SN (5 of which are included in this study). Those unfiltered light curves were crucial for calculating the SN luminosity function and the LOSS SN rates, however they are in a single, non-standard band.
A collection of UV light curves of core-collapse SN from *SWIFT* [@y_Burrows_Cominsky_et_al__2004], including 15 stripped SN (6 of which are in our sample), is presented in @Pritchard13.
Understanding the full range of massive star explosion properties requires the study of a large and comprehensive SN sample with homogeneous and densely-sampled data. Moreover, the current SN classification scheme, outlined above, is based on spectroscopy. As we enter the era of all-sky optical transient searches, with hundreds, even thousands of SN to be discovered each night [@LSST], we will simply be unable to obtain systematic spectroscopic follow-up data of most objects. Devising photometric criteria for classifying SN without spectra is important [@2014arXiv1401.3317S]. The first step in this process is to obtain well-sampled light curves of SN Ib, SN Ic and SN IIb.
This work presents a densely sampled, multi-color, homogeneous data set of stripped SN, supported and complemented by spectroscopic data (@Modjaz14, henceforth M14). Since 1993, spectroscopic *and* photometric monitoring of nearby and newly-discovered SN at the Fred L. Whipple Observatory (FLWO) on Mt. Hopkins in Arizona has been undertaken by the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA)[^1]. Furthermore, the CfA conducted a parallel near infrared (NIR) photometric campaign with PAIRITEL at FLWO starting in 2004. While, due to their cosmological relevance, SN Ia were prioritized targets throughout the campaign [@er_Grashius_Schild_et_al__1999; @2006AJ....131..527J; @2009ApJ...700..331H; @ind_Brown_Caldwell_et_al__2012], an intense follow-up program of stripped SN began in 2004, in addition to the SN Ia follow-up. Here we present photometric data of nearby ($z \la 0.047$) stripped SN collected between 2001 and 2009. In a second paper (Bianco et al. in preparation) we will present a deeper analysis of the sample, integrate it with data from the literature, discuss statistical differences in the photometry and colors of different stripped SN subtypes, and derive constraints on their progenitors.
The data set presented in this paper includes ${4543}$ optical photometric observations of ${61}$ SN ([Section \[sec:optphot\_sec\]]{}), and ${2142}$ NIR observations of ${25}$ SN ([Section \[sec:irphot\_sec\]]{}). All photometry presented here is available in the online version of the journal, and at the CfA[^2] and NYU[^3] supernova group Web sites. The CfA spectroscopic observations of ${54}$ of our SN are presented in M14.
Discovery {#sec:disc_sec}
=========
The nearby SN we monitored at the CfA were discovered by a variety of professional SN searches, as well as amateurs using modern CCD technology. Systematic SN searches include LOSS, the Texas SN Search[^4] [@Quimby06phd], The Chilean Automatic Supernova Search [@2012MmSAI..83..388H], and the Nearby SN Factory [@Aldering02]. SN 2008D was discovered in the X-Ray with SWIFT (@Ofek_Cucchiara_Rau_et_al__2008, in X-Ray observations of SN 2007uy, an unrelated stripped SN discovered in the same galaxy). The LOSS survey, and many amateur SN searches, observe in a relatively small field-of-view (FOV, $8.7\arcmin \times 8.7\arcmin$ for LOSS) and recursively monitor the same galaxies. Typically, these surveys concentrate on well-known luminous galaxies (e.g., @nko_Treffers_Riess_Hu_Qiu_2001 [@lind_Challis_Jha_Kirshner_2005; @aiolino_Petrosian_Turatto_2005]). Conversely, the Texas SN Search and the Nearby SN Factory are rolling searches with a large FOV (2 and 3 square degrees, respectively) with thousands of galaxies searched impartially.
We list the objects in our SN sample and their basic discovery data in [Table \[tab:discoverytable\]]{}. Our decision to monitor a particular newly-discovered SN Ib, SN Ic, or SN IIb was broadly informed by three considerations: *accessibility*, , *brightness*, $m <$ 18 mag for spectroscopic observations, and $m <$ 20 mag for optical photometry, and *age*, SN whose spectra indicated a young age were given higher priority. Of course, the latter two criteria are correlated, since older SN are dimmer.
FLWO undergoes a shutdown during the month of August every year, due to Arizona monsoon season, thus, we have no monitoring data for one month each year.
The [37]{} SN in our sample that were studied in the literature prior to this work (and to M14) are noted in [Table \[tab:discoverytable\]]{}. Twenty-two of these were previously studied *individually* (i.e., not just as part of a survey) in the literature. However the optical and/or NIR light curves are published for only 18 of these 22 SN. In some cases (e.g., SN 2007ke – [Section \[sec:07ke\]]{}) the only photometric data published are in a single band, while our data always provides multi-band coverage, in a minimum of three photometric bands. The photometry for an additional 17 stripped SN that are part of our sample appeared in D11 in $V$ and $R$ bands.
The host galaxy characteristics for all of our objects are listed in [Table \[tab:hostgal\_table\]]{}.
Photometry Data and Reduction {#sec:data_sec}
=============================
Our optical and NIR photometric campaigns are described in detail below, and elsewhere [@2009ApJ...700..331H; @ind_Brown_Caldwell_et_al__2012; @Falco_Szentgyorgyi_et_al__2008; @Friedman14]. We paid particular attention to removing galaxy contamination, as contaminating host galaxy light may affect both the estimates of the peak brightness of the SN and its decline rate [@1991AJ....101.1281B]. The optical sample is produced from template-subtracted images in all but 6 cases, where the SN is well removed from the host galaxy ([Section \[sec:optphot\_sec\]]{}). Thus $\sim90\%$ of our optical sample of [64]{} stripped SN have photometry based on template-subtracted images. Similarly, for 80% of our objects with NIR coverage, NIR photometry is derived from template-subtracted images: all but 5 objects out of [25]{}.
Photometry in both the natural and standard system is available in the supplementary material of this paper, as well as through the CfA Web site.[^5]
Below we describe the photometry acquisition for both optical and NIR photometry, as well as the image and photometric reduction pipelines.
Optical Photometric Observations and Reductions {#sec:optphot_sec}
-----------------------------------------------
All optical photometry presented in this paper was obtained with the FLWO 1.2m telescope during the CfA3 [@2009ApJ...700..331H] and CfA4 campaigns [@ind_Brown_Caldwell_et_al__2012]. Three different cameras were used to acquire the photometry: the 4Shooter 2$\times$2 CCD mosaic (for data before 2004 September), the Minicam CCD mosaic camera (2004 September until 2005 July), and the Keplercam CCD mosaic Camera (after 2005 August). All cameras are thinned, back-illuminated CCDs, mounted at the f/8 Cassegrain focus of the 1.2m telescope. All $UBV$ photometry is obtained in Johnson $UBV$, with $B$ and $V$ Harris filters. At redder wavelengths, observations were conducted with the 4Shooter 2$\times$2 CCD mosaic in Johnson $RI$ band-passes, with the Harris filter set, and after 2004 September with Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) $r'i'$ filters [@ek_Ichikawa_Lupton_et_al__2007; @gensen_Uomoto_Gunn_et_al__2002]. In addition in 2009 January the Johnson $U$ filter broke and was replaced by an SDSS $u'$ filter. Two objects in our survey, SN 2009iz and SN 2009jf, have $u'$ data. The typical FWHM in our data falls between 1.5 and 3 , with the larger values typically found in the CfA4 survey. To provide prompt and dense sampling, the SN were observed by observers at the telescopes for other programs, and supplemented by photometric observations on our scheduled nights.
The optical photometry presented here was produced at the same time and in the same way as the CfA3 and CfA4 SN Ia samples. The detailed operations of the optical photometric pipeline are discussed in @2009ApJ...700..331H, and @ind_Brown_Caldwell_et_al__2012 respectively. In brief: we employed differential photometry by measuring the brightness of the SN with respect to a set of comparison stars (ranging from a few to dozens) in the SN field. We employed the photometry pipeline of the SuperMACHO and ESSENCE collaborations (see @rest05 and @bbs_Suntzeff_Foley_et_al__2007 for details), adapted for the 1.2m FLWO.
A finding chart is shown in [Figure \[fig:fchart\]]{}, with the field comparison stars marked. Comparison stars for each SN are available on the web[^6], and the photometry for the comparison stars used to produce the optical light curve of SN 2005hg is shown, as an example, in [Table \[tab:compstar\_2005hg\]]{}. The comparison stars were calibrated on photometric nights by observing standard stars from Landolt [@Landolt_1992] and @gensen_Uomoto_Gunn_et_al__2002. Aperture photometry in IRAF[^7] was used for this calibration.
Color terms are obtained from the standard stars. The implicit color term equations have the following form: for Keplercam-chip2/Sloan, for example, . For the [ ]{} filters, the lowercase/uppercase letters in the color terms refer to instrumental/standard magnitudes. For the $u'r'i'$ filters, the lowercase letters refer to the instrumental magnitudes, whereas the primed lower case letters refer to the standard magnitudes. Average color terms for each setup used in our optical sample, along with the internal uncertainties in the mean, are available in the supplementary material, as well as online.[^8]
Throughout the survey, five different sets of color terms were used, corresponding to four different camera/filter setups (4Shooter 2$\times$2 – ${\protect\hbox{$U\!BV\!RI$} }$, Minicam – ${\protect\hbox{$U\!BV\!r'i'$} }$, Keplercam – ${\protect\hbox{$U\!BV\!r'i'$} }$, and Keplercam – ${\protect\hbox{$u'\!BV\!r'i'$} }$), slight modifications to the photometric pipeline between CfA3 and CfA4 (all 4Shooter, Minicam and much of the Keplercam data before 2009 was processed during CfA3 while some of the data before 2009 and all of it afterwards was processed during CfA4), and lastly, changes in the instrument transmission observed in mid 2009. For each light curve made available online, the instrument setup and pipeline used for the reduction are indicated in the file header as 4sh/${\protect\hbox{$U\!BV\!RI$} }$, mini/${\protect\hbox{$U\!BV\!r'i'$} }$, CfA3kep/${\protect\hbox{$U\!BV\!r'i'$} }$, CfA4kep1/${\protect\hbox{$U\!BV\!r'i'$} }$, and CfA4kep2/${\protect\hbox{$u'\!BV\!r'i'$} }$, respectively. Since no data in Johnson $U$ band was collected in 2009, all our ${\protect\hbox{$u'\!BV\!r'i'$} }$ is to be processed with the CfA4kep2/${\protect\hbox{$u'\!BV\!r'i'$} }$ color-terms. Anyone wishing to use the natural system passbands must ensure that the proper passband is used to correct the photometry.
![Example supernova finding chart. This image of SN 2007C was collected with Keplercam on the FLWO 1.2-m telescope (<http://linmax.sao.arizona.edu/FLWO/48/kep.primer.html>) on 2007 January 21. The comparison stars are indicated with numbers from 1 to 12. North is top and East is to the left. The bar in the lower right corner indicates one arcminute.[]{data-label="fig:fchart"}](f1.pdf){width="0.7\columnwidth"}
With the exception of 6 objects that are well removed from the host galaxy (SN 2002ap, SN 2004aw, SN 2006gi, SN 2007ce, SN 2007ru, and SN 2008aq), we derive photometric measurements from template-subtracted images (see @gensen_Uomoto_Gunn_et_al__2002) using the robust algorithm of Alard & Lupton [@Alard_Lupton_1998; @Alard_2000]. The template images of SN host galaxies were obtained under optimal seeing conditions, after the SN had faded sufficiently, usually 6 months to 1 year after the end of the SN observing campaign. In [Table \[tab:hostgal\_table\]]{} we report the characteristics of the host galaxies for all objects in our sample.
DoPHOT PSF photometry [@Schechter_Mateo_Saha_1993] was used to measure the flux of the SN and its comparison stars. The majority of the stripped SN photometry in this work was produced during the CfA3 campaign and used only one host-galaxy image for host subtraction. However, the CfA4 campaign used multiple host-galaxy images where possible, and for stripped SN produced during CfA4 we use the median photometry pipeline uncertainty as the uncertainty for each light curve point. The CfA4 SN Ia uncertainties [@ind_Brown_Caldwell_et_al__2012] also added, in quadrature, the standard deviation of the photometry values from the multiple host-image subtractions for a given point to produce the total uncertainty. However, this overestimates the uncertainty [@2013arXiv1310.3824S]. In order to maintain consistency with the CfA3-era stripped SN, we present the CfA4 data without adding the standard deviation to the CfA4-era uncertainties. The optical photometry of the [61]{} SN is available for download[^9] and in the supplementary material for this paper.
Optical CfA photometry of some of the SN listed in this paper has been previously published: SN 2005bf [@jaz_Hicken_Challis_et_al__2005], SN 2006aj/GRB060218 [@Diamond-Stanic_Hao_et_al__2006], and SN 2008D [@Kirshner_Kocevski_et_al__2009]. The optical data previously published for SN 2005bf were not based on template-subtracted images. Although SN 2005bf is well removed from its host, so host contamination was not significant, here we present the template-subtracted photometry, produced with the standard CfA photometric pipeline. Thus the light curves presented here for SN 2005bf supersede those previously published.
A sample CfA SN light curve is shown in [Table \[tab:snoptphot\]]{}, and the photometry for four objects, spanning the best and worst sampling quality, is shown in [Figure \[fig:optphot\]]{}. Note that for SN 2005hg, SN 2009iz, and SN 2006ep, where the epoch of maximum $V$-band brightness is known (see [Section \[sec:sample\_stat\]]{}), the epochs are expressed both as JD (bottom $x$-axis) and as days since/to $V$-band peak (top $x$-axis). However, the epoch of maximum $V$-band brightness is *not* known for SN 2008an. Plots for all SN are available online.[^10]
![Optical and NIR photometry of four SN chosen to represent the range of wavelength and cadence coverage in our sample. The multi-color light curves in $U$ (black triangles), $B$ (blue squares), $V$ (green circles), $r'$ (red diamonds), $i'$ (magenta hexagons), $J$ (purple empty triangles), $H$ (orange empty squares), and $K_s$ (gray empty circles) light curves are shown with offsets as indicated on the $y$-axis. []{data-label="fig:optphot"}](f2a.pdf "fig:"){width="0.52\columnwidth"}![Optical and NIR photometry of four SN chosen to represent the range of wavelength and cadence coverage in our sample. The multi-color light curves in $U$ (black triangles), $B$ (blue squares), $V$ (green circles), $r'$ (red diamonds), $i'$ (magenta hexagons), $J$ (purple empty triangles), $H$ (orange empty squares), and $K_s$ (gray empty circles) light curves are shown with offsets as indicated on the $y$-axis. []{data-label="fig:optphot"}](f2b.pdf "fig:"){width="0.482\columnwidth"}
![Optical and NIR photometry of four SN chosen to represent the range of wavelength and cadence coverage in our sample. The multi-color light curves in $U$ (black triangles), $B$ (blue squares), $V$ (green circles), $r'$ (red diamonds), $i'$ (magenta hexagons), $J$ (purple empty triangles), $H$ (orange empty squares), and $K_s$ (gray empty circles) light curves are shown with offsets as indicated on the $y$-axis. []{data-label="fig:optphot"}](f2c.pdf "fig:"){width="0.52\columnwidth"}![Optical and NIR photometry of four SN chosen to represent the range of wavelength and cadence coverage in our sample. The multi-color light curves in $U$ (black triangles), $B$ (blue squares), $V$ (green circles), $r'$ (red diamonds), $i'$ (magenta hexagons), $J$ (purple empty triangles), $H$ (orange empty squares), and $K_s$ (gray empty circles) light curves are shown with offsets as indicated on the $y$-axis. []{data-label="fig:optphot"}](f2d.pdf "fig:"){width="0.478\columnwidth"}
Near-infrared Photometry {#sec:irphot_sec}
------------------------
For 25 SN in our sample, we obtained near infrared (NIR) photometry with the fully automated 1.3-m Peters Automated Infrared Telescope (PAIRITEL)[^11] located at FLWO. PAIRITEL is a refurbishment of the 2MASS North telescope outfitted with the 2MASS South camera [@apps_Chester_Elias_et_al__2006] and is the first fully robotic and dedicated IR imaging system for the follow-up of transients [@Bloom06]. The automation of PAIRITEL has enabled NIR SN with simultaneous $J$-, $H$- and $K_s$-band observations and nearly nightly cadence allows for densely sampled PAIRITEL NIR SN light curves, from as many as $\sim$ 10 days before $V$-band maximum brightness to $\sim$ 150 days past maximum. PAIRITEL SN Ia data are published in @Falco_Szentgyorgyi_et_al__2008, @Friedman12phd, and @Friedman14 will present the CfAIR2 sample of $\sim 100$ $JHK_s$ SN Ia light curves.
PAIRITEL data for individual stripped-envelope SN have been published in @jaz_Hicken_Challis_et_al__2005, @er_Skrutskie_Szentgyorgyi_2007, @Kirshner_Kocevski_et_al__2009, @Marion13, and [@ock_Foley_Kirshner_et_al__2013].
PAIRITEL $J$-, $H$- and $K_s$-band images were acquired simultaneously with the three NICMOS3 arrays in double correlated reads with individual exposure times of 7.8 seconds. Individual images were dithered every fourth exposure in order to remove bad pixels and aid subtraction of the bright NIR sky. Each image consists of a 256$\times$256 array with a plate scale of , yielding an individual FOV of .
Sky subtraction is a crucial step in NIR image processing. The PAIRITEL image reduction pipeline software [@Bloom06; @Falco_Szentgyorgyi_et_al__2008; @Friedman12phd] performed sky subtraction before cross-correlating, stacking and sub-sampling the processed images in order to produce the final, Nyquist-sampled image, with an effective pixel scale of .
The PAIRITEL imager does not have a shutter, thus independent determination of the dark current is impossible. For all SN, the sky+dark values for a given raw image were determined using a star-masked, pixel-by-pixel robust average through a temporal stack of unregistered raw images, which included removing the highest and lowest pixel values in the stack. The temporal range of the raw image stack was set to $\pm 5$ minutes around the raw science image, which implicitly assumes that sky+dark values are approximately constant on $\sim 10$ minute time scales. This reconstructed sky+dark image was then subtracted from the corresponding raw science image. For some SN fields with large host galaxies filling a fraction of the final FOV greater than $\sim 1/5$, a pixel-by-pixel robust average through the image series can lead to biased sky+dark values due to excess galaxy light falling in those pixels. However, overall systematic effects are negligible, biasing photometry to be fainter by only $\sim 1-2$ hundredths of a magnitude. The same sky+dark procedure was applied to all SN fields, including those with large host galaxies. The sky+dark subtracted dithered science images are then registered and combined into final mosaiced images with SWarp [@Bertin02], with a FOV of $12 \arcmin \times 12 \arcmin$.
Collection time ranged between 1800-second and 5400-seconds including overhead; the effective exposure times for the final mosaiced images ranged between 10 and 20 minutes. The effective seeing generally fell between 2 and 2.5 FWHM. The typical 30-minute signal-to-noise-ratio (SNR=10) sensitivity limits are $\sim$18, 17.5, and 17 mag for $J$, $H$, and $K_s$ respectively. For fainter sources, 10$\sigma$ point source sensitivities of 19.4, 18.5, and 18 mag are achievable with 1.5 hours of dithered imaging [@Bloom03].
Photometric data points are calculated using forced DoPHOT photometry at the best fit SN centroid position. Photometry is generated for each SN from both un-subtracted and template-subtracted mosaiced images, the latter produced using the ESSENCE pipeline [@rest05]. Typically, a minimum of 3 template images were obtained for each SN, after the SN had faded below our detection limit, 6 to 12 months after discovery. The template-subtracted light curves are created as a nightly weighted average of the photometry produced using different templates. The most reliable photometry is ultimately chosen by visual inspection of the un-subtracted and subtracted mosaiced images, as well as considering the scatter in the photometric measurement obtained by each method. For template-subtracted light curves, a combination of automated and visual inspection also allowed removal of individual bad subtractions and outlier data points arising from poor quality science or template images.
For SN not embedded in the host galaxy nucleus, or with little host galaxy light at the SN position, forced DoPHOT photometry on the un-subtracted mosaics was sometimes of higher quality than the galaxy subtracted light curves. We include in our sample forced photometry NIR light curves from *un-subtracted* images for the following objects: SN 2004gq, SN 2005ek, SN 2007ce, SN 2007uy, and SN 2008hh. All other NIR SN light curves included here used photometry on the template-subtracted images, including SN 2006aj, and SN 2008D, for which PAIRITEL photometry is already published in @er_Skrutskie_Szentgyorgyi_2007 and @Modjaz07phd, and @Kirshner_Kocevski_et_al__2009, respectively. A new light curve, generated from template-subtracted images, is presented here for SN 2005bf, and supersedes previously published PAIRITEL data in @jaz_Hicken_Challis_et_al__2005. SN 2005ek is well separated from the host galaxy; the light curve presented here is not based on host subtracted images, however we present additional PAIRITEL data points, together with those already included in @ock_Foley_Kirshner_et_al__2013, and originally published in @Modjaz07phd.
For each SN field, the SN brightness was determined using differential photometry against reference field stars in the 2MASS point source catalog [@Cutri03]. Each field had $\sim$10–90 2MASS stars (which achieved 10$\sigma$ point source sensitivities of $J$=15.8 mag, $H$=15.1 mag, $K_s$=14.3 mag; @apps_Chester_Elias_et_al__2006). No color-term corrections were required since our natural system photometry is already on the 2MASS system. We extensively tested the accuracy and precision of both the PAIRITEL reduction and our photometry pipeline by comparing our photometry of 2MASS stars in the SN observations to that in the 2MASS catalog. The difference between the two photometry values is consistent with zero everywhere in the magnitude range $J$ = 12-18 mag. Thus, we conclude our photometry is well anchored in the 2MASS system. Note however, that the difference uncertainties are expected to be correlated, since the 2MASS photometry values were used to compute the zeropoint of each image in the first place. More details of the PAIRITEL image processing and photometric pipelines are presented in @Modjaz07phd [@Falco_Szentgyorgyi_et_al__2008; @Friedman12phd], and @Friedman14.
A sample CfA NIR SN light curve, for SN 2005hg, is shown in [Table \[tab:snnirphot\]]{}, and NIR photometry is shown in [Figure \[fig:optphot\]]{} for SN 2005hg and SN 2009iz.
CfA stripped SN sample statistics {#sec:sample_stat}
=================================
The sample of stripped SN we present contains a total of [64]{} SN observed between 2001 and 2009. The quality varies. The list below details our objects grouped based on their photometric quality. Several objects are then discussed in the later sections of this paper.
- Our best quality subset contains light curves in at least 4 bands, with data before and after the $V$ photometric peak. In this subset are multi-band light curves of 24 objects, 11 SN Ib, 5 SN Ic, 3 SN IIb, 3 SN Ic-bl, and two peculiar SN Ib (SN 2007uy, and SN 2009er).
- An intermediate quality subsample contains multi-band light curves of 26 SN: 6 SN Ib, 8 SN Ic, 4 SN IIb, 4 SN Ic-bl, 1 SN Ic/Ic-bl (SN 2007iq), 2 SN Ib-n/IIb-n (Ib with narrow emission lines of H and He: SN 2005la and SN 2006jc), one Ca-rich Ib (SN 2007ke).
- A subset of 11 SN light curves for which we could not set good constraints on the date of maximum in any band, or which contains only a few epochs, or less than four photometric bands.
- Finally three objects (SN 2005ek, SN 2008ax, and SN 2008hh) have only NIR photometry.
The distribution of our objects in redshift is shown in [Figure \[fig:histz\]]{}, where we identify different SN types with different colors, and [Figure \[fig:histz2\]]{}, where the color indicates the quality of our photometry.
![Redshift distribution of SN in our sample. Each color represents a SN type: SN Ib, Ic/Ic-bl, and IIb. The histograms are stacked: for each bin the total height of the bar indicates the total number of objects and the color segments represent the contribution of types within that redshift bin.[]{data-label="fig:histz"}](f3.pdf){width="0.9\columnwidth"}
![Same as [Figure \[fig:histz\]]{}, but with the sample split by photometric quality, as described in [Section \[sec:sample\_stat\]]{} (good, fair, and poor light curve quality).[]{data-label="fig:histz2"}](f4.pdf){width="0.9\columnwidth"}
Most of the optical photometric measurements are in $B$, $V$, $r'$, and $i'$: 854, 1120, 1115, 1123 in each band respectively; 183 measurements were collected in $U$ band. In addition, the earliest objects observed within our program (SN 2001ej, SN 2001gd, SN 2002ap, SN 2003jd, SN 2004ao, and SN 2004aw) were imaged with $R$ and $I$ filter, in place of $r'$ and $i'$, with 68 and 60 points in each band for the 6 objects. In 2009 the Johnson $U$ filter was replaced by an SDSS $u'$ filter; two objects, SN 2009iz and SN 2009jf, have $u'$ band data, a total of 20 data points, 13 for SN 2009iz and 7 for SN 2009jf. In the NIR we collected: 774 measurements in $J$, 738 in $H$, and 630 in $K_s$. The photometry for each of our SN is made available as machine-readable tables in the supplementary material, on our Web site[^12] as plots, and in tabular form.[^13] In [Table \[tab:maxsUBV\]]{}, \[tab:maxsRI\], and \[tab:maxsHJK\] we present observational photometric characteristic for all objects in our sample: the epoch of maximum brightness, the peak magnitude, and the decline rate in each filter, whenever it is possible to derive them. Similarly to what is done for SN Ia, we measure the decline rate as [$\Delta\rm{m}_{15}$]{}: the difference in magnitude between peak and 15 days after peak. We simply rely on a second-degree polynomial fit near the light curve peak to obtain these quantities. Notice that these are presented as observational quantities: no $S$ or $K$-corrections are applied to compensate for the reddening effects of redshift, nor do we correct for dust extinction at this time. A more complete analysis of our photometric data will be presented in the companion paper (Bianco et al., in preparation), and such corrections will be discussed there. The maximum brightness, and the epoch of maximum, are measured as follows:
- For each single-band light curve we select by eye a region around peak large enough to allow a quadratic fit (at least four points, typically several more) but small enough to follow a simple parabolic evolution.
- A suite of $N$ Monte Carlo realizations is generated by drawing each data point from a Gaussian distribution centered on the photometric data point, and with a standard deviation corresponding to the photometric error-bars. In each realization the boundaries of the region that is fit, particularly after peak where in most cases more photometric data points are available, are allowed to oscillate by including or removing up to three data points. The number $N$ of realizations depends on the number of data points $N_d$ used for that particular object: $N$ is the integer nearest to $N_d\log(N_d)^2$, but no smaller than 200: $$N~=~\mathrm{argmin}\left({\mathrm{int}(N_d\log(N_d)^2),200}\right)$$
- Each realization is fit with a second-degree polynomial. The epochs of maximum brightness and the corresponding magnitudes we report are the mean of the maximum epoch and magnitude distributions in the fit over the family of Monte Carlo realizations, and the errors are the corresponding standard deviations.
![Suite of Monte Carlo realization generated for SN 2006aj $V$-band near peak to determine the peak date and magnitude and associated uncertainties. In each realization a subset of data points is selected where one, two, or three data-points at the edges of the set may or may not be included. A synthetic photometric data set is then generated by drawing a data point (gray circle) for each epoch within a Gaussian distribution centered on the photometric datum (green circle), and with standard deviation equal to its error-bar. The synthetic photometry is fit with a parabola (gray line). The date of peak, the magnitude at peak, the [$\Delta\rm{m}_{15}$]{} reported, and their related uncertainties, are calculated as the mean and standard deviation of the corresponding values across all realizations.[]{data-label="fig:Vmax_mc"}](f5.pdf){width="0.9\columnwidth"}
[Figure \[fig:Vmax\_mc\]]{} shows the suite of Monte Carlo realization generated for SN 2006aj $V$-band near peak to determine the peak date and magnitude, and their uncertainties. Notice that, with a $\sim9$ day gap in the coverage starting about 4 days after peak, the determination of [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{} is indeed affected by the choice of boundaries to the region used for the parabola fit. By means of the Monte Carlo simulations this is reflected in a 0.61 days uncertainty. The [$\Delta\rm{m}_{15}$]{} can be estimated as an extrapolation of the polynomial to 15 days. However, we only report this metric when it is sensible to do so: when data covers epochs near 15 days after maximum in the band considered, and the quadratic fit is consistent with these data. In the case of SN 2006aj, for example ([Figure \[fig:Vmax\_mc\]]{}), these criteria are not fulfilled, and the [$\Delta\rm{m}_{15}$]{} obtained through polynomial fitting, shown in the figure, is not reported in [Table \[tab:maxsUBV\]]{}.
In [Table \[tab:stats1\]]{} and [Table \[tab:stats2\]]{} we report the statistical differences we find across our sample in the date of maximum, and peak magnitude, compared to $V$ (helpful to estimate [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{}, which is usually the reference for spectral phases, even in absence of adequate $V$ coverage around peak).
[cccc]{} $U $ & -1.2 & -3.3 &2.1\
$B $ & -2.3 & -2.3 &1.3\
$R/r' $ & 1.8 & 1.5 &1.3\
$I/i' $ & 3.5 & 3.1 &1.5\
$J $ & 8.5 & 6.9 &3.3\
$H $ & 10.1 & 9.8 &4.3\
$K $ & 10.5 & 10.9 &5.0\
\[tab:stats1\]
[cccc]{} $U $ & -0.13 & -0.20 &0.27\
$B $ & -0.70 & -0.62 &0.16\
$R/r' $ & 0.21 & 0.19 &0.16\
$I/i' $ & 0.25 & 0.17 &0.32\
$J $ & 0.91 & 0.73 &0.71\
$H $ & 1.04 & 0.81 &0.81\
$K $ & 1.35 & 1.19 &0.87\
\[tab:stats2\]
{width="80.00000%"}
In [Table \[tab:hostgal\_table\]]{} we report the characteristics of the host galaxies for all objects in our sample. We report the distance to the host galaxy (as heliocentric recession velocity), the absolute and apparent $B$ magnitude, when available, and distance modulus. These quantities are extracted from the HyperLEDA catalog[^14] . When not available in HyperLEDA, the NED catalog is used, and the cosmological parameters used, for consistency with HyperLEDA, are: $H_o = 70$ ${\rm km~s^{\scriptscriptstyle -1}~Mpc^{\scriptscriptstyle -1}}$, $\Omega_m = 0.27$, and $\Omega_{\Lambda} = 0.73$
We report Galactic extinction ($E_{B-V}$) for each of our objects based on its sky coordinates, and on the most recent dust maps produced by @2011ApJ...737..103S. Note that these extinction maps deviate by about 10% in high-extinction regions from the older, and commonly used @1998ApJ...500..525S maps. The photometry we provided is *not* corrected for Galaxy, host, or cosmological extinction or reddening.
![CfA stripped SN $V$-band light curves compared with $V$-band light curves from the literature. (Top) SN 2007ru, with data from @2009ApJ...697..676S; (Middle) SN 2008D, including data from @Ofek_Cucchiara_Rau_et_al__2008 and KAIT data from @Kirshner_Kocevski_et_al__2009; and (Bottom) SN 2009jf with data from @rello_Smartt_Ergon_et_al__2011. Our photometry agrees with the literature photometry for these objects within the quoted errors. We have shown only $V$-band data here for clarity, but the photometry is similarly consistent in other bands. []{data-label="fig:litcomp"}](f7a.pdf){width="0.85\columnwidth"}
![CfA stripped SN $V$-band light curves compared with $V$-band light curves from the literature. (Top) SN 2007ru, with data from @2009ApJ...697..676S; (Middle) SN 2008D, including data from @Ofek_Cucchiara_Rau_et_al__2008 and KAIT data from @Kirshner_Kocevski_et_al__2009; and (Bottom) SN 2009jf with data from @rello_Smartt_Ergon_et_al__2011. Our photometry agrees with the literature photometry for these objects within the quoted errors. We have shown only $V$-band data here for clarity, but the photometry is similarly consistent in other bands. []{data-label="fig:litcomp"}](f7b.pdf){width="0.85\columnwidth"}
![CfA stripped SN $V$-band light curves compared with $V$-band light curves from the literature. (Top) SN 2007ru, with data from @2009ApJ...697..676S; (Middle) SN 2008D, including data from @Ofek_Cucchiara_Rau_et_al__2008 and KAIT data from @Kirshner_Kocevski_et_al__2009; and (Bottom) SN 2009jf with data from @rello_Smartt_Ergon_et_al__2011. Our photometry agrees with the literature photometry for these objects within the quoted errors. We have shown only $V$-band data here for clarity, but the photometry is similarly consistent in other bands. []{data-label="fig:litcomp"}](f7c.pdf){width="0.85\columnwidth"}
![$V$-band light curves from our survey and D11 for SN 2005hg (top), SN 2005az (middle), and SN 2006fo (bottom), respectively from the *gold*, *silver* and *bronze* D11 subsamples (see text). SN 2005hg shows excellent agreement in $V$ (although an offset is present in $R$), while both SN 2005az and SN 2006fo show a significant photometric offset, with D11 brighter at all epochs, a behavior observed in the majority of the objects in common between the two samples. The discrepancy grows at later epochs, when the SN is fainter, which is consistent with the D11 photometry being brighter due to host galaxy contamination in the photometric measurements. Only $V$-band data is shown, as the $V$ standardized magnitudes are reported by both surveys in the same photometric system, but similar discrepancies are seen in $R$ after photometric transformations are applied.[]{data-label="fig:d11phot"}](f8a.pdf){width="0.85\columnwidth"}
![$V$-band light curves from our survey and D11 for SN 2005hg (top), SN 2005az (middle), and SN 2006fo (bottom), respectively from the *gold*, *silver* and *bronze* D11 subsamples (see text). SN 2005hg shows excellent agreement in $V$ (although an offset is present in $R$), while both SN 2005az and SN 2006fo show a significant photometric offset, with D11 brighter at all epochs, a behavior observed in the majority of the objects in common between the two samples. The discrepancy grows at later epochs, when the SN is fainter, which is consistent with the D11 photometry being brighter due to host galaxy contamination in the photometric measurements. Only $V$-band data is shown, as the $V$ standardized magnitudes are reported by both surveys in the same photometric system, but similar discrepancies are seen in $R$ after photometric transformations are applied.[]{data-label="fig:d11phot"}](f8b.pdf){width="0.85\columnwidth"}
![$V$-band light curves from our survey and D11 for SN 2005hg (top), SN 2005az (middle), and SN 2006fo (bottom), respectively from the *gold*, *silver* and *bronze* D11 subsamples (see text). SN 2005hg shows excellent agreement in $V$ (although an offset is present in $R$), while both SN 2005az and SN 2006fo show a significant photometric offset, with D11 brighter at all epochs, a behavior observed in the majority of the objects in common between the two samples. The discrepancy grows at later epochs, when the SN is fainter, which is consistent with the D11 photometry being brighter due to host galaxy contamination in the photometric measurements. Only $V$-band data is shown, as the $V$ standardized magnitudes are reported by both surveys in the same photometric system, but similar discrepancies are seen in $R$ after photometric transformations are applied.[]{data-label="fig:d11phot"}](f8c.pdf){width="0.85\columnwidth"}
Among the supernovae in this sample over 80% of the objects have spectra collected within our SN program (M14): only SN 2005kz, SN 2006F, SN 2006ba, SN 2006bf, SN 2006cb, SN 2006gi, SN 2006ir, SN 2007aw, SN 2007ke, and SN 2009K do not have any spectral coverage obtained within our group. Spectral information for SN 2007ke exists in the literature, and it indicates that SN 2007ke is an unusual Ca-rich SN Ib [@Kasliwal13]. SN 2008hh does not have spectral coverage within the CfA sample and it only has NIR CfA photometric coverage. [Figure \[fig:specep\]]{} shows the epoch of all spectra obtained at FLWO for the objects in our sample. In the bottom portion of the plot all objects for which the epoch of maximum $V$ brightness ([$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{}) is available are plotted against the bottom $x$-axis: the epoch of the spectra is expressed as days to (since) [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{}. In the top portion of the plot the 17 objects for which we have CfA spectra, but [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{} is not known (neither through our data nor in the literature) are plotted against the top $x$-axis, with the epoch expressed as day to (since) our first photometric measurement. Omitted from the plot are all spectra collected at epoch $\ga 90$ days, however our spectroscopic sample contains many nebular phase spectra (M14).
Comparison with literature data {#sec:litdata}
===============================
![$V$ magnitude difference between D11 and our (CfA) data ($\Delta{V}=V_{\rm CfA}-V_{\rm D11}$). For each light curve the data with the closest dates of observations between the surveys are used, and data are only included when the observations are separated by less than 5 days (10 days for epochs later than 45 days to peak). Error bars represent the error in the mean offset for each epoch ($\sigma/\sqrt{N}$). The blue line (filled circles) includes all objects in common, while red line data (empty circles) exclude SN 2005la and SN 2006jc (see text). The offset is minimum near peak magnitude, and increases as the SN get dimmer. Note that all values are positive, indicating that the D11 photometry is consistently, and significantly, brighter than our photometry at all epochs.[]{data-label="fig:d11comp"}](f9.pdf){width="1.0\columnwidth"}
![ Distribution of the photometric discrepancy between the D11 data and our data (see [Figure \[fig:d11comp\]]{}) shown as a stacked histogram. Different colors represent different epochs (blue: $0\pm5$ days; red: $40\pm5$ days; black: $>45$ days). All values are positive, indicating that the D11 photometry is consistently brighter than our photometry. The difference between D11 and our data is more prominently skewed toward high $\Delta{V}$ at late epochs than near peak. The D11 light curves plateau at these late phases, an effect which we attribute to residual galaxy contamination in the D11 photometric analysis. []{data-label="fig:d11comp2"}](f10.pdf){width="0.97\columnwidth"}
![$V$ magnitude difference between D11 and our (CfA) data averaged in 10-day bins of phase, as in [Figure \[fig:d11comp\]]{}. The D11 data are shown separately for each of the different quality samples in the D11 paper. These samples were ranked from best to worst as *gold* (yellow line, solid circles), *silver* (blue line, empty circles), and *bronze* (red line, exes). The number of objects in each subsample is shown in parenthesis. D11 used only their gold and silver samples in their analysis. []{data-label="fig:d11comp3"}](f11.pdf){width="0.97\columnwidth"}
Out of the [64]{} objects that comprise our sample, [37]{} objects have published photometry. The objects for which data is available in the literature are marked in [Table \[tab:discoverytable\]]{}. When photometric measurements exist for an object in the same photometric system of our monitoring program, or the photometric conversion is trivial (when the photometric system for the data available in the literature is well defined) we compare our data with the published photometry. In addition, when more data around maximum are available, our data are combined with the literature data to derive a more accurate date of maximum in $V$, following the procedure described in [Section \[sec:sample\_stat\]]{} and Figure \[fig:Vmax\_mc\].
We find that our photometry is generally consistent within the errors with published photometry for the objects in our sample ([Figure \[fig:litcomp\]]{}), with one notable exception: D11 offered the most complete study of stripped SN light curves to date, and our samples share 17 stripped SN. D11 published photometry in $V$ and $R$. When compared with our photometry, only two objects appear to be in excellent agreement in both bands: SN 2004gk, and SN 2006jc. SN 2005hg and SN 2007C agree well in $V$, but shows an offset in $R$. In addition for SN 2005la and SN 2006jc an independent confirmation of the magnitude is also available. The D11 photometry of SN 2006jc includes data from @am_Li_Chornock_Filippenko_2007, and @2007Natur.447..829P, and the photometry agrees well with ours. The D11 photometry of SN 2005la includes measurements from @2008MNRAS.389..113P, and although the light curves from both the D11 and our surveys are noisy, they are in reasonable agreement.
For the remaining objects, where the coverage overlaps allowing a comparison, we notice that the D11 photometry is brighter, with up to a magnitude difference in $R$ at peak and over 0.5 mag in $V$ (e.g., SN 2006fo, [Figure \[fig:d11phot\]]{}). The discrepancy typically increases as the SN evolve, growing as large as $\sim1.5$ in $V$ and $\sim2$ mag in $R$ at later epochs ($\ga~50~\mathrm{days}$, e.g., SN 2007D, SN 2006fo). [Figure \[fig:d11comp\]]{} shows the evolution of the mean discrepancy in $V$ band between the D11 and CfA surveys, as a function of phase. Photometric measurements are included if the separation in time between the D11 and CfA photometry is less than 5 days for epochs earlier than 45 days after [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{}, and less than 10 days for later epochs. A single SN can contribute to each bin with one or more data points. Error bars represent the error in the mean offset for each epoch (standard deviation over square root of the number of data points that generates the mean). The mean evolution is shown for all objects, as well as after excluding SN 2005la and SN 2006jc.
[Figure \[fig:d11comp2\]]{} shows a histogram of the distribution of $V$ band magnitude offsets for data points within 5 days of [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{}, within 5 days of phase=40 days after [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{}, and for any epoch later than 45 days after [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{}. Notice that all offsets are positive, or zero at best, indicating that the D11 is always brighter than the CfA photometry, and at later epochs the discrepancy increases, as the D11 light curves reach a plateau.
For all of these objects, our measurements are generated as PSF fitting photometry on host-subtracted images, while D11 performed PSF fitting photometry on the original images, without host subtraction. Thus we attribute this discrepancy to galaxy contamination in the D11 sample. The discrepancy is consistent with the well-known effect of host galaxy contamination on SN light curves, as the SN fades and becomes less bright in comparison to the host-galaxy, as described in [@1991AJ....101.1281B]. Additionally our photometry has proven to be consistent at the level of a few hundredths of a magnitude on average for a large sample of SN Ia [@ind_Brown_Caldwell_et_al__2012; @2009ApJ...700..331H]. Visual inspection of the SN images shows that several objects for which the difference is largest are in fact close to the core of the host galaxy (e.g., SN 2006fo) or in bright regions of the host galaxy arms (e.g., SN 2004gt, SN 2004fe).
D11 classified their sample by quality in three groups: a *gold*, a *silver*, and a *bronze* subset. The latter is judged too poor to be used for the analysis and all inference in D11 is based on the gold and silver objects. We notice that, although still typically brighter, the gold sample is in best agreement with our data, while the silver and bronze sample shows the largest offsets (see [Figure \[fig:d11phot\]]{} and [Figure \[fig:d11comp3\]]{}). The host contamination in the D11 sample may affect the time evolution of the SN, and particularly the [$\Delta\rm{m}_{15}$]{} estimates, and the use of the $V-R$ color evolution in correcting the host galaxy extinction, since, in addition to giving rise to an offset in magnitude, the contamination is worse at later epochs and is different in different bands.
Finally, in addition to the 17 stripped SN common to our samples, D11 presents photometry or SN 2005eo, which was also monitored at the CfA. SN 2005eo is included in the D11 silver sample, and was originally classified as a SN Ic. SN 2005eo was however removed from our stripped SN sample, as we reclassified this object as a SN Ia (M14). This classification is further discussed in [Section \[sec:05kl\]]{}.
Colors and Color Evolution {#colorcolor}
==========================
Our multi-wavelength photometric coverage allows us to discuss the color characteristics and color evolution of the supernovae in our sample. While an in-depth discussion is beyond the scope of this paper, and it will be presented in (Bianco et al., in preparation), here we present the basic color evolution and color-color behavior of our stripped SN sample.
When we discuss colors, color evolution, and for all plots in color space, we correct the magnitude of all objects in our sample for Galactic extinction only. The Galactic extinction $E_{B-V}$ is obtained adopting the @2011ApJ...737..103S recalibration of the @1998ApJ...500..525S extinction maps, with the $E_{B-V}$ reported in [Table \[tab:hostgal\_table\]]{}. For each photometric band we use the extinction coefficients $A_\lambda$ normalized to the photoelectric measurements of $E_{B-V}$ as reported in Table 6 of @1998ApJ...500..525S, which assume a reddening law according to @1999PASP..111...63F with $R_V = 3.1$, and standard transmission for the Landolt ${\protect\hbox{$U\!BV\!RI$} }$, the SDSS $r'i'$, and 2MASS [ ]{} filters. These extinction corrections are based on star spectra and we do not correct the extinction for the SN SED. Based on @2007ApJ...659..122J, who studied this effect for SN Ia, we estimate the correction on $R_V$ to be $\la 4\%$. No host reddening or cosmological corrections are applied. While with spectra and NIR data the host reddening can be constrained (Bianco et al., in preparation), here we use the observed color. This approach is sensible to aid photometric differentiation of subtypes.
![Color-color distributions at [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{} for the SN presented in this paper: (Top) $B-V$ vs. $r'-i'$; (Middle) $B-V$ vs. $V-H$; (Bottom) $r'-i'$ vs. $V-H$. Different SN types are indicated by different symbols: IIb – green triangles; Ib – gray circles; Ic – blue squares; Ic-bl – red upside-down triangles; other subtypes are indicated by exes. Ellipses (same color mapping by subtype) are centered on the mean of each subtype distribution with their semi-major and semi-minor axes given by the 1-, 2-, and 3-$\sigma$ projected single-color distributions. The large standard deviation of the Ic sample (shown in blue) is dominated by the contributions of the very red SN 2005kl which is outside the plotted range at $B-V=3.25 \pm 0.08$ mag, $r-i=0.6734 \pm 4\times10^{-4}$ mag, and $V-H=3.21 \pm 0.05$ mag. All colors are the closest available to [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{} and only included if the epoch in both bands is within 5 days of [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{} epoch. The arrow simply indicates the direction of redder colors (i.e. a reddeining vector with A=1).[]{data-label="fig:colorcolor"}](f12a.pdf "fig:"){width="0.73\columnwidth"} ![Color-color distributions at [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{} for the SN presented in this paper: (Top) $B-V$ vs. $r'-i'$; (Middle) $B-V$ vs. $V-H$; (Bottom) $r'-i'$ vs. $V-H$. Different SN types are indicated by different symbols: IIb – green triangles; Ib – gray circles; Ic – blue squares; Ic-bl – red upside-down triangles; other subtypes are indicated by exes. Ellipses (same color mapping by subtype) are centered on the mean of each subtype distribution with their semi-major and semi-minor axes given by the 1-, 2-, and 3-$\sigma$ projected single-color distributions. The large standard deviation of the Ic sample (shown in blue) is dominated by the contributions of the very red SN 2005kl which is outside the plotted range at $B-V=3.25 \pm 0.08$ mag, $r-i=0.6734 \pm 4\times10^{-4}$ mag, and $V-H=3.21 \pm 0.05$ mag. All colors are the closest available to [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{} and only included if the epoch in both bands is within 5 days of [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{} epoch. The arrow simply indicates the direction of redder colors (i.e. a reddeining vector with A=1).[]{data-label="fig:colorcolor"}](f12b.pdf "fig:"){width="0.66\columnwidth"} ![Color-color distributions at [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{} for the SN presented in this paper: (Top) $B-V$ vs. $r'-i'$; (Middle) $B-V$ vs. $V-H$; (Bottom) $r'-i'$ vs. $V-H$. Different SN types are indicated by different symbols: IIb – green triangles; Ib – gray circles; Ic – blue squares; Ic-bl – red upside-down triangles; other subtypes are indicated by exes. Ellipses (same color mapping by subtype) are centered on the mean of each subtype distribution with their semi-major and semi-minor axes given by the 1-, 2-, and 3-$\sigma$ projected single-color distributions. The large standard deviation of the Ic sample (shown in blue) is dominated by the contributions of the very red SN 2005kl which is outside the plotted range at $B-V=3.25 \pm 0.08$ mag, $r-i=0.6734 \pm 4\times10^{-4}$ mag, and $V-H=3.21 \pm 0.05$ mag. All colors are the closest available to [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{} and only included if the epoch in both bands is within 5 days of [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{} epoch. The arrow simply indicates the direction of redder colors (i.e. a reddeining vector with A=1).[]{data-label="fig:colorcolor"}](f12c.pdf "fig:"){width="0.73\columnwidth"}
[Figure \[fig:colorcolor\]]{} shows color-color plots for our sample of stripped SN in $B-V$ vs. $r'-i'$, $B-V$ vs. $V-H$, and $r'-i'$ vs. $V-H$ space. The errorbars in the plot are generated by adding photometric errors in each band in quadrature (disregarding correlation). All objects with a solid determination of [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{}, either in the literature or derived from our data ([Section \[sec:litdata\]]{}), are included in these plots when photometry data are available within 8 days of [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{} for all four bands used in each plot. In $B-V$ vs. $r'-i'$ this amounts to 47 objects: 8 SN IIb, 15 Ib, 13 Ic, 6 Ic-bl. Identified as “other” are objects for which we could not determine a subtype (SN 2007iq, which is of uncertain classification Ic or Ic-bl, as only late spectra are available), or that appear spectroscopically atypical (the Ca-rich transient SN 2007ke, the narrow line SN 2005la, and the SN Ib-pec 2007uy and SN 2009er). The spectroscopic characteristics of these objects are discussed in detail in M14 and the photometric properties of SN 2007ke, SN 2005la are discussed in [Section \[specSN\_sec\]]{}. The ellipses in the plot represent the mean (center) and standard deviation ($\sigma$) of each subtype distribution.
In $B-V$ vs. $r'-i'$ all distributions are well consistent with each other to the 1$\sigma$ level: the subtypes cluster in overlapping distributions and appear indistinguishable in this color-color space ([Figure \[fig:colorcolor\]]{}, top panel). When NIR colors are used the subtypes seem to separate in color-color space, although the number of objects available for this analysis is smaller. When including NIR colors ($V-H$) the number of objects that can be used for this plot drops significantly, as only 15 objects in our sample have a determination of [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{} *and* optical and NIR photometry within 8 days of it. These objects include: 8 SN Ib, 2 SN Ic, and 2 Ic-bl, and the peculiar objects SN 2007uy and SN 2009er (in these plots under the label “other”). Subtypes separate to $\ga 1\sigma$ level, particularly in $r'-i'$ vs. $V-H$. The $V-H$ distribution in fact shows the broadest variation, while the $r'-i'$ is the narrowest. Amongst the SN IIb only SN 2008ax has NIR coverage, but unfortunately there is no optical coverage from FLWO for this SN, thus no SN IIb were included in the $B-V$ vs. $V-H$ or $r'-i'$ vs. $V-H$ plot. The mean of the distribution of SN Ib and Ic is still consistent within 2$\sigma$, but SN Ib appear redder in $V-H$, and SN Ic-bl bluer, though this observation is based on only 2 SN Ic-bl and it needs to be verified in larger samples.
While these trends are based on small samples, they highlight the importance of NIR photometry, and we suggest populating such $r'-i'$ vs. $V-H$ color-color plots in the future to verify the SN-type-dependent color trends observed here, which ultimately could be used to differentiate core-collapse SN subtypes photometrically.
We plot the color evolution of our objects in $B-V$, $r'-i'$, and $V-H$ in [Figure \[colallsn\]]{}. In each plot all photometric data between -20 and 210 days with respect to the epoch of peak V magnitude, [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{}, are plotted in the bottom panel for all SN with well determined [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{}. *All* objects in our sample with known [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{} are on display here. The errorbars represent the photometric errors. The scatter in the bottom panels of this plot thus represents the diversity in the observed photometry of stripped SN.
The top panel shows the mean color evolution, binned in 10 day intervals, and its standard deviation as a gray area. This is the weighted average of the photometry for all objects calculated over 10-day bins, weighted by the photometric errors. The standard deviation in the average is calculated as the second moment of the distribution of photometric measurements, disregarding the photometric errors. The weighted average colors for a more complete set of color spaces is shown in [Figure \[fig:meancol\]]{}. Outliers are plotted in color in [Figure \[colallsn\]]{} in each top panel, with the same 10 day binning, and errorbars representing the standard deviation within the bin. All objects with a binned color data-point with a 2$\sigma$ lower (upper) limit above (below) the average by more than 2 standard deviations (standard deviations of the average in this case) are considered outliers, are plotted in this panel, and identified in the legend. Note that SN 2006jc ([Section \[sec:06jc\]]{}) is an obvious outlier in each of these plots (gray circles) with early blue and late red colors. SN 2006jc is removed from the calculation of the mean color evolution, as it is known to be spectroscopically peculiar and its late-time color-evolution is driven by non-intrinsic SN processes, such as dust formation (see [Section \[sec:06jc\]]{} and references therein). Other outliers are discussed in [Section \[specSN\_sec\]]{}.
![Color evolution of the objects in our sample with determined [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{}: (Top) $B-V$; (Middle) $r-i$; (Bottom) $V-H$. For each color plot the bottom panel shows the color evolution of all objects along with their photometric errors. The top panel shows the 1$\sigma$ weighted average color evolution range (gray region) for objects with defined colors at [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{}. Outliers are illustrated and named separately in these top panels with their color curves binned in 10-day intervals. []{data-label="colallsn"}](f13a.pdf "fig:"){width="0.795\columnwidth"} ![Color evolution of the objects in our sample with determined [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{}: (Top) $B-V$; (Middle) $r-i$; (Bottom) $V-H$. For each color plot the bottom panel shows the color evolution of all objects along with their photometric errors. The top panel shows the 1$\sigma$ weighted average color evolution range (gray region) for objects with defined colors at [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{}. Outliers are illustrated and named separately in these top panels with their color curves binned in 10-day intervals. []{data-label="colallsn"}](f13b.pdf "fig:"){width="0.795\columnwidth"} ![Color evolution of the objects in our sample with determined [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{}: (Top) $B-V$; (Middle) $r-i$; (Bottom) $V-H$. For each color plot the bottom panel shows the color evolution of all objects along with their photometric errors. The top panel shows the 1$\sigma$ weighted average color evolution range (gray region) for objects with defined colors at [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{}. Outliers are illustrated and named separately in these top panels with their color curves binned in 10-day intervals. []{data-label="colallsn"}](f13c.pdf "fig:"){width="0.795\columnwidth"}
Finally, we present the average color evolution across our sample, and its standard deviation, in [Figure \[fig:meancol\]]{} for $B-V$, $r'-i'$, and $V-H$ (left), and $U-B$, $V-r'$, $H-J$, $J-K$ (right). For $B-V$, $r'-i'$, and $V-H$ these averages also appear as shaded regions in [Figure \[colallsn\]]{}. The average, weighted by the photometric errors, is generated in each color band as described in the previous paragraph, again excluding SN 2006jc.
{width="0.95\columnwidth"}{width="0.948\columnwidth"}
We notice that:
- the largest color variation is observed in $V-H$: in time, ([Figure \[fig:meancol\]]{}), as well as amongst different SN types (as already noted in [Section \[colorcolor\]]{} and [Figure \[fig:colorcolor\]]{}, and indicated by the large standard deviation in this plot). Two causes may contribute to this effect: the small size of the sample that has photometry near [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{} in both $V$ and $H$, which is only 20 objects, and host galaxy reddening effects. High reddening would have the most impact on the bluest and the least on the reddest band, and would result in a large effect in $V-H$, since we are bridging an interval of over 1100nm in wavelength. However reddening would affect the spread in color equally at all epochs (the standard deviation of the mean color, which is in fact large, typically $\sim1.5$ mag). The color *evolution* over time is due to intrinsic changes in the SN SED as the SN evolves. The mean $V-H$ color spans a dramatic 1.6 magnitudes between $10$ days before and 50 days after peak;
- the least variation is in $r'-i'$: only 0.5 mag total as seen in [Figure \[fig:meancol\]]{} both for the standard deviation, and for the change in mean color over time. Narrow standard deviations are also observed in $H-J$ and $V-r'$, while $J-K_s$ shows remarkably little color evolution;
- the $r'-i'$ colors at peak are intriguingly similar for all objects. This was also noticeable in [Figure \[fig:colorcolor\]]{}, especially for SN Ic-bl, although only 6 and 2 SN Ic-bl are plotted, respectively, in the top and two bottom panels, due to the availability of photometry in all four bands needed for each plot. However, we can measure the $r'-i'$ color within 10 days of [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{} for 7 SN Ic-bl. We find a mean $r'-i'$ peak color for SN Ic-bl of . The standard deviation for the distribution of other types is at least twice as large.
These color evolutions and the relation between colors are worth a more thorough investigation, since they will be valuable in typing and classification in synoptic surveys where the data volume renders spectroscopic identification infeasible, and followup resources will be scarce compared to the number of discoveries. A more complete analysis of the colors of stripped SN, and their correlations with types will be presented in Bianco et al. (in preparation) including SN data from the literature.
Discussion of specific SN {#specSN_sec}
=========================
SN 2005bf
---------
Some CfA optical and NIR photometric measurements of SN 2005bf were published in @jaz_Hicken_Challis_et_al__2005, but the data presented here used template subtraction and more comparison stars for the reduction, and they supersede the measurements in @jaz_Hicken_Challis_et_al__2005. SN 2005bf was an unusual SN Ib with unique photometric and spectroscopic properties [@2008MNRAS.389..141M; @jaz_Hicken_Challis_et_al__2005; @Lee_Hamuy_Gonzalez_et_al__2006; @2007ApJ...666.1069M; @2007MNRAS.381..201M], interpreted as a strongly aspherical explosion of a Wolf-Rayet WN star, perhaps with a unipolar jet [@jaz_Hicken_Challis_et_al__2005; @Lee_Hamuy_Gonzalez_et_al__2006; @2007MNRAS.381..201M], and possibly powered by a magnetar at late times [@2007ApJ...666.1069M].
Our light curve has excellent multi-band coverage of the region around peak brightness, both before and after peak: the first CfA optical epochs were collected on JD 2553471.742 ($U$), while NIR coverage began 10 days later. The CfA optical and NIR light curve of SN 2005bf is shown in [Figure \[fig:05bf07kephot\]]{}, left panel. An early peak is clearly identifiable in the bluer bands $U$ and $B$, and (less clearly) in $V$ on $\mathrm{JD}~2453476.75$. A later, more prominent peak, visible in all bands occurs in $V$ on $\mathrm{JD}$ 2453498.96 ([$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{}). Our photometric coverage continues through JD 2553526 in optical wavelengths and JD 2553525 in NIR. An in-depth phenomenological discussion of these peaks was presented in @jaz_Hicken_Challis_et_al__2005, and @Lee_Hamuy_Gonzalez_et_al__2006. We notice that the first peak is too late after explosion to be consistent with a standard shock breakout (as seen in SN 2008D – @Ofek_Cucchiara_Rau_et_al__2008 [@Kirshner_Kocevski_et_al__2009]), while if the second peak is considered, the rise time for this SN is unusually long (over 30 days!). The second maximum and long rise time has been attributed to the highly aspherical distribution of a large amount of [$^{56}$[Ni]{}]{} synthesized in the explosion [@jaz_Hicken_Challis_et_al__2005; @Lee_Hamuy_Gonzalez_et_al__2006]. M14 discusses how the choice of the epoch for the peak affects the spectroscopic analysis of SN 2005bf.
![Optical and NIR photometry of SN 2005bf (Left), and SN 2007ke (Right), symbols as described in [Figure \[fig:optphot\]]{}.[]{data-label="fig:05bf07kephot"}](f15a.pdf "fig:"){width="0.52\columnwidth"}![Optical and NIR photometry of SN 2005bf (Left), and SN 2007ke (Right), symbols as described in [Figure \[fig:optphot\]]{}.[]{data-label="fig:05bf07kephot"}](f15b.pdf "fig:"){width="0.477\columnwidth"}
SN 2007ke {#sec:07ke}
---------
SN 2007ke is a known Ca-rich transient with 7 photometric data points in KAIT $R$ published in @Kasliwal13. Our data does not cover the rise of the light curve, thus we estimated the $V$-band maximum using the @Kasliwal13 data according to the prescription described in [Section \[sec:sample\_stat\]]{}, and applying a shift corresponding to the median difference in time between $R$ and $V$ reported in [Table \[tab:stats1\]]{}. Adding the error to the fit (0.32 days) and the standard deviation in the time offset (1.4 days, [Table \[tab:stats1\]]{}) in quadrature, we obtain [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{}$=2454371.2 \pm 2.1$. While our photometry is sparse, and our coverage begins near peak, we have coverage in four bands $BVr'i'$, with four epochs in $B$ and $V$, including a non detection at JD=2454402.8, and five in $r'i'$. This allows us to probe its color evolution, and we notice that SN 2007ke shows scatter ([Figure \[fig:05bf07kephot\]]{}, right panel). Additionally, it was noted [@Kasliwal13] that SN 2007ke is well removed from its host galaxy (compare its separation of $\sim 0.5$ arcmin from the center of the host, [Table \[tab:hostgal\_table\]]{}, with NGC 1129’s radius of 1.6 arcmin: the extinction corrected apparent semi major axis of the 25 $B~\mathrm{mag/arcsec^2}$ isophote reported by HyperLEDA, ). Additionally, SN 2007ke is the only SN in our sample to arise in an elliptical host galaxy (see [Table \[tab:hostgal\_table\]]{}), confirming the environments of Ca-rich transients are unusual, compared to stripped SN host environments, as pointed out in [@Kasliwal13].
Unusual color evolution
-----------------------
[Figure \[colallsn\]]{} shows the color evolution of our SN in $B-V$, $r'-i'$, and $V-H$. The top panel in each of the three plots shows the mean color evolution, as described in [Figure \[fig:meancol\]]{}, and over plotted are the color curves for outliers: objects whose color, binned in 10 day intervals, is at least 2$\sigma$ away from the 2$\sigma$ limit of the color average in one or more bins. Three obvious outliers in these plots are discussed in this Section: SN 2006jc, SN 2005kl (both outliers in all three color spaces), and SN 2005la (outlier in $B-V$, and for which we have no NIR coverage). Additionally SN 2008D is a $>2\sigma$ outlier in both $r'-i'$ and $V-H$. Although SN 2004gt, SN 2005az, and SN 2007uy, also appear in the top plots in [Figure \[colallsn\]]{} as outlier in one color space, their classification as outlier is weak, due only to the distance of one early (SN 2005az) or one late 10-day bin (SN 2004gt, SN 2007uy) from the sample average, and are not discussed individually.
### SN 2008D
SN 2008D is a well studied SN Ib [@Ofek_Cucchiara_Rau_et_al__2008; @2008Sci...321.1185M; @Kirshner_Kocevski_et_al__2009; @2009ApJ...692L..84M], discovered in the X-Ray while SWIFT monitored the host galaxy to observe the evolution of SN 2007uy [@Ofek_Cucchiara_Rau_et_al__2008], thus yielding very stringent optical and NIR pre-explosion limits only hours before explosion [@Kirshner_Kocevski_et_al__2009]. Our data on SN 2008D were already published in @Kirshner_Kocevski_et_al__2009, and it is presented again here for completeness. SN 2008D does not appear as an outlier in [Figure \[colallsn\]]{}, but it is a $> 2\sigma$ outlier in both $r'-i'$ and $V-H$ colors. Its light curve is redder than the mean over the entire evolution, and in fact SN 2008D is known to suffer significant host reddening ($A_v\sim1.5-2.5$ mag - @Ofek_Cucchiara_Rau_et_al__2008), in addition to the early (prior to $-10$ days to [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{}) blue excess attributed to cooling of the shock-heated stellar envelope [@Kirshner_Kocevski_et_al__2009].
### SN 2006jc {#sec:06jc}
SN 2006jc is classified as a SN Ib-n. A re-brightening in the NIR light curve of SN 2006jc was noticed first by @2006ATel..961....1A. Our NIR data has exquisite sampling of the NIR re-brightening, which begins near JD 24541050, or roughly 40 days after peak, adopting the peak determination of @2008MNRAS.389..113P, and continues with regular sampling through $\sim$160 days after peak. We also present regular photometry in optical bands that continues through 100 days after peak. Optical and NIR photometry of SN 2006jc can be found in the literature [@2008MNRAS.389..141M; @2008MNRAS.389..113P]. We plot our light curve in [Figure \[fig:06jcphot\]]{} (left panel), and color time series in [Figure \[fig:06jccol\]]{}. The unusually blue early color of SN 2006jc at early times, and its later NIR re-brightening have been explained by complex interaction with circumstellar material. The early blue color is due to interaction with He-rich material ejected by the progenitor in prior outbursts [@2007Natur.447..829P; @2007ApJ...657L.105F; @2008ApJ...680..568S], and the reddening is due to production of dust triggered in the ejecta at later epochs [@2008MNRAS.389..141M; @2008MNRAS.389..113P].
![Optical and NIR photometry of SN 2006jc (Left) and SN 2005la (Right), symbols as describes in [Figure \[fig:optphot\]]{}.[]{data-label="fig:06jcphot"}](f16a.pdf "fig:"){width="0.52\columnwidth"}![Optical and NIR photometry of SN 2006jc (Left) and SN 2005la (Right), symbols as describes in [Figure \[fig:optphot\]]{}.[]{data-label="fig:06jcphot"}](f16b.pdf "fig:"){width="0.477\columnwidth"}
![Color time series for SN 2006jc. The error bars are the quadrature sum of the photometric errors for the constituent bands.[]{data-label="fig:06jccol"}](f17.pdf){width="0.95\columnwidth"}
### SN 2005la {#sec:05la}
SN 2005la ([Figure \[fig:06jcphot\]]{}, right panel) is spectroscopically peculiar, showing narrow He and H lines in emission, indicative of interaction with circumstellar material [@2008MNRAS.389..131P], and is considered a transitional object between SN 2006jc-like events, and SN IIn. SN 2005la appears as a blue outlier in $B-V$, and it is bluer than the mean in $r'-i'$, evolving redward at late times (phase $\ga 50$ days). SN 2005la is also included in the D11 sample. We note that SN 2006jc and SN 2005la, both SN interacting with a He-rich, and for SN 2005la also H-rich, circumstellar medium have bluer $B-V$ colors than the rest of the normal stripped SN. Figure 3 in @2008MNRAS.389..131P shows the $B-V$ evolution of SN Ib-n (also including SN 2000er and SN 2002ao): all of these SN have very blue colors ($-0.4 \lesssim B-V \lesssim 0.6$ mag for 0 to 100 days after maximum) when compared to non-interacting stripped SN, as in our [Figure \[colallsn\]]{}. The bluer colors of these SN Ib-n and SN 2005la are due to both a bluer continuum (most likely due blending of FeII lines from fluorescence, @2007ApJ...657L.105F) and to strong He lines in emission.
### SN 2005kl {#sec:05kl}
SN 2005kl (light blue in [Figure \[colallsn\]]{}) is consistently and significantly redder than the sample mean throughout its color evolution in each color space. However it is not spectroscopically peculiar.
The SN is in a bright and high-gradient galaxy, making image subtraction difficult, and resulting in the large errorbars, especially in $B$. From the spectra, published in M14 it is evident that the SN sits in an HII region. SN 2005kl is classified as a SN Ic in M14. The sparse spectral coverage cannot rule out the development of He I lines near peak, which would modify the classification to SN IIb. We notice a supernova that shows a qualitatively similar color evolution, with suppressed $B$ flux, and red colors, is SN 2005eo. CfA light curves for both objects are shown in [Figure \[fig:sn05kl\]]{}. While SN 2005eo was initially classified as a SN Ic, and thus included in the D11 sample, we now reclassify it as a late SN Ia (M14)[^15]. With its reclassification the earliest optical photometry in D11 is actually catching the second $R$-band peak of the late SN Ia. Both SN 2005kl and SN 2005eo are found in early type spiral galaxies. Neither object suffers from significant galactic reddening (see [Table \[tab:hostgal\_table\]]{}). While SN 20005kl may show similarly red colors as SN 2005eo, a SN Ia, we are certain that SN 2005kl is not a SN Ia since our CfA late-time, nebular spectra of SN 2005kl show strong emission lines of \[OI\] and \[CaII\], characteristic of stripped SN (M14).
![SN Ic SN 2005kl (Left) and SN 2005eo (Right), which was reclassified as a late SN Ia in M14 (right). Both show uncharacteristically red colors. Note however the steeper slope of flux decay in SN 2005kl, consistent with a young SN evolution. []{data-label="fig:sn05kl"}](f18a.pdf "fig:"){width="0.52\columnwidth"}![SN Ic SN 2005kl (Left) and SN 2005eo (Right), which was reclassified as a late SN Ia in M14 (right). Both show uncharacteristically red colors. Note however the steeper slope of flux decay in SN 2005kl, consistent with a young SN evolution. []{data-label="fig:sn05kl"}](f18b.pdf "fig:"){width="0.477\columnwidth"}
Conclusions
===========
This paper presents a densely-sampled, homogeneous suite of photometric measurements of stripped SN at optical and NIR wavelengths: $U$ (before 2009 January) and $u'$ (after 2009 January); $\!BV$; $RI$ (before 2004 September) and $r'i'$ (after 2004 September); and $JHK_s$ bands, including [61]{} objects covered in optical bands, and [25]{} in NIR. These data were collected between 2001 and 2009 at FLWO.
Our photometry provides additional data for [37]{} supernovae already discussed in the literature, and the first published measurements for [27]{} new supernovae. Among the objects previously published, we are publishing photometry for [6]{} objects studied in the literature at other wavelengths (radio or UV), or with methods different than photometry (e.g., spectroscopy, or host and progenitor studies, see [Table \[tab:discoverytable\]]{}), but for which photometric measurements had not yet been published. Stripped SN spectroscopy from our group is presented in M14, complementing this data set with coverage for [54]{} of our total [64]{} objects.
This is the largest stripped SN data set to date, containing multi-color photometry in bands from optical $U$ to NIR $K_s$. Our sample includes [64]{} stripped SN, [22]{} with both optical and NIR measurements, [61]{} with optical measurements, and [25]{} with NIR measurements. This doubles the current supply of stripped SN objects in the literature. All SN have multi-band data, allowing the determination of multiple colors. Our photometry (described in [Section \[sec:optphot\_sec\]]{} and \[sec:irphot\_sec\]) is produced from template-subtracted images, for all but 6 objects in optical bands and 5 in NIR, since those objects are well removed from their host galaxy. We compare our photometry with literature data ([Section \[sec:litdata\]]{}) and find agreement within the errors for most published SN. However, we find D11 photometry to be brighter than ours by as much as one magnitude at peak, and even more at late times. We attribute this discrepancy to host galaxy contamination in the D11 data, since the D11 photometric data are not based on template-subtracted images.
A solid determination of the epoch of maximum brightness in $V$-band ([$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{}) is now possible for 36 objects using our data in combination with existing literature data ([Section \[sec:sample\_stat\]]{}).
With these data we investigated the color behavior of stripped SN ([Section \[colorcolor\]]{}), with the caveat that no corrections for host galaxy extinction have been applied to our data. This approach captures the observed color behavior of stripped SN (also adopted for SN rates, in @2011MNRAS.412.1441L for example), and simulates the parameter space of current and future optical and NIR surveys such as RATIR [@2012SPIE.8446E..10B] and LSST [@LSST], assuming the reddening of the SN in our sample experienced is representative.
We present an intriguing separation of different stripped SN subtypes in the $r'-i'$ vs $V-H$ color space, with SN Ic-bl appearing bluer than both SN Ib and Ic, based on the 19 stripped SN for which [$\mathrm{JD}_\mathrm{Vmax}$]{} optical+NIR colors can be determined, but cautioning the reader that in our dataset only two SN Ic and two SN Ic-bl has sufficient photometric coverage to be included in a $r'-i'$ vs $V-H$ color-color plot evaluated near peak ([Figure \[fig:colorcolor\]]{}). We also observe a very narrow distribution in $r'-i'$ color for SN Ic-bl, with a standard deviation of only 0.01 mag around a mean . This standard deviation is at least two times smaller than for any other subtype. As the data set grows, these color-color plots hold the promise to separate supernova types by photometry alone, especially with the advent of new NIR surveys (e.g., RATIR – @2012SPIE.8446E..10B [@2012SPIE.8453E..1OF], and SASIR – @2009arXiv0905.1965B).
In addition we identify a number of individual SN with peculiar color behavior - some of which were known to be peculiar from spectra (e.g., SN 2005la and SN 2006jc, both SN whose ejecta are interacting with He-rich and for SN 2005la, also H-rich circumstellar material), while others are spectroscopically normal (SN 2005kl).
Finally, spectra for over 80% of the objects we presented here are presented in a companion paper (M14). The availability of spectra with ample coverage at several epochs for most of our objects, offers an opportunity for an accurate statistical assessment of the photometric diversity among stripped SN types, which is necessary for classification in upcoming large synoptic surveys, as well as for future progenitor studies.
We are immensely grateful for the efforts of the service observers at the 1.2m FLWO, who obtained the majority of data presented here. In addition, we thank the staff of the F. L. Whipple Observatories for their extensive support and assistance.
The authors would like to thank Saurabh Jha, Tom Matheson, Alex Filippenko, Ryan Foley, Nathan Smith, John Raymond, Rob Fesen, Chris Stubbs, Avishay Gal-Yam, Claes Fransson, Alicia Soderberg, and Eli Dwek for illuminating discussions. We thank Brandon Patel and Saurabh Jha for running SNANA fits.
FBB is supported by a James Arthur fellowship at the Center for Cosmology and Particle Physics at NYU. Supernova research at Harvard University has been supported in part by the National Science Foundation grant AST06-06772 and R.P.K. in part by the NSF grant AST09-07903 and AST12-11196, and in part by the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics NSF grant PHY99-07949. Observations reported here were obtained at the F.L Whipple Observatory, which is operated by the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory. PAIRITEL is operated by the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory (SAO) and was made possible by a grant from the Harvard University Milton Fund, the camera loan from the University of Virginia, and the continued support of the SAO and UC Berkeley. The data analysis in this paper has made use of the Hydra computer cluster run by the Computation Facility at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.
This research has made use of NASA’s Astrophysics Data System Bibliographic Services (ADS), the HyperLEDA database and the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED) which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. This publication makes use of data products from the Two Micron All Sky Survey, which is a joint project of the University of Massachusetts and the Infrared Processing and Analysis Center/California Institute of Technology, funded by NASA and NSF.
natexlab\#1[\#1]{}
Alard, C. 2000, Astronomy and Astrophysics Supplement Series, 144, 363
Alard, C., & Lupton, R. H. 1998, The Astrophysical Journal, 503, 325
, G., [Adam]{}, G., [Antilogus]{}, P., [et al.]{} 2002, 4836, 61
, A., [Efimova]{}, N., [Leoni]{}, R., [et al.]{} 2006, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 961, 1
, E., [Mellier]{}, Y., [Radovich]{}, M., [et al.]{} 2002, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 281, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XI, ed. [D. A. Bohlender, D. Durand, & T. H. Handley]{}, 228–+
, J. S., [Caldwell]{}, N., [Pahre]{}, M., & [Falco]{}, E. E. 2003, Proposal, 1
, J. S., [Starr]{}, D. L., [Blake]{}, C. H., [Skrutskie]{}, M. F., & [Falco]{}, E. E. 2006, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 351, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XV, ed. C. [Gabriel]{}, C. [Arviset]{}, D. [Ponz]{}, & S. [Enrique]{}, 751
, J. S., [Prochaska]{}, J. X., [Lee]{}, W., [et al.]{} 2009, ArXiv e-prints, arXiv:0905.1965
, J. R., & [Wheeler]{}, J. C. 1991, , 101, 1281
Burbidge, E., Burbidge, G., Fowler, W., & Hoyle, F. 1957, Reviews of Modern Physics, 29, 547
, N., [Klein]{}, C., [Fox]{}, O., [et al.]{} 2012, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 8446, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series
, A., [Wheeler]{}, J. C., [Phillips]{}, M. M. [et al.]{} 1997, The Astrophysical Journal, 482, 675
, R. M., [Skrutskie]{}, M. F., [van Dyk]{}, S., [et al.]{} 2003, [2MASS All Sky Catalog of point sources.]{} (The IRSA 2MASS All-Sky Point Source Catalog, NASA/IPAC Infrared Science Archive. http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/Gator/)
Drout, M. R., Soderberg, A. M., Gal-Yam, A., [et al.]{} 2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 741, 97
Drout, M. R., Soderberg, A. M., Mazzali, P. A., [et al.]{} 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 774, 58
Elmhamdi, A., Danziger, I. J., Branch, D., [et al.]{} 2006, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 450, 305
Filippenko, A. V. 1997, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 35, 309
, A. V., [Barth]{}, A. J., & [Matheson]{}, T. a. 1995, , 450, L11
, A. V., [Li]{}, W. D., [Treffers]{}, R. R., & [Modjaz]{}, M. 2001, in Small Telescope Astronomy on Global Scales, IAU Colloquium 183, Vol. 246, 121
Filippenko, A. V., Matheson, T., & Ho, L. C. 1993, The Astrophysical Journal, 415, L103
, E. L. 1999, , 111, 63
Folatelli, G., Contreras, C., Phillips, M. M., [et al.]{} 2006, The Astrophysical Journal, 641, 1039
Foley, R. J., Smith, N., Ganeshalingam, M., [et al.]{} 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 657, L105
, R. J., [Smith]{}, N., [Ganeshalingam]{}, M., [et al.]{} 2007, , 657, L105
, O. D., [Kutyrev]{}, A. S., [Rapchun]{}, D. A., & [Klein]{}, C. R. a. 2012, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 8453, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series
, A. S. 2012, PhD thesis, Harvard University
, A. S., [Wood-Vasey]{}, W. M., [Marion]{}, G. H. H., [et al.]{} 2014, in prep.
Fukugita, M., Nakamura, O., Okamura, S., [et al.]{} 2007, The Astronomical Journal, 134, 579
Galama, T. J., Vreeswijk, P. M., van Paradijs, J., [et al.]{} 1998, Nature, 395, 670
Gallagher, J. S., Garnavich, P. M., Berlind, P., [et al.]{} 2005, The Astrophysical Journal, 634, 210
Gehrels, N., Chincarini, G., Giommi, P., [et al.]{} 2004, The Astrophysical Journal, 611, 1005
, M., [Pignata]{}, G., [Maza]{}, J., [et al.]{} 2012, , 83, 388
, M., [Challis]{}, P., [Jha]{}, S., [et al.]{} 2009, , 700, 331
Hicken, M., Challis, P., Kirshner, R. P., [et al.]{} 2012, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 200, 12
, J., & [Bloom]{}, J. S. 2012, [The Gamma-Ray Burst - Supernova Connection]{}, 169–190
Hjorth, J., Sollerman, J., M[ø]{}ller, P., [et al.]{} 2003, Nature, 423, 847
, S., [Kirshner]{}, R. P., [Challis]{}, P., & [Garnavich]{}, P. M. a. 2006, , 131, 527
, S., [Riess]{}, A. G., & [Kirshner]{}, R. P. 2007, , 659, 122
, M. M., [et al.]{} 2011, ArXiv e-prints, arXiv:1111.6109
, R., [Bernstein]{}, J. P., [Cinabro]{}, D., [et al.]{} 2009, , 121, 1028
Kocevski, D., Modjaz, M., Bloom, J. S., [et al.]{} 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 663, 1180
Landolt, A. U. 1992, The Astronomical Journal, 104, 340
Li, W., Filippenko, A. V., Treffers, R. R., [et al.]{} 2001, The Astrophysical Journal, 546, 734
, W., [Leaman]{}, J., [Chornock]{}, R., [et al.]{} 2011, , 412, 1441
. 2009, [LSST Science Book]{} (arXiv:0912.0201, http://www.lsst.org/lsst/scibook)
, K., [Tanaka]{}, M., [Nomoto]{}, K., [et al.]{} 2007, , 666, 1069
, D., [Fynbo]{}, J. P. U., [Hjorth]{}, J., [et al.]{} 2009, , 692, L84
Mannucci, F., Della Valle, M., Panagia, N., [et al.]{} 2005, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 433, 807
, G. H., [Vinko]{}, J., [Kirshner]{}, R. P., [et al.]{} 2013, ArXiv e-prints, arXiv:1303.5482
, S., [Meikle]{}, W. P. S., & [Lundqvist]{}, P. a. 2008, , 389, 141
, J. R., [Wheeler]{}, J. C., [Patat]{}, F., [et al.]{} 2007, , 381, 201
, P. A., [Valenti]{}, S., [Della Valle]{}, M., [et al.]{} 2008, Science, 321, 1185
Miknaitis, G., Pignata, G., Rest, A., [et al.]{} 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 666, 674
, M. 2007, PhD thesis, Harvard University
—. 2011, Astronomische Nachrichten, 332, 434
Modjaz, M., Blondin, S., Kirshner, R., P., T., M., [et al.]{} 2014, The Astrophysical Journal, submitted
Modjaz, M., Stanek, K. Z., Garnavich, P. M., [et al.]{} 2006, The Astrophysical Journal, 645, L21
Modjaz, M., Li, W., Butler, N., [et al.]{} 2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 702, 226
Nomoto, K., Iwamoto, K., & Suzuki, T. 1995, Physics Reports, 256, 173
Nomoto, K., Tominaga, N., Umeda, H., Kobayashi, C., & Maeda, K. 2006, Nuclear Physics A, 777, 424
, A., [Mattila]{}, S., [Zampieri]{}, L., & [Della Valle]{}, M. a. 2008, , 389, 113
, A., [Quimby]{}, R. M., & [Smartt]{}, S. J. a. 2008, , 389, 131
, A., [Smartt]{}, S. J., [Mattila]{}, S., & [Eldridge]{}, J. J. a. 2007, , 447, 829
Patat, F., Cappellaro, E., Danziger, J., [et al.]{} 2001, The Astrophysical Journal, 555, 900
, G., [Garcia]{}, A. M., [Fouque]{}, P., & [Buta]{}, R. 1991, , 243, 319
, G., [Theureau]{}, G., [Bottinelli]{}, L., [et al.]{} 2003, , 412, 57
Pian, E., Mazzali, P. A., Masetti, N., [et al.]{} 2006, Nature, 442, 1011
Podsiadlowski, P., Langer, N., Poelarends, A. J. T., [et al.]{} 2004, The Astrophysical Journal, 612, 1044
, G. H., & [Roming]{}, P. W. A. 2013, ArXiv e-prints, arXiv:1303.1190
, R. 2006, PhD thesis, The University of Texas at Austin
, A., [Stubbs]{}, C., [Becker]{}, A. C., [et al.]{} 2005, , 634, 1103
Richardson, D., Branch, D., & Baron, E. 2006, The Astronomical Journal, 131, 2233
Richmond, M. W., Treffers, R. R., Filippenko, A. V., & Paik, Y. 1996, The Astronomical Journal, 112, 732
Riess, A. G., Kirshner, R. P., Schmidt, B. P., [et al.]{} 1999, The Astronomical Journal, 117, 707
, D. K., [Tanaka]{}, M., [Anupama]{}, G. C., [Gurugubelli]{}, U. K., & [Nomoto]{}, K. 2009, , 697, 676
, M., [Bassett]{}, B., [Becker]{}, A. C., [et al.]{} 2014, ArXiv e-prints, arXiv:1401.3317
, N. E., [Soderberg]{}, A. M., & [Valenti]{}, S. a. 2012, , 756, 184
, D. N., [Mazzali]{}, P. A., [Deng]{}, J., [et al.]{} 2006, , 369, 1939
Schechter, P. L., Mateo, M., & Saha, A. 1993, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 105, 1342
, E. F., & [Finkbeiner]{}, D. P. 2011, , 737, 103
, D. J., [Finkbeiner]{}, D. P., & [Davis]{}, M. 1998, , 500, 525
, D., [Rest]{}, A., [Riess]{}, A., & [Huber]{}, M. E. a. 2013, ArXiv e-prints, arXiv:1310.3824
Skrutskie, M. F., Cutri, R. M., Stiening, R., [et al.]{} 2006, The Astronomical Journal, 131, 1163
Smith, J. A., Tucker, D. L., Kent, S., [et al.]{} 2002, The Astronomical Journal, 123, 2121
, N., [Foloey]{}, R. J., & [Filippenko]{}, A. V. 2008, , 680, 568
Soderberg, A. M., Berger, E., Page, K. L., [et al.]{} 2008, Nature, 453, 469
Stanek, K. Z., Matheson, T., Garnavich, P. M., [et al.]{} 2003, The Astrophysical Journal, 591, L17
Tominaga, N., Tanaka, M., Nomoto, K., [et al.]{} 2005, The Astrophysical Journal, 633, L97
Uomoto, A., & Kirshner, R. P. 1986, The Astrophysical Journal, 308, 685
Valenti, S., Fraser, M., Benetti, S., [et al.]{} 2011, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 416, 3138
Wood-Vasey, W. M., Friedman, A. S., Bloom, J. S., [et al.]{} 2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 689, 377
, S. E., & [Bloom]{}, J. S. 2006, , 44, 507
Woosley, S. E., Langer, N., & Weaver, T. A. 1993, The Astrophysical Journal, 411, 823
[^1]: [<http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/oir/Research/supernova/>]{}
[^2]: [<http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/oir/Research/supernova/>]{}
[^3]: [<http://www.cosmo.nyu.edu/SNYU>]{}
[^4]: <http://www.grad40.as.utexas.edu/~quimby/tss>
[^5]: [<http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/oir/Research/supernova/>]{}
[^6]: [<http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/oir/Research/supernova/>]{}
[^7]: IRAF (Image Reduction and Analysis Facility) is distributed by the National Optical Astronomy Observatories, which are operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under cooperative agreement with the National Science Foundation.
[^8]: [<http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/oir/Research/supernova/>]{}
[^9]: [<http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/oir/Research/supernova/>]{}
[^10]: [<http://www.cosmo.nyu.edu/SNYU>]{}
[^11]: <http://www.pairitel.org/>
[^12]: [<http://www.cosmo.nyu.edu/SNYU>]{}
[^13]: [<http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/oir/Research/supernova/>]{}
[^14]: <http://www.leda.univ-lyon1.fr>
[^15]: The light curve was fitted with SNANA [@2009PASP..121.1028K], but with the little available data the photometric fit remains inconclusive, although SN Ic provided worse fits than SN Ia’s. Although SN 2005eo would not be a standard SN Ia, as its $J$-band flux fall is slow, the poor light curve fit to SN Ic templates reinforces our trust in the new spectroscopic classification.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.